Woo fooking hoo - 102.3 bhp !!!!!

HansJ · Post by **HansJ** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 9:16 pm

phuk72 wrote:yep - it is a lot of money but to my mind I now have a bike which is not only a complete one off but it does everything I want it to.

Also, if you put it into context - the Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£2700 it costs to get a sorted TRX (Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£1500 tuning + Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£1200 on a bike) still gets you way more than a run of the mill boring R6 or ZX6 which will invariably be shagged and making less power!

So true, couldn't have said it better myself

And to be honest, one does not need to spend 2700Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£ to get a really decent bike!

Post by **phuk72** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 9:24 pm

Very true

You can get a TRX for less than Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£1000, spend a bit of time giving it a good tidy up, buy some end cans and some flatslides and for Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£1500 you have got a cracking bike

wicky · Post by **wicky** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 11:28 pm

actually when ye put it like that it all makes perfect sense ! or maybe im just a toight ass that reels at spending some of me hard earned Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£

dandywarhol · Post by **dandywarhol** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 1:22 am

Phuk - any idea what does that figure equates to at the wheel?

Post by **Max** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 1:46 am

I'm pretty sure his is measured at the wheel. Haven't seen many dynos around that users can have their bikes measured at the crank.

burty · Post by **burty** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 9:48 am

That's got to be a crank value.

Which is calculated based on what was measured at the wheel.

All dynos will do that calculation, with varying degrees of accuracy of course. Then we can get into the debate about dyno accuracy again.....no tracebility to a standard...variation in atmospheric pressure, temperature....etc...etc

Post by **phuk72** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 11:45 am

Wheel, crank, flywheel - I've seen measurements given from them all.

Frankly it doesn't matter where the power is measured as Dyno figures aren't worth the paper they are written on EXCEPT for showing before and after figures on the same dyno (and obviously to sort the air / fuel mixture!). Which is why I have always taken mine to the same shop since I started tuning the motor.

Dynos are all different and there is no standardisation. Interestingly Dynojet dynos only give wheel figures and do not display or calculate crank figures. I have had my bike on a number of dynos and have got different figures every time (including one which showed my bike making more at the wheel than one supposedly measured at the crank).

The only important figure as far as I am concerned is the percentage gain from stock (77bhp) to what I have now (102.3) = 33%

Where it is measured or how much power it makes (although nice to see) is wholly irrelevant.

burty · Post by **burty** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 3:50 pm

phuk72 wrote:
Where it is measured or how much power it makes (although nice to see) is wholly irrelevant.

Except it makes for nice headlines.

And inevitably people make comparisons. There's at least one in this thread.

dandywarhol · Post by **dandywarhol** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 5:26 pm

phuk72 wrote:Wheel, crank, flywheel - I've seen measurements given from them all.

Frankly it doesn't matter where the power is measured as Dyno figures aren't worth the paper they are written on EXCEPT for showing before and after figures on the same dyno (and obviously to sort the air / fuel mixture!). Which is why I have always taken mine to the same shop since I started tuning the motor.

Dynos are all different and there is no standardisation. Interestingly Dynojet dynos only give wheel figures and do not display or calculate crank figures. I have had my bike on a number of dynos and have got different figures every time (including one which showed my bike making more at the wheel than one supposedly measured at the crank).

The only important figure as far as I am concerned is the percentage gain from stock (77bhp) to what I have now (102.3) = 33%

Where it is measured or how much power it makes (although nice to see) is wholly irrelevant.

I wholly agree with all that phuk and that the 25% increase is pretty impressive............so I can assume then that the figure is a recalculated wheel figure to represent crankshaft power ( a dyno actually measures torque produced at the wheel and converts it into HP). The figure for my 900 is detailed on the printout as at the wheel.

Triton · Post by **Triton** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:12 am

Oh, I thought it was a claimed 33% increase, not 25. Even more impressive.

However, I still say it's 90% rider and 10% bike. The hard thing is getting the bike to a level where a really good rider doesn't complain about the bike. For track oriented machines such as Phuk's and Honk's the ultimate power output is merely an optional extra, the main thing is for them to feel comfortable riding it, therefore the shape of the power curve is way more important than the peak output. Just my HO.

dandywarhol · Post by **dandywarhol** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 12:35 pm

Triton wrote:Oh, I thought it was a claimed 33% increase, not 25. Even more impressive.

However, I still say it's 90% rider and 10% bike. The hard thing is getting the bike to a level where a really good rider doesn't complain about the bike. For track oriented machines such as Phuk's and Honk's the ultimate power output is merely an optional extra, the main thing is for them to feel comfortable riding it, therefore the shape of the power curve is way more important than the peak output. Just my HO.

Oops - slapped wrist - it is 33%

..............I'd be getting worried about the rods if your using it hard at track days phuk.
TTS put Carrillo rods in the 900 I've got - quite unnessessary for road use IMHO but they were playing safe incase it was used on the track...........

Post by **phuk72** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:02 pm

However, I still say it's 90% rider and 10% bike. The hard thing is getting the bike to a level where a really good rider doesn't complain about the bike. For track oriented machines such as Phuk's and Honk's the ultimate power output is merely an optional extra, the main thing is for them to feel comfortable riding it, therefore the shape of the power curve is way more important than the peak output. Just my HO.

Agreed - which is why I spent money on an Ohlins rear shock and a USD front end with Ohlins internals before the big money tuning

Triton · Post by **Triton** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:19 am

Good move phuk. Even in standard engine trim, the TRX benefits big time from mods that make the suspension and handling combination better. I've done the basics to the suspension and set up the geometry for my taste and the bike is about 2 and a half seconds quicker at Eastern Creek than it was with stock suspension.

One day, when I get out of this seemingly perpetual time loop where I seem to achieve less and less as I age,

I'll get around to the big bore and tuning mods plus a six speed gearbox as I find the stock box is crap compared to the YZF's.

Tonight's task to to remove the R6 callipers and get the seals sorted... that's only taken four months!!!

Still a member of the OOOSDC!

rs1800 · Post by **rs1800** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 11:39 pm

nice figures.

I know that dynos are more about the differences than the actual numbers but they do give a guide.

I bought a bog standard trx and fitted a k&n and 2-1 pipe fitted and went to get it rejetted only to be told it was running rich and they went down a jet size !! DOH !!

Anyway here are the charts, how does 79bhp at wheel compare to other standard trx's or should I start a new post?

thanks

[/img]

Killerwhale · Post by **Killerwhale** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 11:52 pm

[quote="rs1800"][/quote]

Well, 78-82 HP sounds just right, maybe a little higher with cans and a jetting....gearing might have an impact if you donÃƒâ€šÃ‚Â´t do standard....

....and then i took the time to read it thru!!!

I had the K&N and race cans before going other route.....was perfect....little fat actually!!

Only thing it had been a city commute bike home 2 school thing....
Low rev city traffic eats emulsion tubes.....worn emulsion tubes makes your bike run fat.....idiot bike firm says your bike is fat and changes your mains to lower.....

Well, thatÃƒâ€šÃ‚Â´s what it sounds like anyway!!!