New 20 ounce tumblers available now! Forum donation credit with purchase. https://www.wildguzzi.com/Products/products.htm#Tumbler
Well duh . Dusty
There’s something that I don’t always pick up on over on my side of the Pacific.Your humour is different.
Your humour is different.
147 indicated, 144 GPS, tucked in behind the speed screen. Didn't notice where the tach was but hadn't hit the limiter yet. There was a little more left. Griso.
Of course that was on the track, right?
Nice try Dusty but you fired a little early.I said...If the 9,000 rpm bike CAN pull the revs then it WILL be faster because of the mechanical connection to the rear wheel. If it does not have the TORQUE available then the lower revving higher torque ‘14 will win.Power is TORQUE x RPM and it’s the multiple of the two that gives POWER.By the time the 1200 hits 8250 rpm side by side with the 1400 the race is still even, but the 1400 has hit it’s rev limit so cannot continue to accelerate, IF the 1200 has enough torque to increase the revs by a bit more then it will slightly pull away..Power is an often quoted and just as often misunderstood term.Power is and always was an expression of the RATE of DOING WORK.
Here is a historic data point for you.In 1985 I ran a friend's quite new Mark 3 Le Mans in a Bears speed trial. It was timed both ways over a flying quarter. Average speed 130.65 mph. I was 3rd on the day, first place went to another friend on his BMW K100RS at around 135mph. 2nd place was a very highly tuned Triumph with an average speed of about 0.25mph higher than the LM. A good fart would have done it!I'm pretty sure it was maxxed out, the engine was quiet, there was just the wind noise. I had used my first run to figure out how to launch it and fit myself in behind the screen. And to crib an extra bit of run up at the starting end because that end was a bit shorter.Tony
I took the bevelbox off my V85 down to Geelong on Friday.I was on my Norge and it was 9 degrees C.The cold air was just what my Norge wanted and being suitably dressed it was lovely.
During the time I was land speed racing at the one mile track ,2013-2015 the fastest stock Japanese big bore sport bikes were crowding 175 mph. But stock production in LSR means stock exhaust and air boxes the engine internals can be tuned beyond stock. Fastest production 2 cylinder bikes were the last Buell's with the Rotex engines, about 160 mph. At the 1.5 mile track in Maine some of the same bikes were 5 mph faster. My naked frame 650 Triumph racer with 55 rwhp , about 65 at the flywheel, ran consistent 133 mph at Maine. I believe a non faired stock Guzzi with 75 rwhp should be able to see 145 mph.
https://www.motorcyclistonline.com/mandello-meteor/This one is fast, nice bike
n you have the V8 powered Curtiss LSR motorbike that ran 136 with an engine rated at 40 HP AT 1,800 RPM's . Go Huzo , what kind of gearing was he running to go that fast at such a low engine speed ? Dusty
The Curtiss bike was only 40 hp but it was 270 cubic inches. Crude as it was,it must have a bit of torque... We can argue if it's HP or torque that moves the bike....Example, On a Superflow dyno,my 650 Triumph racer makes 55 rwhp between 7000-7150 rpm. Peak torque is 46 ft lbs at 5100 rpm. At 6900-7000 rpm the engine still has 40 ft lbs of torque...Best speed as mentioned is when geared not to exceed 6900 rpm...Dyno power read outs may differ a bit than track or road performance but it's a valid example...
Torque turns the wheel.Power is a numerical figure assigned to the rate at which the work was done to move the mass...(how many times..)
I presume you were taking the Bevelbox to PS the Guzzi dealer in these parts, how did things transpire?
The aircraft V8 in the Curtiss LSR bike was built when power output wasn't really even measured , the figures were based on displacement . Was up late , didn't get much sleep , but once the brain clears a bit we can do the math and figure the torque numbers for that engine if we believe it was making 40 HP at 1,800 RPM's . Guessing it was Diesel like , probably 100 lbs feet at that engine speed . Oh , Huzo , you are probably about right at that 1:1 figure .. Dusty
For use in aircraft ,maximum rpms held to a level that gave some sort of reliability in that era. Used a sprint racing engine in bike,the rpm may have been 2100 for example.You really need the actual gear ratio and tire diameter. But I think ,based on my experience,60-70 ft lbs would do the job