|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Rubber Side Down! >> MPH /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1161558066 Message started by mickthelimey on 10/22/06 at 16:01:06 |
|
Title: MPH Post by mickthelimey on 10/22/06 at 16:01:06 When I first got my Savage,I should say a week or two after I got it,I took it for a speed test and got 80 mph. I put on a harley muffler,still 80 mph, I put in a 150 main jet in the carb,still 80 mph,an iridium plug,still 80,a K& N air filter,guess what ? you guessed it 80 mph,I'm beginning to think you guys who are getting close to 100mph are snowing me, I do get faster exceleration,and the backfiring has almost gone,but that's it ! any more bright ideas beside getting a better bike? |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by sluggo on 10/22/06 at 16:24:51 94 mph indicated with new tire 140/90 , bone stock except supper trap 4 disk. it took over a mile to get it up to speed. no wind. unlike my vw which got 0 to 60 in ten. thats right ten minutes that is. ;D |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by Ed_L. on 10/22/06 at 17:42:28 Don't think there is any snow job going on, only saw 85mph today with WOT on a long flat road tucked over the tank. Took off the windshield and lost almost 10mph on the top speed, was able to see 95mph with the windshield on and laid flat. A lot is aerodynamics and wind resistance. Still looking for the ton with my '02, seems not many Savages have been there. Heard somewhere that if you run the carb a bit rich on the top it will give a little more top end end but it screws up the rest of the power curve. Try removing the air box door for a speed run, I drilled holes in mine, beer, a drill and a bike leads to some strange mods ;D. |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by barry68v10 on 10/22/06 at 17:58:49 Mick, Most configs of this engine (lancer's setup doesn't really count here) have a HP peak at 5400 RPMs (based on cam profile, compression ratio, stroke length and stroke/rod ratio, and spark curve profile.) At 80 MPH you're really close to the peak, and if you go faster, the HP actually drops off as torque plummets to the 6500 RPM redline. With a stock HP around 30, roughly 85 MPH is where the amount of drag on a stock bike with a typical rider is bleeding about 30 HP. Wind resistance increases EXPONENTIALLY as speed increases. For example, your motorcycle (and your car for that matter) requires TWICE as much HP to travel 65 MPH as it needs to maintain 55 MPH. The only 2 ways known to man to increase top-speed are: #1 - reduce drag #2 - increase HP And #1 is more important than #2 for the above reasons. (Gearing changes are really #2 when you think about it, your just changing the speed where you hit peak HP.) You are increasing your HP with the mods, but not likely much above 5000 RPMs. Remember, with a 3.7 inch stroke, piston speed on an LS650 is greater than some 600 cc 4-bangers at 12000+ RPMs. A shorter stroke would give more RPM range to play with but would decrease torque. Another consideration is the cam duration and lift, which is setup for 5500 RPMs and below. A more radical cam, increased compression ratio, and altered spark advance would help RPMs as long as the rest of the components can withstand the punishment, but your idle and low-end would REALLY suffer. Bottom line: can a Savage hit 100 MPH, sure...but not in anything resembling a stock configuration. If speed is your goal, you need more cylinders or lots of mods and taller gearing IMHO. If you want to hit the 100 MPH mark, go buy a bone-stock Kawasaki EX-500 and you're there, and probably for less $ than it would take for the Savage. |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by riptide_fl on 10/22/06 at 19:30:55 The best I can do on my 2006 S40 is about 85.. The way it vibrates I woldnt want to do more than that !! lol.. I also have a bone stock Ninja 250 that I ride most of the time that will easily do 100 with no vibration !! |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by spike on 10/22/06 at 21:54:22 The book says not to exceed 100. I don't think they ever rode one to see that it dosen't do that. I too have seen 85 and that is totaly stock 06, no windshield and not laid over the tank. Don't see it real often but I have seen it. Thought it might only be me not seeing the good #'s but I guess not.:'( |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by ChopDog on 10/22/06 at 22:18:57 OK MY TURN. SO TO ANSWER THE ORIGINAL QUESTION, YES YOU COULD DO MORE TO INCREASE "SPEED". WITH ALL OF THE MODDING YOU'VE DONE YOU SEEM TO HAVE LEFT OUT TWO. YES, ONLY TWO BUT PROBABLY THE TWO MOST IMPORTANT (OTHER THAN THE CARB.) 1. GO WITH AN OVERSIZE PISTON. I THINK THIS IS COMMON SENSE. BASICALLY YOUR MAKING A BIGGER MOTOR. OBVIOUSLY WHAT COMES WITH THIS IS TO BORE THE CYLINDER. (AND YOU MIGHT AS WELL CARBIDE TREAT IT AFTER IT'S BORED) 2. PERFORMANCE CAMSHAFT. RE-MACHINE YOUR CAM FOR PERFORMANCE. TYPE THESE INTO YOUR SEARCH FIELD AND I'M POSITIVE YOU'LL FIND SOMEONE ON HERE THAT'S DYING TO TELL YOU ALL ABOUT IT IN A PREVIOUS THREAD. -AND THIS IS 2 CENTS YOU CAN TAKE TO THE BANK- |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by sluggo on 10/22/06 at 22:40:09 ChopDog wrote:
#1 should be.. strip off all excess weight. ie signals, rear seat, original seat, replace with chopper seat, side rails, bob it. right hand mirror. chain guard, saddlebags. bar end caps, replace muffler with lighter one. pretty much what i've done with thumper. it now weights in at 290 lbs. then if ya got the bucks and experience do the steps listed above. make the speed run on reserve. less fuel, less weight. really if you want to go that fast, get a different machine. like maybe an old kawi 750 tripple. that'll get ya over a hundred easy. ;D |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by mornhm on 10/23/06 at 06:21:37 I don't think most of the people claiming 100 mph on a Savage are trying to snow anyone. (There may be an exception to my impression.) However I also don't think it is easy. I'm also pretty sure it is not for people who want to sit back with apehangers and their pegs down near the ground with a stock engine. As several others have stated if a ton of speed is your only goal, get a MC that is made to run those speeds in stock configuration, and learn how to ride it. Today's sport tourers will do a ton all day long. A lot of sport bikes pass 100 on the way up like other MC's come off the starting line. A naked cruiser like the Savage is going to need some help. |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by Stimpy on 10/23/06 at 13:24:47 About lightening the load for better speed here is what I found: - In my case it goes about 75mph WITH a passenger (130.lb She´s thin thank god ;D) and takes for ever to reach 80mph, if at all. - And riding SOLO (I´m 140.lb) it goes about 85mph and takes for ever to reach 90mph, if at all. It´s not math but hope this illustrates the idea that for about every 10 punds less, only ONE more mph can be achieved at top speed. Therefore more HP are the better choice, not less weight. |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by sluggo on 10/23/06 at 14:18:47 my point is this. start with weight reduction. then hp. ever see a race cars gear shift and other parts. they've got holes drilled in them to reduce weight. i've trimmed 60 lbs off thumper, so using your "fuzzy" math. i've gained 6 mph top speed. thats the difference between 87 and 93, considerable i would say. and it cost absolutley nothing. now i don't ride that speed regularly so i'll take that gain long before i would tear into the engine. want a faster bike, buy a different bike. i'm happy with thumper just the way it is. ;D |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by Savage_Rob on 10/23/06 at 16:51:35 I'll vouch for Barry's assertion that aerodynamics play a large part. A properly installed windshield helps a lot. |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by mickthelimey on 10/23/06 at 19:36:01 I do have a windshield on,it came with the bike,I had never ridden with one before,it was considered a bit nansy pansy in my youth, but now that I have one I wouldn't be without it,it allows me to ride way later into winter, I did manage to eke out 85 today,with a light wind at my back ,and no cops thank goodness. Don't get the wrong idea gents I was looking for a little more top speed because of all the blurbs I've read about 95s and one guy saying a 100,you know who you are. I'm quite happy with my steed,however I am saving for a little 250cc ninja ,just so that I have a bike to satisfy my need for the occasional blast from the past. thanks for all your input, Mick |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by stinger on 10/23/06 at 23:56:04 Whats the big deal about top speed? 85 isnt fast enough? Traveled 11 states and the top speed on any interstate was 75. Plenty fast enough for me. My bike has seen many hours of 70 plus cruising, but Im no sure if ive ever gone over 80mph. Other than the fact that one might be curious as to whether it could actually reach a 100 without exploding, a 85 mph bike is plenty fast enough for any single rider. Its a cruiser , so just cruise. |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by Stimpy on 10/24/06 at 01:46:02 I don´t think any of us ride at "high" speeds ALL the time, it´s just fun to know it can be done. If so, we would all be in the hayabusa forum and not here. But there´s just something about that elusive 100mph mark. Wow! 60lbs?! How you did that? What I meant earlier is that I thought removing things like mirrors and signals would not make any real difference (and also you kinda need things like signals and mirrors) but 60 pounds are A LOT of weight. Very true as well is that one should avoid getting into the engine for no good reason; so the carb & exhaust seem to be a good place to start for more HPs. aaanyway... |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by Paladin on 10/24/06 at 03:29:16 Stimpy wrote:
Aye... I think it was in '64, maybe '65. We had a mid-size '63 Plymouth, 225" slant six, auto. Went to visit my brother in Navy Boot in Chicago, on the freeway back to detroit. Mum's asleep. Sis is asleep. Road is clean and clear and straight. Depress the accellerator, picking up speed. Got up to the magical 100 mph -- cruising along quite nicely. Not bad for a six-cylinder econo-car. Caddy passes me doing at least 120 mph. Let the speed ease back to 75. I have no clear highways around here. But I think you have the right of it -- yeah, it's just a little cruiser, yeah it loves the back roads at 45 mph. But what is it's top end; stock and with a little assist? The stock gearing will do 100 if you can find the HP and cut the wind drag. I've gone and put a windshield in the wife's Amazon shopping cart. ::) |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by spike on 10/24/06 at 04:08:28 It's not so much running at a very high speed alot (maybe once and awhile...ok twice in awhile) it's being able to roll down the road and know that there is something left in the throttle to goose it around that big truck (which I drive) and get on down the road before it lays a gator out in front of you. Or to get up through the suction/tubunlence more quickly. ;D |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by lancer on 10/24/06 at 05:12:59 For me, it's mostly about the rolling acceleration ... especially in 2nd & 3rd on the Savage because that is where most of it is ... I just like the feel of it. 100? I am just curious to see what affect the latest change has done to the performance capability. Besides, it is a noise making machine and when it is running really good I love the sound. When in the Army flying helicopters in Vietnam (no speed limits, no rules, if you can make the machine do something then you just did it) I loved flying low and fast. It was a necessity to avoid being shot down, but aside from that one little drawback, it was a blast to do. The UH-1H Huey is essentially a pickup truck, and only good for about 120 knots (~140 mph), but when flying 3' off the ground and dodging bushes, water buffalo or little farmers in the rice field, or maybe turning up sideways to skinny in between 2 trees, it was a bunch of fun. You know how it seems you are going so fast on a go-cart because you are so close to the ground? It's that kind of thing when you're just 3' up @ 140mph. I had ONE incident while doing that, it was this skinny little sapling sticking up about 10' above everything else, except that it did not show itself until we topped this little rise and had all of .1 seconds before it SLAPPED the front of the fuslage ... broke out all of the windshield on my side ... @ 140 mph it gets pretty darn windy let me tell you...and I was the one flying! I hollered for the other pilot to take the controls, the crew and passengers all thought I was cut to pieces at first but fortunately not. We were still flyable but at a much slower speed as we made our way back to the base. One of these days I should tell you all about the "falling off the top of the mountain" flying technique. |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by riptide_fl on 10/24/06 at 05:45:59 Mick, If your thinking of a Ninja 250 ,here is a great website..The Ninja 250 rider's club...The FAQs on this site are excellant !!! http://www.ninja250.info/index.htm |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by Stimpy on 10/24/06 at 05:52:29 You know what I find funny about all this? That for some reason a Savage is considered (in most reviews and by today´s standards) a "small" bike. It´s a 650 FGS! Brando´s bike in The Wild One was a Triumph Thunderbird 650, and that was the baddest, coolest, biggest bike around back then. Yeah, things have changed, but that´s the whole point: the Savage stayed true to it´s classic roots ;D (...amazing stories Lancer ;)) |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by Reelthing on 10/24/06 at 06:43:49 mickthelimey wrote:
Mick, if I remember correct and no offense and all but you might, just maybe, be past your more flexible years where folding yourself into the required pretzel position to ride a 250 ninja is a comfortable thing, at least for me it only takes about 15 minutes to want off |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by mickthelimey on 10/24/06 at 07:12:56 Reelthing wrote:
I can touch my toes without bending my knees,the only difference now is that I creek a bit ,and let loose the occasional fart. and as I always say,"your a long time dead" One more thing ,my 70 year old brother in law drag races a chevy pick up at the strip that is very close to us,he is doing about 84mph in a quarter mile,I would very much like to beat his sorry a$$ ;) |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by Salad_Shaker on 10/24/06 at 08:27:54 The Lettuce is unmodified and hits 140kph/87mph if I really push for it. But it don't like it much and neither do I. I was up for doing the mods - Sportster exhaust, 152.5 jet etc but am now having second thoughts. Kev and Mick, my mates who got me into bikes always maintained that the most dangerous part of any bike is the rider's right wrist. How true. I just got back from a hospital visit to the son of a couple in the church- I'm a pastor so its all part of the job. I didn't go on the bike and David was in hospital for another op on his knee after coming off his Ducati Monster on a bend on what is our favourite road. That he lived to tell the tale is pretty remarkable when you list his injuries: 14 breaks in his right femur (yes, 14!). Broken hip. Broken left shoulder. Both wrists. Both ankes including compound fracture of the left - the bone broke out through his Alpinestar kevlar racing boots. Skin stripped off both hands. he was wearing full leathers, boots, winter gloves and a quality full-face helmet, plus back-protector. The skid generated enough heat to melt the plastic of the back-protector underneath his leathers. He was pieced back together with titanium and mesh. A year on he can walk again but very stiffly hence repeat operation on knee. He had been doing something near 180kph/112.5mph. Speed and overconfidence (AKA stupidity) very nearly killed him. Sobering stuff. The Lettuce in stock form will do for me. |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by riptide_fl on 10/24/06 at 08:32:48 Mick, The riding position on any bike is a matter of individuality...I'm 61 years old and can ride my ninja 250 for 500+ miles a day and it doesnt bother me in any way...I've done it several times.. To me that position is more natural and comfortable, no sore back or monkee butt..I could never last that long on the S40, even with the frequent fuel stops required.. |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by Reelthing on 10/24/06 at 12:35:51 mickthelimey wrote:
sounds like a job for an older 1200 bandit and several others that will do the job http://www.sportrider.com/bikes/146_street_bike_performance_times/ |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by sluggo on 10/24/06 at 12:38:05 Stimpy wrote:
signals are not required in washington state. reducing the weight was pretty easy. signals, signal mounts. right hand mirror, every reflector, all that stuff adds up. the biggest gain came from the bob job.. fender, fender rails, sissy bar. both seats. muffler change. here's the end result, check out the lines from handle bars to rear wheel. down the tank and curved over seat and fender, and the dual triangles of front end and engine area. i spent alot of time getting the lines right, and i believe it shows. i bought the machine just so i could bob it. i was stripping off stuff the day i brought it home. every part i replaced has come off some other machine. 50 year old tail light, used supper trap, used chopper seat. seat springs off a thirty year old bicycle seat. handlebars from a junk pile. chrome fenders off a 25 year old gn400. thats why everybody thinks it's an old harley. ask max, he's seen it in person. he provided the suppertrapp, and helped me burn off the rear tire. thanks max it's gotten alot of hits on youtube. only regret from that deal was it was just me and him. i watched a simular burnout on biker build off, the crowd went wild. and it wasn't even as good as mine. just in case you missed it http://youtube.com/watch?v=E4pnqtSfqcM http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j257/dsluggo/fall%20foliage/IMG_00252.jpg |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by barry68v10 on 10/24/06 at 15:55:19 Okay! I've fought the urge to chime in and lost! I reiterate...there are only TWO ways to increase top speed: HP, and aerodynamics. Weight affects acceleration (WHEN you hit top speed) but has virtually NO EFFECT on top speed itself. (More weight will cause a miniscual amount of extra friction on the tire-road contact, but also drops the bike a little, decreasing drag. Result: A wash. Extra weight in the form of ground effects, airfoils etc. can increase weight AND increase top-speed.) If you study Sluggo's bike you will notice a MUCH better coefficient of drag than stock! No mirrors and signals acting like sails, lower rider seating position (biggest effect), less air catching fenders, etc. Until somebody disproves the laws of physics (don't hold you breath folks) there are still only TWO WAYS to increase top speed on a land-locked rig! HP and aerodynamics! (Again, aerodynamics are more important.) Note: weight DOES affect aircraft BECAUSE more weight for a given lift WILL increase drag. Not-so for land-born vehicles. Sea-born vehicles can experience the same effect as air-born craft by increasing the draft (depth craft sits in the water), but hydrofoil designs can reverse some of this effect by lifting the craft out of the water and limiting drag from the water + increaseing top speed. |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by sluggo on 10/24/06 at 16:17:33 i'll buy that concept for a dollar. the lower seating position allows the rear pegs to be used in a better aerodynamic seating position. franky, i made the mods as appearance mods, not performance. i will probably not take it up to top speed again. yeah right. i am quite satisfied with the way thumper looks and runs. when i get the need for speed i go beat up the kids and their high rev tuners with my 95 accura. it looks like a grandpa's car, fly's like a bat out of well you know where. i topped that out at 139mph one evening on a road we closed at 3 am. a trooper friend of my did the radar to verify, a fact the department never heard about. i wanted 140 but just couldn't get it. |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by torque on 10/24/06 at 16:57:37 sluggo wrote:
acura's are high reving tuners too! |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by sluggo on 10/24/06 at 17:01:10 torque wrote:
with the exception of a k&n filter it's stock. that's why i don't consider it a HRT. but it is the engine model number the kids are looking for. oh yeah, i'm getting your piston from lancer to make a headlight out of. |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by torque on 10/24/06 at 17:09:27 sluggo wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by klx650sm2002 on 10/25/06 at 02:32:31 Laws of physics To go 10% faster you need 33.1% more power. Clive W :D |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by barry68v10 on 10/25/06 at 02:56:39 For any "geeks" out there other than me, here's the equation you could use to calculate it: D = Cd * A * .5 * V^2 Drag from the air is the coefficient of drag (this is how aerodynamic your steed is...a typical car = .3, a typical m/c = .9). A is the frontal area in square feet (typical car = 20, typical m/c = 8), and velocity must be expressed in ft/sec. (This equation is simplified since at a given altitude air viscosity will not change much.) (This is mostly just for fun since Cd always has to be tested in a wind tunnel for empirical values and A must be meticulously calculated. Also this "simplified" equation will not yield "correct" units, they would need to be converted to lb-f, then to HP to be useful for us ::) Anybody got a spare wind tunnel? ;D |
|
Title: Re: MPH Post by spike on 10/25/06 at 04:57:20 Posted by: sluggo Posted on: 24. Oct 2006 at 15:38 and helped me burn off the rear tire. How did you manage that ??? If I get on mine hard starting out and sometimes on the slow roll it makes alot of like tapping noise. Have 2400mi on it. Had it's first service 1400mi ago. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |