ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Bikes > Beasts > The British Invasion: Triumph Tigers
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

View Results: Explorer or Explorer/XC
Explorer 0 0%
Explorer/xc 0 0%
Voters: 0. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-02-2012, 11:52 AM   #1561
markjenn
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Location: Swellvue, WA
Oddometer: 10,421
20% overall loss in a modern shaft drive system sounds like a high estimate to me. I'd guess it would be more like 12-14%, compared to perhaps 7-9% for a brand-new, well-lubed chain. Unless your chain maintenance is rigorous, you're, on average, not going to do that well with the chain, so the actual advantage of the chain is probably going to be less than the 5% between these numbers, perhaps 3-4% on average. On a 120 RWHP bike, that's 4 hp or so. Not insignificant certainly, but not a deal breaker either.

- Mark
markjenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 12:41 PM   #1562
Croak
Studly Adventurer
 
Croak's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC/Is-Swieqi, Malta
Oddometer: 529
Quote:
Originally Posted by markjenn View Post
20% overall loss in a modern shaft drive system sounds like a high estimate to me. I'd guess it would be more like 12-14%, compared to perhaps 7-9% for a brand-new, well-lubed chain. Unless your chain maintenance is rigorous, you're, on average, not going to do that well with the chain, so the actual advantage of the chain is probably going to be less than the 5% between these numbers, perhaps 3-4% on average. On a 120 RWHP bike, that's 4 hp or so. Not insignificant certainly, but not a deal breaker either.

- Mark
Thing is, with a modern chain, there's very little power delivery delta between a "well maintained" and a neglected chain. Even if the chain is more loose than it should be, it's still a direct mechanical connection and once it's fully loaded and in a steady state, losses are barely worse than with a properly tightened and lubed chain. For that matter, external lube has almost no impact on efficiency, just durability...modern chains are internally lubed, you know.

15-20% is still a realistic loss percentage on a shaft drive. Part of that is the extra gearing needed to couple the crank to the drive shaft and then to the rear hub, but the biggest parasitic losses come from weight. The mass of a shaft drive and associated gearing is many times greater than a chain drive, there's simply no getting around that.
__________________
2003 Aprilia Tuono
2002 Triumph Sprint ST
2013 Kymco Agility City 200i
Croak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 01:09 PM   #1563
PirateJohn
Banned
 
PirateJohn's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Location: Uvalde, TX
Oddometer: 22,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by markjenn View Post
20% overall loss in a modern shaft drive system sounds like a high estimate to me. I'd guess it would be more like 12-14%, compared to perhaps 7-9% for a brand-new, well-lubed chain. Unless your chain maintenance is rigorous, you're, on average, not going to do that well with the chain, so the actual advantage of the chain is probably going to be less than the 5% between these numbers, perhaps 3-4% on average. On a 120 RWHP bike, that's 4 hp or so. Not insignificant certainly, but not a deal breaker either.

- Mark


Old school bicycle racers will tell you that a well oiled chain makes a tremendous difference in power output.
PirateJohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 01:22 PM   #1564
Mercury264
Once you go Triple...
 
Mercury264's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Location: Masshole
Oddometer: 22,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by PirateJohn View Post
Old school bicycle racers will tell you that a well oiled chain makes a tremendous difference in power output.
But they don't use O ring chains on bicycles do they ? I think that's the key when talking modern motorcycle chains.
__________________
'12 Tiger 800XC
'07 TE510
'02 Sprint ST
'99 XR650L
'99 Speed Triple
Mercury264 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 02:11 PM   #1565
PirateJohn
Banned
 
PirateJohn's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Location: Uvalde, TX
Oddometer: 22,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercury264 View Post
But they don't use O ring chains on bicycles do they ? I think that's the key when talking modern motorcycle chains.
I have no idea, just that there can be significant friction in a chain drive train, so the implication that a driveshaft sucks up even more power has plenty of merit.

And I think that what you are saying is that a modern motorcycle chain works better than the old chains, which makes sense.

Another thing, while we are on the subject, is that although modern road bicycles have a simple automatic chain tensioning device in the gear change mechanism, track bicycles are the old style bikes with a single gear in the front and a cog in the back and you adjust chain tension by sliding the wheel back and forth and tightening it with a wrench (obviously something that shouldn't be done while riding). There is a point of least friction where the chain is slightly loose but not so floppy that it will come off while you are racing. A chain that it too tight really binds things up.
PirateJohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 02:14 PM   #1566
mousitsas
Beastly Adventurer
 
mousitsas's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Location: Athens, Greece
Oddometer: 2,749
shaft losses

Check out this site, they make ecu chips for boxers. According to them, combined transmission and final drive losses are of the order of 10%. However, they use this estimate without any further explanation.
http://www.bbp.homepage.t-online.de/r15gs2e.htm
mousitsas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 02:26 PM   #1567
Mercury264
Once you go Triple...
 
Mercury264's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Location: Masshole
Oddometer: 22,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by PirateJohn View Post
I have no idea, just that there can be significant friction in a chain drive train, so the implication that a driveshaft sucks up even more power has plenty of merit.

And I think that what you are saying is that a modern motorcycle chain works better than the old chains, which makes sense.

Another thing, while we are on the subject, is that although modern road bicycles have a simple automatic chain tensioning device in the gear change mechanism, track bicycles are the old style bikes with a single gear in the front and a cog in the back and you adjust chain tension by sliding the wheel back and forth and tightening it with a wrench (obviously something that shouldn't be done while riding). There is a point of least friction where the chain is slightly loose but not so floppy that it will come off while you are racing. A chain that it too tight really binds things up.
That really was my point. I have to think that modern O and X ring chains are much more efficient than the older 'non-ring' chains.
__________________
'12 Tiger 800XC
'07 TE510
'02 Sprint ST
'99 XR650L
'99 Speed Triple
Mercury264 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 04:04 PM   #1568
markjenn
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Location: Swellvue, WA
Oddometer: 10,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by Croak View Post
....the biggest parasitic losses come from weight. The mass of a shaft drive and associated gearing is many times greater than a chain drive, there's simply no getting around that.
Drivetrain losses are calculated in steady state (not accelerating or decelerating) so I don't see how weight/mass would affect drivetrain losses.

- Mark
markjenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 06:14 PM   #1569
Adv Grifter
on the road o'dreams
 
Adv Grifter's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: Passing ADV Stalkers in California
Oddometer: 6,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray_rev View Post
Yes. 135bhp is good for about 140mph on the bike, afaik. I can't remember from the blurb whether the top speed is limited electronically.
I would think so Ray. With 135 HP on tap ... figure 125 HP at the wheel ... the bike should touch 150 mph if gearing is reasonable and aerodynamics aren't too bad.

Even my DL1000 V-Strom (92 RWHP measured) went a real 130 mph once the 5th and 6th gear elec. limiters were by passed. With limiters working the motor would not rev beyond about 6000 rpm in 5th and 6th gears. De-restricted, it was still pulling at 130 (142 indicated) ... but began to weave ... The Vstrom was NOT stable over 120 mph and I very rarely went over that speed. I'm sure the Tiger 1200 is safer and more stable, with better suspension and a very good chassis ... but still.

Riding on public roads a lot changes once up over 120 mph. I'm too old for that now! But good for crossing Nevada on Highway 50. (bring tires)
Adv Grifter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2012, 07:02 PM   #1570
precarious
Studly Adventurer
 
precarious's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Location: New Hampshire
Oddometer: 559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adv Grifter View Post
I would think so Ray. With 135 HP on tap ... figure 125 HP at the wheel ... the bike should touch 150 mph if gearing is reasonable and aerodynamics aren't too bad.

Even my DL1000 V-Strom (92 RWHP measured) went a real 130 mph once the 5th and 6th gear elec. limiters were by passed. With limiters working the motor would not rev beyond about 6000 rpm in 5th and 6th gears. De-restricted, it was still pulling at 130 (142 indicated) ... but began to weave ... The Vstrom was NOT stable over 120 mph and I very rarely went over that speed. I'm sure the Tiger 1200 is safer and more stable, with better suspension and a very good chassis ... but still.

Riding on public roads a lot changes once up over 120 mph. I'm too old for that now! But good for crossing Nevada on Highway 50. (bring tires)
+1. I hit a GPS 120 mph crossing the desert on my DL1000, and it was SKETCHY! Plenty of pull, but it started shaking its big head around.
precarious is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 12:14 AM   #1571
Jud
Beastly Adventurer
 
Jud's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Location: N.E. Ga. USA
Oddometer: 2,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Croak View Post
Thing is, with a modern chain, there's very little power delivery delta between a "well maintained" and a neglected chain. Even if the chain is more loose than it should be, it's still a direct mechanical connection and once it's fully loaded and in a steady state, losses are barely worse than with a properly tightened and lubed chain. For that matter, external lube has almost no impact on efficiency, just durability...modern chains are internally lubed, you know.

15-20% is still a realistic loss percentage on a shaft drive. Part of that is the extra gearing needed to couple the crank to the drive shaft and then to the rear hub, but the biggest parasitic losses come from weight. The mass of a shaft drive and associated gearing is many times greater than a chain drive, there's simply no getting around that.
I really think that 15-20% is a smidge high man. Modern cars with manual trannys have loses in that range or less {many in the 10-15% range}. Modern autos often return loses in the 15-25% range with the lower numbers being econo type cars with tight converters and the higher loses being associated with performance autos with looser converters {higher stall}. As an apples to apples example, most sources put my 04 FJR's hp at roughly 140-145hp at the crank and most sources list RWHP in the 125-130 range. That sounds like 15% to me worst case and around 10% in most cases so,,,, 10-15%. Not alot in argument's sake but it does mean alot in terms of outright power loss comparison. If my 98 Camaro with a 4 speed auto can return 20-25% loss numbers and my old 2000 Firebird with a M6 can return 10-15% numbers I find it hard to believe a modern motorcycle shaft would lose the same much less double?????

But who knows, maybe you are dead on with that 15-20% number but we should find out soon. My guess would be well under that 15%, probably right around 10%. You are absolutely right in that higher rotating mass hurts acceleration{hp} but once again this shouldn't be a huge factor and man,,,,,,, diss ain't no repli-racer and ultimate performance is less important in this class than low maintenance especially considering the miles many will be laying down. In any event, we are only talking what, maybe a 10-15hp difference between the two {chain vs shaft}if that? I consider that more than a worth while trade for no maintenance. I absolutely love the shaft drive on my FJR and my wife's Ascot. The FJR has over 75K miles on it without a single issue. I changed out the oil at around 25K miles for some synthetic and I lubed the pumpkin splines at the same time. Took what, maybe 30 minutes extra to do while changing tires?The Ascot going on 25K and it's going on 30 years old with nary and issue. Maintenance??? I did change the oil in it at around 25 yrs and 7K miles. In contrast, I have averaged a new chain and sprockets every 10-20K miles {just depends on the chain and how much I play} on my DL at a cost of around 150-200$ so each time so I'm looking at around 500$ just in crappin chains so far.

On the other hand, I've had to gear the piss outta the DL to get the off road performance I want and had that bike been a shaftie, that wouldn't have been an option so there are advantages and disadvantages and I and most others understand that. My FJR's gearing is spot on if a bit low but that's Yamaha's fault for not building enough gearing spread and hopefully Triumph will learn that these type bikes really need a nice wide tranny spread. At least a nice tall and lazy OD 6th gear anyway.
__________________
Pics- http://s563.photobucket.com/albums/s...eon/?start=all
Places visited on two- http://s563.photobucket.com/albums/s...0two%20wheels/
Endeavor to Persevere
Blue Skies Coming

Jud screwed with this post 03-03-2012 at 12:58 AM
Jud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 06:18 AM   #1572
littlefield
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: May 2004
Location: SE Texas
Oddometer: 119
The motorcylce-usa article insinuated the change to the driveshaft alone accounted for a 15-20% loss. That would mean from the crank to the rear wheel would be, what, 20-25%? 25-30%? Yikes.
littlefield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 07:31 AM   #1573
996DL
Buell me
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Location: finally back in paradise...
Oddometer: 2,253


There hasn't been a press demo review yet, that's complained about a lack of power, instead they've focused on the strong bottom to midrange performance, with some vibration up top if it's neck is wrung.

So let's say 115 rwhp, with a stronger low to midrange pull than the MS1200, which needs higher revs to exploit it's explosive output.

996DL
996DL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 09:17 AM   #1574
GaelicDog
Lesser of Two Weasels
 
GaelicDog's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Oddometer: 7,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by 996DL View Post


There hasn't been a press demo review yet, that's complained about a lack of power, instead they've focused on the strong bottom to midrange performance, with some vibration up top if it's neck is wrung.

So let's say 115 rwhp, with a stronger low to midrange pull than the MS1200, which needs higher revs to exploit it's explosive output.

996DL
AMEN!

__________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.
GaelicDog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2012, 09:20 AM   #1575
Dr. Greg
Tryin' to get home..
 
Dr. Greg's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Location: ABQ, New Mexico
Oddometer: 1,175
FWIW, rotational mass (i.e. "inertia") theoretically has no effect on power output. Inertia definitely affects acceleration, however (inertia is basically resistance to any change in speed).

Practically speaking, heavier/larger drivetrain components could result in higher bearing loading (w/more friction), windage losses, etc., and consequently would reduce power.

Not tryin' to start yet another physics debate, just sayin'...

--Doc
__________________
Isa. 58:14 (KJV)
2013 BMW GSW (traveler)
1992 Ducati 900SS (looker)
1991 Honda Hawk NT650 (commuter)
Dr. Greg is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 10:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2015