ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Riding > The perfect line and other riding myths
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-20-2014, 05:08 AM   #16
scootrboi
Beastly Adventurer
 
scootrboi's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: Vermont
Oddometer: 1,186
The handbook that came with my bike had a set of charts included for torque, horsepower, hill gradients and gears, fuel efficiency. The most interesting to me was torque. The engine redlines at 5,750, maximum torque is 3,500-4,500, and best fuel efficiency is within that range. At 50 mph I get 80 mpg, at 57 I get 70. 57 is maximum cruising speed and redline. What seemed remarkable to me was the accuracy of the charts on such an old machine. I climbed a long 5% grade on the Interstate in high gear and maintained a minimum of 45 mph, exactly what the chart predicted, max grade and max torque. The engine was in perfect condition with the advantage of synthetic lubricant. I had not intended to be on that section of I-89. I got on one ramp too soon.
__________________
42 years on a Heinkel Tourist
scootrboi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2014, 05:23 AM   #17
hugemoth
Beastly Adventurer
 
hugemoth's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Location: Bend, Oregon summer, Snowbird in winter
Oddometer: 2,532
Halfway to red line on a Ninja 250 would be 7,000 RPM. Red line is 14,000. Middle of the tach would be 8,000 RPM as the tach goes to 16,000. Yes, it's a very over-square engine with a 62mm bore and 41mm stroke. Try riding one at 3000 RPM and you'll get nowhere fast.

If you ride a low RPM bike it feels strange to ride a high RPM bike but eventually you get used to it and it feels normal. I love the sound of my old GL500 V twin at 9,000+ RPM which is where the max HP is.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Pollo View Post
what is low revs

middle of the tach?
hugemoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2014, 05:29 AM   #18
nskitts
Beastly Adventurer
 
nskitts's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Location: Southern Ohio
Oddometer: 2,942
I am gonna start ridin my Harley on the highway banging off the rev limiter at a screaming 5500 RPM


....now the FZ6 I used to ride didn't even wake up until 8,000 RPMs.
__________________
"I never regretted any vacation that I took."
--Dad, a few months before he passed.



nskitts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2014, 06:28 AM   #19
High Country Herb
Adventure Connoiseur
 
High Country Herb's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Location: Western Sierras
Oddometer: 6,250
If it isn't leaking oil out the seals, I fail to see the problem. I had an '83 XL185 that would spit oil all over my legs at anything over 55 mph.
High Country Herb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2014, 07:28 AM   #20
OrangeYZ
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Southern Oregon
Oddometer: 477
My KLR vibrated like shit at high revs. 5000 rpm was the limit of me having a good time, and I didn't pass it (about 65 or 70 mph in 5th)unless I wanted to get somewhere fast or needed to not get run over.

My Tiger 800 doesn't vibrate ever. At 70 mph I'd rather be in 4th gear than 3rd, but it doesn't care.
__________________
Idaho
OrangeYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2014, 07:40 AM   #21
randyo
Beastly Adventurer
 
randyo's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Location: Northern NewEngland
Oddometer: 1,438
Quote:
Originally Posted by ragtoplvr View Post
There is less engine wear and lower fuel consumption at low RPM
Rod

maybe, fuel consumption is more dependent on throttle opening than rpm
__________________
RandyO
IBA # 9560
07 VeeStrom
99 SV650
82 XV920R
A man with a gun is a citizen
A man without a gun is a subject
randyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2014, 07:59 AM   #22
Wraith Rider
Studly Adventurer
 
Wraith Rider's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Location: Germany
Oddometer: 991
Quote:
Originally Posted by windmill View Post
Low RPMs are less "stressful" on the rider when doing lots of miles.
Vibrations can be fun for a short trip, but when doing lots of miles, I prefer a smooth running engine with as less vibrations as possible. That's why HIGH rpms are less "stressful" to me and consequently I use the upper half or better the upper most quarter (depends a bit on cylinder number) of the rpm range.
__________________
"Why not stay in disguise all the time? You know, look like everyone else."
"Because we shouldn't have to."
Wraith Rider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2014, 09:27 AM   #23
Albie
Kool Aid poisoner
 
Albie's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Upstate SC
Oddometer: 8,269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idle View Post
Quite simply, they are brick stupid..


They don't understand that the wind resistance increases exponentially the faster you go. Their bike goes just fine at 10 mph in second gear at 2,250 rpms... So 3,500 at 70 mph is ok.

They don't understand that all engines have a sweet spot.

They don't understand that you need to hold the next gear a little longer than the last one as you accelerate.

They don't understand they are lugging their engine riding in top gear around town at 50mph.

They don't understand that the manufacturers put TALL gearing on the bike to pass emissions.

They can't comprehend that an engine can return better fuel economy and a longer service life if ridden at speed at a higher rpm. It goes against everything they "know".



That is all.

Yup.
__________________
Good. Bad. I'm the guy with the gun.

Another day, another foot injury!
Albie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2014, 09:49 AM   #24
trc.rhubarb
Beastly Adventurer
 
trc.rhubarb's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Concord, CA
Oddometer: 1,851
Manufacturers don't always get it right.
My 2008 Harley Ultra couldn't effectively use 6th gear under about 75 or 80. Mileage suffered and any incline sucked.

My 2010 does much better due to revised gearing and changes I've made to the power.

Oh and mine can scream down the highway bouncing off the limiter at 6100!
__________________
2007 BMW GS Adventure
2000 Ducati 900ss
2010 Harley Ultra Limited
1975 R90/6
Follow me here
trc.rhubarb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2014, 10:27 AM   #25
Badjuju
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Badjuju's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Location: ...your girlfriend's bedroom
Oddometer: 252
Quote:
Originally Posted by randyo View Post
maybe, fuel consumption is more dependent on throttle opening than rpm
Nope. Not particularly true for carbed bikes, and certainly not true for FI bikes. An engine is nothing more than an air pump, and other than when under load (say during acceleration) the sweet spot for air:fuel ratio is approx 12:1 to maybe 14:1 for efficient combustion. Even if you're talking carbs, the fuel is drawn from the bowl by venturi, which is largely dependent on RPM at SS cruising. FI controls fuel flow based on a number of parameters, including throttle position, RPM, engine temp, manifold vacuum and exhaust O2 level.
__________________
Some people will tell you that slow is good, and it may be on some days, but I am here to tell you that fast is better... Being shot out of a cannon will always be better than being squeezed out of a tube. That is why God made fast motorcycles, Bubba.... Hunter S Thompson, Song of the Sausage Creature
Badjuju is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2014, 10:29 AM   #26
DAKEZ
Beastly Adventurer
 
DAKEZ's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Location: U-gene, OR.
Oddometer: 19,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by windmill View Post
Low RPMs are less "stressful" on the rider when doing lots of miles.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Idle View Post
They don't stress about their bike revving...

__________________
“Watch out for everything bigger than you, they have the "right of weight"
Bib
DAKEZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2014, 10:43 AM   #27
DC2wheels
Castle Anthrax troll
 
DC2wheels's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Location: N.H.
Oddometer: 2,057
Engine speed on the highway (65-75 mph) is all over the place, depending on the bike.

Son has an '07 Ducati 800 Supersport that won't get out of its own way in 6th gear at 65- Revs far too low, geared WAY too high, can't accelerate at all. What were they thinking? On back roads, 50 mph or so, he never gets past 3rd gear.

My '92 BMW K100RS revs around 4600 rpms at 70 mph in 5th (5 speed trans), feels ok and will get nearly 50 mpg
__________________
a few bikes in the barn

sugarhillctd on the
http://k11og.org/forum/index.php world-wide K bike forum

DC2wheels is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2014, 10:54 AM   #28
Bill Harris
Confirmed Curmudgeon
 
Bill Harris's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Location: backwoods Alabama
Oddometer: 5,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamcanjim View Post
Whenever a new bike is introduced, members here wail and go on about how high the bike will be revving at 80, 90 or 100 mph.

I don't get it.

Perhaps I trust the manufacturer too much, but I always figure that they have designed the bike to be at an optimal rpm at 70 mph.

However, it seems that everyone always claims it is 'revving too high.'

Why do we dislike bikes revving high? Is it longevity concerns? Vibration? Noise (that can probably be fixed by putting the stock pipe back on). Or just a subjective aesthetic concern?
It's probably a subset corollary of the Cruiserface phenomenon. Go down the road blatting potato-potato-potato all day.

--Bill
__________________
'73 R60/5 Toaster
Luddite. Not just a philosophy, a way of life...
Bill Harris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2014, 12:08 PM   #29
windmill
Beastly Adventurer
 
windmill's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Kent, Washington State
Oddometer: 4,084
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAKEZ View Post





Really?

I always thought that was a major selling point for Harleys, trading top end HP for low end torque making for a more relaxed ride at freeway speeds.

I think you're being intentionally obtuse.

If I'm so off base, why are touring bikes and cruisers tuned for low rpm torque rather than high rpm HP?
__________________
"Take care, sir," cried Sancho. "Those over there are not giants but windmills".
windmill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2014, 12:12 PM   #30
Kommando
Grumpy Young Man
 
Kommando's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Spacecoaster FL
Oddometer: 6,415
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamcanjim View Post
Whenever a new bike is introduced, members here wail and go on about how high the bike will be revving at 80, 90 or 100 mph.

I don't get it.

Perhaps I trust the manufacturer too much, but I always figure that they have designed the bike to be at an optimal rpm at 70 mph.

However, it seems that everyone always claims it is 'revving too high.'

Why do we dislike bikes revving high? Is it longevity concerns? Vibration? Noise (that can probably be fixed by putting the stock pipe back on). Or just a subjective aesthetic concern?
You trust the manufacturer too much. Engineers make mistakes. So do R&D departments. So do parts mfrs. So do assembly departments. Why do you think vehicle recalls exist?
__________________
'8yrs in the Marines, 'almost a decade of knocking heads in the service industry, I took a ride out to visit family and friends for Thanksgiving at 41yrs old, and my mom confiscated my bike.

Kommando 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 12:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014