so i went to the grand opening of family powersports in san angelo texas today, and they had $15 dynos all day long. i went kinda late but better late than never, right? so im in line to get my 87 cbr 1k dyno'd and they tell me that te guy before me (my friend) was the last guy for the day. he has a bone stock 2006 zx-10r that after 3 runs gave a 146.77 hp with a 74 trq. sooo......... this had me wondering what mine would have done. all i have on my bike is a -1+2 sprkt conv and f-1r slip ons for my duals. i always thought that these bikes were pushing around 130-135 at the wheel, but never looked it up. has anyone ever dyno'd their bike and what was it?

 

130-135 at the wheel is purely a dream.

According to mcreports.com:

Power in 1986 peaked out at 112.75@10,000rpm, with torque at 65.76@8000rpm. Wet weight was 582 lb's. (I assume this is at the crank)

By 1994 horsepower was 105 (at the rear wheel). Wet weight was 606lb's.

 

what would make it drop down 7 horses over the years? i thought the newer the better? also, what site or mag. did you get it from?

 

My '91 was dynoed at 117HP and 72 foot pounds peak torque at a similar event when it had 27,000 miles on it. I wouldn't have had reason to pay to dyno it otherwise. I don't recall the other specifics. 135 is a number I've heard for HP at the crank.

Dynos vary. They also have correction factors in the computer program, selected by the operator, for altitude, temp, humidity, etc in the interest of arriving at a standard that's good for comparison, taken anywhere on earth. Those can also be used to alter readings intentionally or just by error. You could put correction factors in to make the readout whatever you want it to read.... within a limited range, maybe as much as 10%. Also, being a machine, Dynos can vary just due to minor variations in the many components that make up the whole machine.

Changing gearing will not change the HP and a dyno will read HP only, because it calculates the accelleration and speed of the drum while it reads the RPM change, recognizing the gearing compared to the force accellerating the drum. It will give a proper reading in any gear and with any final drive gearing because it doesn't care what the gearing is. You only need to go to high gear to get top MPH reading... then there's potential tire slippage at the drum that's reduced in the higher gears.

The cam grind is different on later models, after '91, theoretically milder. I say theoretically because many factors come in to play that may or may not result in what a simple review of the cam specs might suggest. There's more to it like head flow capacity, etc. I've never heard that the HP was less in later models but the cam specs suggest it's possible. This information is a result of my cursory review of this because I picked up a low mileage '94 engine for my '91 and have discovered these things when investigating it. None of the sources have suggested less HP but the cam specs hint it's possible. I don't know for sure because I've gone no further than this.

 

Hey:

I sure wish you could have got that run as I would like to know what it would have shown, are you going to try to go back?

Boy can I relate to your misfortune of being the first non player after the cutoff after waiting in line at a dyno run. I had just got my engine freshened up with all the mods and it was a free run with a card they gave out as prizes that I got and the dyno computer had and uncorrectable error on the bike in front of me, and was done for the day. It was at a Myrtle Beach bike fest and I have not been able to get back there for the last 5 yrs, So I doubt my free card will still be good.

A British Publication sport bike riders and Honda adds back in the day list the 93 as the high hp year at a 135 bhp measured @ the crank, but since the bike had gained 30 lbs over the 90-92 bike it was not any faster and the 92 model was king for CBR 1KFs. The shootout for the 93 bikes which was won by the fireblade 900RR overall, but the Kaw ZX11 posted Fastest top speed and 1/4 mile performance. The 93 CBR1KF was voted as the best all around big bike and one the riders would buy if they had to own one of the bikes tested.

 

I got new exhausts on my bike resently, and got it on a dyno.

119 hp on the rear

 

Cycle magazine tested the 1000F in August, 1990. It made 111.4 HP at 9,500, and 68 torque at 8,000. It made over 60 ft/lbs from 6,000 to 9,500. Other tidbids: 1/4 mi: 11.06 sec @125mph. 0-60: 3.0 sec. Average MPG: 42. Speedo error: 60mph indicated is actually 54.7, and curb weight with a full tank was 600.0 pounds. Here's how they summed it up: "If you want the most refined, carefully developed liter bike, the one that balances strength in every performance catagory with a polished feel that separates it from the competition, the CBR1000 is calling your name."

 

Gotta love that quote. Good find slowpoke.

MDFF

 

88, i WAS gonna try to go back, but when i did and looked at the prices..... i said hell no. $60!! i dont know how much they normally run for, but thats a huge leap from $15. I'm also toying with the idea of selling her. I have found ONE of my dream bikes (cbr 900rr) for $2,700.....so if i can work something out with the owner....she will be going. sad to say, but at least im staying with the CBR.