When comparing the 1000F motor with the 1000RR motor on a broad and ignorant level, I see the same in line, 4 cylinder, 16 valve, DOHC layout with 1cc added.

Compression has gone from 10.5:1 to 12.3:1.

The red line is 2,500 rpm higher.

I assume fuel injection is a huge part.

Is there any other magic that explains the 52 HP increase?

That's 46% more power, isn't it?

Just looking for a nutshell/thumbnail level of comprehension here. Thanks.

 

look closer. the RR engine is completely diff from the 1000cc of yester year. Lighter, stronger internals, combustion cambers, valves, cams, hotter ignitions, just to list a few.

 

So we are talking about a wide range of incremental improvements. That's about what I expected.

So high strength/light weight metals is big. And I assume it's polished up with close tolerances.

I saw that show on the development of the original 750 Four, and was interested in the part where the original design and materials failed quickly until they figured out some new ways to cool the internal cylinders and decrease the wear. They did all that before came to the market, so when we first saw them, they seemed to run forever. All of a sudden a bike wasn't shot after 10,000 miles.

I was just wondering if there was some single or small group of breakthroughs that had changed the world again while I wasn't looking.

 

Don't forget about the extra ponies the ram air gives you at higher speeds. Read an article about the transition from the '05 to the '06 1kRR and all the engineers had to carry around a weight (10# I think) with them everywhere they went so that they'd think of ways to cut that weight from the bike. A couple pounds was actually taken from the engine yet it gained a couple extra ponies that year. Incredible!

 

It is incredible, stretcher.....
It's just amazing some of the stuff they're coming up with.

I know you mentioned it, joe, but fuel injection is definitely a big part.
And cams, etc. etc.

 

when it comes to weight and hp, for every 7lbs lost in weight you gain 1hp, that at the wheel of course.

 

Wow since the RR has 52 more horsies than the F, it must hav lost 364 lbs.! Talk about a feather weight.

Actually, if you follow that logic, the new RR is like having our engine in a bike that weighs 154 lbs. No wonder they scream and wheelie.

 

oh oh ..........time to get back to working out at the Gym

Reckon I could add 5 ponys easy without even touching the bike

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by JHouse

Is there any other magic that explains the 52 HP increase?

Mostly the computer is the answer, as mentioned before. Our bikes are carbureted. If we were to put a hotter cam in we would loose power in the bottom end and mid range (after re-jetting). On the newer bikes the computer makes adjustments to the fuel and timing, keeping the engine in peek power. It checks engine temperature and makes adjustments. It also checks the outside air pressure and corrects the intake mixture accordingly. The computer checks the throttle position to see what the rider wants and supplies the best fuel mixture and timing without lag, instant power.

There are many other things that have been developed in the last twenty-year. The valve to head angles, combustion chamber shape and piston dome shape are major factors in power output as well. Also as mentioned before is the lighter moving parts in the engine. You are not comparing apples to apples here just because they are both 1,000 cc. The newer bikes bore and stroke are different than ours but still giving the same displacement. The angles that the connecting rods are attached to the crank are different than ours. Some manufactures and playing with crossplane technology witch puts each crank pin 90 degrees from the next, with an uneven firing interval of 270-180-90-180 degrees.

The biggest thing is the computer that ties it all the other technologies together.

They are both inline-4's but that's about where it ends.

 

I don't think so. It may tbe the equivalent of gaining 1 pony, but you don't literally gain 1 HP at the rear wheel.