posted January 21, 2012 08:41 AM
weight to hp. The real numbers I've heard a lot of guys talking about, what if this guy was riding a bike, or what would it run with my weight?. So I decided to use three of the names that have been popping up. wee, smokin, jt,I use a race air Pro by Computech systems, the same one a lot of Pro Stock car guys use..I need three things to calculate this, total weight, horsepower, and density altitude, I have two of the three, horsepower, and weight, both are estimates. Let's start with weight and use 530 pounds for bike, and a average horsepower rating of 212 HP and let's say all three riders showed up on the same day and rode one bike.
Wee, weighing in at 215 runs 5.624@126.21 and 8.856@153.91
smokin, weighing in at 140 runs 5.420@130.75 and 8.548@159.45
jt, waiting in at 115 runs 5.360@132.42 and 8.441@161.49
I realize these are estimates, but in my experience. I have found them to be pretty close.
quote:I've heard a lot of guys talking about, what if this guy was riding a bike, or what would it run with my weight?. So I decided to use three of the names that have been popping up. wee, smokin, jt,I use a race air Pro by Computech systems, the same one a lot of Pro Stock car guys use..I need three things to calculate this, total weight, horsepower, and density altitude, I have two of the three, horsepower, and weight, both are estimates. Let's start with weight and use 530 pounds for bike, and a average horsepower rating of 212 HP and let's say all three riders showed up on the same day and rode one bike.
Wee, weighing in at 215 runs 5.624@126.21 and 8.856@153.91
smokin, weighing in at 140 runs 5.420@130.75 and 8.548@159.45
jt, waiting in at 115 runs 5.360@132.42 and 8.441@161.49
I realize these are estimates, but in my experience. I have found them to be pretty close.
Ken
Sounds about right. What DA are you plugging in?
Also, Wheelie ran that 1/8th ET (not mph) on his '09. Now with 20 HP more with the 14R, I expected him to run 5.5x. Mathmatically, what does he need? In reality, maybe just a PC?
____________
You only need two tools: WD-40 and Duct Tape.
If it doesn't move and should, use the WD-40.
If it shouldn't move and does, use the duct tape.
posted January 21, 2012 09:13 AM
hey lucky, I wasn't using any density altitude numbers, because I don't know them. Only horsepower to wight. if someone knew the density altitude for both tracks at the time they made their run. I could give you horsepower differences between the two bikes. But even at that it would still be hard to get a real number, because wee has not run a quarter-mile and that is where you get the most accurate horsepower numbers,a nother problem is wee bike is longer, and smokin is closer to sea level, and both of those are big differences. So I used a average horsepower with the rider's weight.
posted January 21, 2012 09:14 AM
Edited By: Shane661 on 21 Jan 2012 17:17
The only difference is that the car has consistent aero's, the bike aero's change significantly with the size/tuck of the rider.
posted January 21, 2012 09:26 AM
I forgot to say about the mph problem, Kennedale mph clocks have been screwed up for a long time, I can go to the Texas motor Plex and run 2 or 3 mph faster in the eighth then Kennedale and about the same at redline, then I've run there, I have seen nights that the left lane went 3 mph slower than the right lane, and not just my bike, but some other guys I asked was having the same problem, I think their ET, is right on but the mph is a mystery,
posted January 21, 2012 09:29 AM
The only real way to do this weight thing is with the same rider and same bike. A full tank of fuel compared to 1/2 a gallon would show a good solid number. For me it is exactly a tenth, but I only run low 9's.
The rider variable makes this hard to avg imo.
____________
Get on the shortbus boys 'cause its time to get schooled.
2007 ZX-14
1.38 60ft
9.03 @ 149mph
8.95 @153 small shot n2o
8.68 @160mph 5lbs boost
posted January 21, 2012 09:30 AM
Rich, do you have that software handy?
I am curious about how a 465 lb bike, with 185 hp would run. One rider 255 suited, the other 170 suited. I am really interested in what it says for mph.
quote:The only difference is that the car has consistent aero's, the bike aero's change significantly with the size/tuck of the rider.
I know that this is right, but I don't have any way of figuring that, other than you know, the bigger the guy is the more mph He's going to lose due to drag.
posted January 21, 2012 09:49 AM
Edited By: kingtramp on 21 Jan 2012 17:51
RICHCRAFT1
Could you possibily predict HP for this combo rider booted/suited =275lbs, bike 500lbs, best pass 1/4=9.086 @ 152.38, 1/8 = 5.895 @ 124.53, Thanks in advance for feedback.
I am curious about how a 465 lb bike, with 185 hp would run. One rider 255 suited, the other 170 suited. I am really interested in what it says for mph.
quote:RICHCRAFT1
Could you possibily predict HP for this combo rider booted/suited =275lbs, bike 500lbs, best pass 1/4=9.086 @ 152.38, 1/8 = 5.895 @ 124.53, Thanks in advance for feedback.
the horsepower would be 204, the problem is, these are based off perfect runs, the bigger you are the harder it is to make that happen. gear ratios, how many RPMs, you have to leave at to make the motor happy, and how long is the bike, all these are big factors in 60 foot numbers which have a big impact on total ET, which is what I use. for others wondering about horsepower to weight, here is a generic number.
Bike and rider 700 pounds @ 200 hp=5.616 @126.38 and 8.844 @154.12
Bike and rider 650 pounds @ 200 hp=5.479 @ 129.54 and 8.628 @ 157.97
This gives you some ideal, what 50 pounds is worth at 200 hp.
Not bad! I made this pass last year...at that combined weight and dyno hp:
Surprisingly close...60' around 1.46, if I recall. Maybe a little more hp due to DA, would have to look that up.
Shane
that's pretty cool that that worked out,I know you're not getting the takeoff It takes to go with these numbers, but I think the ram air makes up for it in extra horsepower on the other in.
it should take a slick and wheelie bar to match these numbers for horsepower off the dino. But I think what you're losing in take off. You are gaining with the RAM air on the other in.
quote:
that's pretty cool that that worked out,I know you're not getting the takeoff It takes to go with these numbers, but I think the ram air makes up for it in extra horsepower on the other in.
it should take a slick and wheelie bar to match these numbers for horsepower off the dino. But I think what you're losing in take off. You are gaining with the RAM air on the other in.
Ken
Yeah, that pass was more like a high 5.8x as I recall, not a 5.81.
posted January 22, 2012 12:52 AM
Lee was at Bradenton Motorsports in Bradenton, FL
____________
2012 zx14R-blue,2012 zx14R-black, 2014 zx14Trbo, 2011 zx10R, 2007 zx10 Turbo.....
HOME
NEW TOPIC
posted January 21, 2012 08:41 AM
Edited By: 
