S1000RR vs. the competition on the dyno

Dailies -

By

new-curves.jpgLast year, we told you that the BMW S1000RR made 183hp at the rear wheel. This chart, which shows the Japanese competitors’ number on the same dyno, illustrates just how big a performance leap that is. And the torque? The BMW makes 79.6lb/ft while the nearest competitor, the 2009 Suzuki GSX-R1000, manages 78.8.

Update: More accurate graphic above and the weirdness in the original graphs explained by Kevin Ash in the comments below. Thanks Kevin!

Fastbikes.se via MC24.no

  • Opps

    Your Graphs are f’d up!

    • http://hellforleathermagazine.com Wes Siler

      How so?

      • s0crates82

        It’s got colors and numbers and names, man!

        :)

  • Opps

    If the torque curves are correct – which they look OK – then deriving Power from them shows the BMW curve to be incorrect – in fact it looks like the Suzuki and Kawasaki would edge the BMW out for power. Again – only accepting that the torque curves are correct – which for a given capacity (1000cc) they look reasonable.

  • http://www.asphaltandrubber.com Jensen Beeler

    I wouldn’t have noticed anything (other than the nearly 20hp advantage the BMW has over the rest of the liter bike squad) if Opps hadn’t said something, but if you calculate HP off that torque curve, the BMW’s hp numbers don’t seem to make sense, while the rest seem to more-or-less jive.

    Most notably, check out the torque curve at 4k RPM’s. The BMW is making 40lb•ft along with the Suzuki. If hp=(40*4000)/5252, then both bikes should be not only be making the same power, but they should both be making ~45hp @ 4,000 RPM’s on the HP chart. The Suzuki makes this, the BMW is at nearly 50-55hp. Quite a bit more for just eye-balling charts.

    The same thing seems to be occurring at 6,000 RPM as well (BMW up about 12hp from what the math gives), and then there’s the entire mid-range where the Yamaha has a substantial torque advantage, but it’s not represented in the HP curve at all.

    I dunno what’s going on, but the math doesn’t work out. Dynamometers measure torque and use the formula: hp=(torque * rpm)/5252 to measure horsepower…we should be able to see that reflected in the graphs, and it’s not.

  • Opps

    Thanks Jensen,

    No calculation was needed – they looked really bad graphs – apart from the colors that is!

    It looks like the wrong multiplier has been used for the BMW – hence the graph being shifted both up and back – if that makes sense.

  • http://www.asphaltandrubber.com Jensen Beeler

    You’re a quicker typer than me. bows down

  • Opps

    Now to check out that other dodgy motorcycle website – see if they’ve got it together over there!

    LOL

  • http://www.asphaltandrubber.com Jensen Beeler

    Probably not, just more typos. ;)

  • MJFIV

    Same pre-production bike that’s featured in BIKE (UK) magazine this month. Same damn dyno they’ve been bantering around to create hype. I don’t believe it for one second.

  • Mike

    It goes further still. See how the Honda’s torque curve stops (due to fuel cutoff I suppose) at about 11,700rpm? Yet horsepower keeps going to 13,000?

    Same with Yamaha, but worse. It’s torque curve (along with BMW’s) cuts back on itself after torque falls off as well. While this is possible, it’s doubtful the software would produce such a curve (2 different torque values for the same rpm.)

    I’m going to guess that the rpm scales for original plots are all different, and they’ve all just been dumped onto the same grid.

    And, that whoever created these pictures is an idiot.

    • http://hellforleathermagazine.com Wes Siler

      Ah, I see it. Wouldn’t surprise me if someone’s simply stuck the wrong scale on the torque curve. The CBR1000RR, for instance, hits the fuel cutoff at 13,000rpm.

  • vic

    how much for a matching headlamp?

  • JJ

    Graph is wrong bmw does not rev to 12k.

    Here is a more accurate dyno of all the bikes

    http://www.motorcyclenews.com/upload/261608/images/new-curves.jpg

    • Mike

      Better, but still no good. Cutoffs still don’t match for Honda/Yamaha.

      There’s much too much manipulation of these curves going on to ever trust the source.

  • Duge

    yes ther bimmer is peaky….but that seems about it….i LOVE a high tq number from low revs and the BMW doesn’t do it for me here…i guess thats why i own a speed triple(60-70ft/lbs @ 3000 RPM)

  • http://www.ashonbikes.com Kevin Ash

    I’ve had a look at the Motor Cycle News graphs and some appear to be accurate, others not, so I’ve mailed MCN for contact details of the dyno operator. I’ll take it up with him, see if I can get to the bottom of it. There are clear problems on there, like the Fireblade is making less torque than the R1 between 4800rpm and 7800rpm but more power, and as Mike points out the fuel cutoffs are wrong for the Blade and R1 and the curve appears to go backwards!
    The BMW looks to be accurate but because of the other errors you can’t trust it. And it’s important because the BMW peak figure is so wildly in excess of everything else, it’s big news.
    I’d bet though the problem comes from magazine art editors transcribing the graphs from their separate print-outs badly rather than a dyno operator error or something conspiratorial – they’ve probably misread some numbers and shifted the Fireblade power curve to the left for example, but it’s worth checking.
    I’ll report back!

  • Sean Smith

    The shop where I work has a dyno that we use to break in motors, test jetting, and diagnose strange problems. Now, we build some pretty mean motors, 350 KTM motocrossers (up from 250), 660 KTMs (up from 525, which is really more like 510 anyway…), 320 Yamaha’s, you get the point.

    Charts like this are the reason we never-ever give out dyno numbers. Magazine and forum guys get their hands on em, and it usually ends badly.

  • http://www.ashonbikes.com Kevin

    Okay, it’s as I suspected, I’ve now seen the original MCN graphs and some lines have been transposed onto the published version badly. All the peak numbers are accurate, except the BMW has actually been reduced by about 3 per cent from a measured 190bhp at the rear wheel (!) because it was run in very cold conditions, -7 deg C (I think that’s 19F in your numbers…). On the proper graphs the Fireblade is strongest in torque (and power of course…) from 5500-9000rpm. The R1 and Aprilia are weakest here, though the BMW is very close to them. From 9000 the BMW is strongest, from 10,000 it blows the rest into the weeds. It’s also the lightest bike, or very close, so that compensates to some degree for the weaker midrange.

  • BernHard

    Hats off to Opps for noticing that these graph are f’d up, and calling them on it. He is absolutely right that you don’t have to do any calculating to see the many glaring mistakes.

  • Jeff

    I’m in the ‘these don’t make sense’ camp. There’s no way the HP curve can be correct if the torque curves are. Suzuki and Kawasaki edge the BMW at 12k rpm and yet the BMW HP curve towers over the others.

  • Matthew

    So let’s see something accurate.

  • General Apathy

    seriously, thanks for calling BS on this guys.. I would have never known. My respect for HFL posters just went up.

  • Skipper

    The new BMW will certainly make the other manufactures sit up and look. It is a fine motorcycle and I am sure will be the new benchmark for others to reach. I just wish I was a little younger so I could ride one.

  • BL

    gotta keep the art guys away from the math stuff…

  • http://www.ashonbikes.com Kevin

    That was the problem with the MCN graphs BL, art guys more interested in making them pretty than accurate. The original ones from the dyno operator (which I’ve now seen, I write for MCN regularly and have discussed this with them) were fine and still show the BMW towering over the rest in peak power and the Blade the strongest in mid-range.

  • Adrian – AKA (Opps)

    Thanks Kevin for taking the time to sort the curves out. The power curves look good – but the torque curves for the Honda and Yamaha look to be ‘shortened’. But still – alot better than before and at least beleivable now.

  • arhaxia

    Where is the Ducati ???

  • wyatterp

    Wait, so is this the same dyno from the other article (http://hellforleathermagazine.com/2009/12/bmw-s1000rr-makes-183hp-on-dyn.html) and it’s just now being made public?

  • Per

    Kevin Ash and Adrian – AKA (Opps)

    I never saw the first grafs but the power and torque curves still do not give the same picture.
    When looking at the power it is clear that the Honda has the strongest midrange (6k to 8k rpm), but accordning to the torque curve that seat is taken by Yamaha with the best torque.
    Around 7500 rpm the torque curve of Yamaha and Honda converge, but not so in the case of the power curves.

    I understand this is better than before, but still not 100% correct and hence should not be trusted.
    This is not rocket science!

  • Per

    To me it looks like the torque curve for the Honda and Yamaha are swithched or maybe it is the power curves that are swithed.
    Both the torque curve for the Honda and the Yamaha has also been compressed in terms of engine speed in the torque graph.

    • http://hellforleathermagazine.com Wes Siler

      As Kevin says, they’ve suffered from a bit of “design” work (not by us), but I think, more or less, the point is made that the Bimmer’s got a big advantage at the top end.