Posted by David T. Ashley on March 8, 2008, 5:52 pm
Are there reliable figures on top speed out there? I can't seem to find any
reliable ones (done by testing).
Also, I've found hints here and there that there is something you can add to
the bike to limit it to 35 BHP or so for learners. Couldn't find more info
there, either. Would this be something mechanical, or new software for the
ignition computer or what?
Thanks.
Posted by . on March 8, 2008, 6:42 pm
> Are there reliable figures on top speed out there? �I can't seem to find any
> reliable ones (done by testing).
I don't need a test to know that machine has the beans to go 135 to
140 mph.
> Also, I've found hints here and there that there is something you can add to
> the bike to limit it to 35 BHP or so for learners. �Couldn't find more info
> there, either. �Would this be something mechanical, or new software for the
> ignition computer or what?
If you are trying to establish a reputation for being a worrywort
wuss, you're certainly succeeding.
Have you ever encountered the phrase, "pursuit of happiness"?
Go for it. Follow your bliss. But keep up the payments on the
ranch ;-)
Posted by David T. Ashley on March 8, 2008, 6:51 pm
> Are there reliable figures on top speed out there? �I can't seem to find
> any
> reliable ones (done by testing).
>I don't need a test to know that machine has the beans to go 135 to
>140 mph.
> Also, I've found hints here and there that there is something you can add
> to
> the bike to limit it to 35 BHP or so for learners. �Couldn't find more
> info
> there, either. �Would this be something mechanical, or new software for
> the
> ignition computer or what?
>If you are trying to establish a reputation for being a worrywort
>wuss, you're certainly succeeding.
>Have you ever encountered the phrase, "pursuit of happiness"?
>Go for it. Follow your bliss. But keep up the payments on the
>ranch ;-)
I was curious on a couple of fronts.
First, I was curious how one would best implement HP restrictions (hardware
or software).
Second, I got conflicting information, as I pointed out in my response to
BrianUT. I've gotta believe the bike will top 110MPH, but the question is
by how much.
It really is a moot point with me. If I buy one, the top speed it will see
with me is about 75 - 80 MPH.
The only time my Honda Shadow 600 annoyed me is one day this guy was closing
on me too fast from the rear on the freeway. I gave it full throttle and
couldn't walk away from him. He ended up changing lanes to the right at the
last minute. If he hadn't eventually moved over, I would have been
roadkill.
For the record, I am both a worrywort and a wuss. I'm not even going to try
to deny it.
Posted by . on March 8, 2008, 8:27 pm
> First, I was curious how one would best implement HP restrictions (hardware
> or software).
The factory could easily map the chip in the ECU to prevent the fuel
injection system from providing enough fuel to exceed some given
horsepower level, and they could easily retard the spark at some
critical RPM level in the same manner.
But why worry about it? You really don't want to be riding a castrated
600cc sporty bike with sportscar drivers, drag racers, hummer, and
soccer moms sharing the same road with you.
Trust me, you don't.
> Second, I got conflicting information, as I pointed out in my response to
> BrianUT. �I've gotta believe the bike will top 110MPH, but the question is
> by how much.
An old twin cylinder Suzuki GS450 would get up to 110 mph, and the
bike you're talking about is a 650 inline four that must have twice
the horsepower. I am sure the GSX650F will go 135 to 140 mph if the
final drive ratio lets it reach full RPM in top gear.
> It really is a moot point with me. �If I buy one, the top speed it will see
> with me is about 75 - 80 MPH.
And it certainly won't be hurting itself at those speeds, even if the
tachometer shows that it's turning 7000 RPM. The stroke on an I-4 is
so short, the piston speed is only 3000 feet per minute.
> For the record, I am both a worrywort and a wuss. �I'm not even going to try
> to deny it.
Well, take whatever vestiges of courage and manhood you can muster,
and go out and do things that seem frighteningly hazardous.
You will soon be jumping out of perfectly good airplanes, or something
similar...
Posted by David T. Ashley on March 8, 2008, 9:19 pm
>> For the record, I am both a worrywort and a wuss. �I'm not even going to
>> try
>> to deny it.
>Well, take whatever vestiges of courage and manhood you can muster,
>and go out and do things that seem frighteningly hazardous.
>You will soon be jumping out of perfectly good airplanes, or something
>similar...
Actually, that probably won't happen.
I'm friends with the two skydive instructors at the local airport. I've
photographed them coming down from tandem jumps, and I've never seen an
unhappy face on the "passenger". But by the time I see the faces, they are
probably 20 feet above the ground and are at that point sure they are going
to live.
It is just that when it goes wrong, it can go SO wrong. The more senior
instructor has about 6,400 jumps, and he has lots of stories.
For example, a student landing in an alligator farm in Florida (and the
flying nylon as the alligators ate him alive).
Or, both primary and reserve chutes failing (very improbable).
Probably the funniest story was from another skydiver ... there are rules
against jumping through clouds ... but one day he did it anyway ... and he
and his buddy had their chutes opened and were in a cloud, and they thought
it was cool that they couldn't see each other but could shout back and
forth. This went on for a while, then off in the distance they heard a
Cessna coming towards them. Uh-oh! They were both in the clouds, trying to
steer away from the noise of the airplane, with neither of them being able
to see each other or the airplane.
I can't imagine the terror. Trying to avoid the plane you can't see.
And of course if the pilot flying IFR had hit them or had a close call ...
he would have crapped his pants, too.
> reliable ones (done by testing).