[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[ST] Higher RPM for racing?
- Subject: [ST] Higher RPM for racing?
- From: "Joel Ashman" <ashmite@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 17:54:20 -0400
OK so I need a little education... When did it become preferable to have
higher RPM for racing? It seems to me (a non racer) that given 2 motors with
the same displacement, one with 12000 RPM and 150 HP (and a peaky curve) and
a 6000 RPM 150 HP (flat curve) that the lower one would be more usable on
the track. Hit a gear and hold it in a turn instead of shifting. I hated
the ride I had on a newer R6. I had to downshift 3 times to pass a car
downhill, while on my Sprint, I just nail the throttle and go. Also, it the
two above motors consumed the same amount of fuel per cycle, the 6000 RPM
would get better mileage and therefore pit less for refueling.
Again, I'm just curious, and its really because I dislike the streetability
of the modern racing style bikes. I can never talk someone out of a
Hyabusa who just wants a bike to cruise around and to work and back. Gimme
a V-twin or Triple anyday.
(Which leaves me to choose between the Monster 695 or the Speed Triple next
Triumph Sprint ST/RS mailing list
Send list posts to ST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Change your list options at www.Triumphnet.com