still king of drag?

[dajogejr]

Exactly,you can use the power spread on the dynograph to figure how the gearing ,traction and weight factor will affect how the quad is setup.

 

Again, I respectfully disagree.

 

I will agree it will give you a rough starting point. Beyond that, it's all tuner and rider (as you said)...

 

If any number on the dyno translated to exact results on any given track at any time....You'd be dead on right.

 

But it never, ever does. It can give you a baseline...or best "guesstimate" starting point at best. That's it.

[shanYE west]

 

 

If the engine makes big numbers,it can be setup to go fast.

 

He's saying that just because it makes big numbers on one person's dyno.. Dont mean that motor will be fast. Every dyno reads different, and every dyno reads different one day to the next..

 

One motor could make 100hp one day.. come in a week later without touching it and make 90hp. A dyno is only a tuning tool to compare changes/parts on the SAME bike.. the SAME day.

 

Using a dyno to compare two bikes is useless.

[bigborebanshee]

 

Saying an engines true capability can only be accurately measured on a dyno is false IMO.

 

Thats why its your opinion.An engine dyno is the only way to truely measure the performance,not how it will perform in an application.

 

Thats what Dyno's do,they provide numbers to then base gearing,traction and optimal engine operation.

[bigborebanshee]

I think a safe assumption can be that"the banshee engine design is still king of drags"There,hows that

[dragbanshee98]

Thats why its your opinion.An engine dyno is the only way to truely measure the performance,not how it will perform in an application.

 

Thats what Dyno's do,they provide numbers to then base gearing,traction and optimal engine operation.

i somewhat agree with the being able to "base stuff off a dyno" but because it is never even close to being dead accurate, my bike has yet to and prolly will never see a dyno unless i am tryin to make record breaking hp or somethin like that... getting it on the actual surface ur racin on is the best bet... dyno has to many factors to figure in from different tire size from ur race tires, to traction on racing surface, to how well the chassis will balance ur ride down/up the track... skip the dyno all together and get it on the track... et's and speed through the trap are alot more to brag about then a 200 hp bike spinning all the way or havin to let off constantly cause it wants to flip over or gets squirrely and in turn is beat by a 100 hp bike that is in total control and pulls like a raped ape

[dajogejr]

Thats why its your opinion.An engine dyno is the only way to truely measure the performance,not how it will perform in an application.

 

Thats what Dyno's do,they provide numbers to then base gearing,traction and optimal engine operation.

 

If you can convince me that the bike with more HP always wins, I'd see your point. It's a fact a smaller motor with less HP can and has beaten a bigger bike with a bigger number.

 

If you say the bike with the less HP has a better setup and better rider, you're proving my point.

 

If you say a HP number is the true measure of performance vs. an ET and MPH....then you live in a hypothetical world, whereas I live in a real one.

 

And last I checked, any form of organized racing was based on 1st place finishes based on ET, speed, etc. Not by how much it read on some screen.

 

Regardless...I'm glad this thread has remained civil, no put downs or personal attacks. Your opinion is yours, and mine is mine...simple as that.

I just agree to disagree...that's all!

[JMADD]

I have a friend with a dyno that, solely from the dyno info he logged; was able to decide what gearing and what the best possible e.t. a particular 7 mil Cub (another friend's) would run. He also said it would be difficult to get it leave without bogging. At the track, the best e.t. was exactly what he predicted (3.84), and it did bog several times. He also has him running low gears (14/42) on his 73ish r/o 14 extremes. That motor has to rev to the moon to reach the 77+ mph he was running.

 

That may have been pure coincidence. I have little experience with dynos, just thought I'd add this tidbit. I don't really have an opinion on this issue other than, YES definitely more hp does NOT always mean faster et's. WHich I think we can all agree on. I've been smoked many times in my Cheetahs by smaller bikes when my setup was wrong.

 

 

Oh yeah.. Back to the subject: The biggest baddest Craptor on the planet would have a hard time beating a good running, properly setup 4 mil Cub.

Edited September 17, 2009 by JMADD

[bigborebanshee]

If you can convince me that the bike with more HP always wins, I'd see your point. It's a fact a smaller motor with less HP can and has beaten a bigger bike with a bigger number.

 

If you say a HP number is the true measure of performance vs. an ET and MPH....then you live in a hypothetical world, whereas I live in a real one.

 

 

I guess that is where I lost you..I never said that a bike with more horsepower will win,I specifically stated that it should win if it is set-up accordingly.

 

I thought that was what the argument was about.I don't agree that ET and MPH are the best measures of performance,you stated it yourself..weight,setup and rider are conditions to consider and none of which can be considered when measuring an engines performance.Its not fair to the engine to introduce these variables and pass judgment as a result.Thats why engine dyno's are an accurate assessment of an engines performance.

 

A bad rider,poor suspension tuning and lack of traction can give the best built engine a bad rep.

A great example is tire choice.With the right paddle,the bigger hp bike is untouchable,with the wrong one,its getting its ass handed to it.Does that make you question the engine performance itself?,or the guy who's tuning the chassis?..that was my point.

[shanYE west]

I guess that is where I lost you..I never said that a bike with more horsepower will win,I specifically stated that it should win if it is set-up accordingly.

 

 

 

I've seen dyno's vary as much as 15%... You can't use dyno #'s from 2 different dyno's to compare 2 bikes. Every dyno has a reputation, Some read high, some read low..

[dajogejr]

Ok, now I'm lost.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Say two bikes, identical weight, setup, etc.

One has 110 HP, 65 Ft. Lbs of torque.

The other, 120 HP, 55 ft. lbs of torque.

 

Which one you think wins? I'd bet the one with more torque does. But it has less power...

 

I know I stated ET and MPH are the best measures of performance...because...uh, I stated it.

 

Like I said, when a dyno passes me on the track, then I'll put faith in that number.

Until then, as I've said....it's a tool to use to tune your bike, only your bike and on the same day/time/atmosphere.

 

It has zero bearing on a bike vs. bike or dyno vs. dyno when it comes to results on the track.

 

Unless there is a drag racing league that doesn't compete anywhere other than a dyno room, which..if there is, I'm unaware of it....you absolutely HAVE to include the variables such as track, setup, etc. It is absolutely 100% fair to introduce these factors. Moreso because they are more of a factor than a number on the screen.

 

Maybe we're saying the same thing in a different way, I don't know...I just know some of the fastest bikes in the country start off on a dyno, but get tuned in at the track in the real world.

 

Maybe that should be a new show.

 

Pinks, all out...Dyno Edition....

 

[shanYE west]

With so many variables involved dyno to dyno, it is impossible to make a "accurate assessment" of performance from one motor to another based of dyno#'s A dyno is simply a tuning tool used to measure changes in performance made on the same engine on the same day.

 

You could be tunning all day and peak hp might 120hp.. come in the next day with the bike still strapped in and it will only make 117hp with no changes made.

 

Now.. as a dyno operator.. you could use the data logged from other bikes to make a estimated assessment on where it stands and where you should start with setup. But.. its still just a estimate. Nothing is 100% accurate from a dyno.

 

and As Dave said.. HP is only one part of the formula.. you can't have HP without torque.

[bigborebanshee]

Ok, now I'm lost.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Say two bikes, identical weight, setup, etc.

One has 110 HP, 65 Ft. Lbs of torque.

The other, 120 HP, 55 ft. lbs of torque.

 

 

 

Unless there is a drag racing league that doesn't compete anywhere other than a dyno room, which..if there is, I'm unaware of it....you absolutely HAVE to include the variables such as track, setup, etc. It is absolutely 100% fair to introduce these factors. Moreso because they are more of a factor than a number on the screen.

 

 

 

I

 

Poor track conditions and poor setups. should not be a factor in an engines true performance.

 

I have beaten a handful of quads that should have destroyed me according to the $$$ that was sunk into them and the power they produced,but the person behind the wrench and rider handicapped it.

 

Thats why i believe you cannot accurately gauge an engines performance solely on its ET and MPH.

 

There was nothing wrong with those quads i beat other than the mechanic who tuned it and the rider who piloted it.i guarantee if i was running those quads,i would have never lost to a weaker bike like mine.

 

Performance can't compensate for ignorance.

 

I think we are thinking the same,its just not coming out that way

[dajogejr]

Aha...

Let me add this, however...poor track conditions effect the guy/gal next to you as well, though.

Which leads to the tuner...it's their job to get the bike to work as best it can on the track.

Shitty track or not...

 

An engines true performance on a dyno is nothing without being able to get it to perform at the track.

It is absolutely the responsibility of the tuner/rider to get just that.

I agree with you wholeheartedly...

 

But I look for the end result. And the end result...or the finish line if you will, is at the track.

If you're only looking at the starting line (the dyno) you're missing out on what's ahead...

[Snopczynski]

In the case of the two bikes I am talking about, it doesn't come down to any of that stuff as to why they pull even in a drag reace. Both chassis setups and even gearing are identical. Its comes down to his torque vs my hp. He gets me off the line, I catch him with my midrange acceleration, and we hang even at the end.

[JMADD]

Aha...

Let me add this, however...poor track conditions effect the guy/gal next to you as well, though.

Which leads to the tuner...it's their job to get the bike to work as best it can on the track.

Shitty track or not...

 

An engines true performance on a dyno is nothing without being able to get it to perform at the track.

It is absolutely the responsibility of the tuner/rider to get just that.

I agree with you wholeheartedly...

 

But I look for the end result. And the end result...or the finish line if you will, is at the track.

If you're only looking at the starting line (the dyno) you're missing out on what's ahead...

 

 

I always wonder why when the track gets loose, I always run like crap; but you still got guys knocking off 3.60s like clockwork on the same loose track. I'm that guy that can't tune the setup of my bike, or can't ride, I guess. Put my 50 lb lighter buddy on there and he picks up 3 tenths.