Design a new VFR - Motor Characteristics

Power Vs Torque

 

The main benefit of the VFR is it's all-around ability. Make the motor suited to that, just like the 5th gen motor, just give it about 15 more HP.

KC-10 FE out...
lane:

 

Wasn't this question asked allready in another way as in displacement ? Okay I'll say it gain 130hp to the ground would be IMO just about right less 50lbs too.

 

Displacement has nothing to do with the engine charateristics.

You can get a high reving 1000cc bike that wouldnt pull the skin off a rice pudding, but in a quarter mile would blow away many a 1200cc cruisers that could out pull a tree stump.

If that same 1000cc had a pillion passenger the same weight as my sister in law, and her luggage on board,then thats another story.

 

25% more power 25% more torque - 1000cc V4 would sound sweet

 

To me the top end power is OK wouldn't mind a little more but not necessary. Would like a bit more bottom end and basically the only way to have both is bigger displacement BUT I don't want more weight, I carry enough spare of my own. Also given the way insurance is based in Canada I would want the capacity under 1000cc. But to be totally honest I would rather have a better seat and suspension.

 

Basically I'd like to see the VFR return in a Gen 7 engine to a Gear drive for the Cam shafts. and squeeze a few more ponies out of it.

Lests see the Triumph Daytona 675 has about 123Bhp at the crank,

and the VFR 800 has 109Bhp at the crank.

since the VFR has oh 119 CC's larger displacement one would figure that honda without making it revvier, or peakier in how it delivers power should be able to squeeze a bit more HP out of the engine.

Lets face it, the 86 VFR750 though rare produced 109 HP, since then power went down, and 96 was about the norm until the 800, which got a 40 (therabouts) cc displacement gain and brough the crank hp back to 109.

something just doesn't smell right here, as bike manufacturers have squeezed more and more HP per liter of bike you now have little 600/650 class bikes making the same HP as the venerable VFR.

Just hopefully if honda makes another 1liter VFR the dont make it disappointing like my 86 VF1KR was. (I migrated from a 86 VFR750 to a VF100R and expected the performance boos that another 250CC would give. No dice. HP was only 122, so a gain of 13 Hp, and it weighed almost 200 lbs more.

the felt difference was that yes it had more power but, the 750 was much more nimble. All in all a bit of a disappointment making me wish I had kept the 750.

 

The trouble is to get more horsepower you have to give up something like low or midrange performance, reliability, rideability, weight etc. or have a significantly higher cost. I can live with 109hp more easily than I can live with losing some or all of the others.

 

point being

though we should be averaging about 126 hp from a stock VFR800 I mean if the Daytona 657 (Or whatever it is) can pull this off with 112 less CC in displacement we should be able to have atleast this in the VFR without any sacrifice.


If you look at the attached Dyno charts, you note that the VFR and the Daytona have nearly identical outputs, so I re-iterate with a 112 cc larger displacement I would expect the VFR to be able to make the "SAME" horsepower as the daytona without a sacrifice to it's all around performance.

Or to put it another way it should make a few more ponies than the 86 VFR 750 considering it's larger displacement.

Yes 109 hp is quite enough for me too. but...

 

I would want to see them back to back, on their own chart. One of the things I notice is that the power peak on the Daytona is about 1,500 RPM higher. So, it may take longer to get that power.

But even if that isn't the case, the Daytona is a true sport bike; the VFR is not. It is more of a sporty Sport Tourer. Obviously Honda could do it, if they wanted, they show that by the CBRs.

 

I would want to see them back to back, on their own chart. One of the things I notice is that the power peak on the Daytona is about 1,500 RPM higher. So, it may take longer to get that power.

But even if that isn't the case, the Daytona is a true sport bike; the VFR is not. It is more of a sporty Sport Tourer. Obviously Honda could do it, if they wanted, they show that by the CBRs.

You also have two completely different engine configurations. Inline triple vs. a V4.

Also, what are the Torque numbers?
How quickly do they both rev?

 

Unscientifically

They both feel about the same...

However my point still is the 86VFR750 (not the 700fII) made 109 Hp at the crank just like any of the VRF800's which a slight displacement bump we should see some increase in the motor output, especially with all the technical advances in oh the past 20 years.

But I'll go dig up the TQ curves as well....Might take a bit.

 

TQ charts.

Ok best I can do.

 

Power means nothing if you dont use it

What is not said is that in the 3000 to 7000 RPM range, where most street & touring guys ride most of the time, the VFR is way superior to any of the oposition.