superhawk22

I'll ask again, Where do you live?

Loco

I live in Dallas thanks for asking. The superhawk will pull hard in 6th gear, but a lot of people feel it, as well as other comparable V-Twins, pulls harder in 5th at the same velocity. This shouldn't be anything to be surprised about, but I really only use 6th as a high speed cruising gear. As far as wheelies, you can do clutch wheelies in 1st and 2nd, and power wheelies in 1,2 and 3rd gear. I wrote a whole post about just that, but I don't feel like diggin it up ATM.

superhawk22

I know where you live....I've even got your addy. What did you want before? The mailbox is empty if you want to try again.

Pdaddy

Id be interested in reading that, any idea of were it was posted and a title name ? Im a big fan of the one wheel thrill !! LOL

99Hawk

grampi,
I don't know if you read MCNews or not but in the Feb '05 issue one of the regular writers, Mark Barnes, had more than a few good comments to say about the bike. He is a very biased owner as you'll see when reading this article.
After reading this you may get an idea why so many owners are so dedicated to the bike. After you get those monster carbs tuned just right the bike is a real dream to ride.

I scanned this last year so I wouldn't loose it !
http://www.3457.com/images/VTR-MCN-Feb_05.PDF

grampi

I obviously like all the SH's, but I really like the bright red ones. For some reason, that color just goes with the SH like butter goes with bread. What model years were they available in this red?

Loco

Here try this link:

https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...=power+wheelie

Sorry for the hijack.

grampi

Sorry, I thought I answered you. I live in Dayton, OH.

grampi

Are any of you in or near the Dayton area?

3D02

I just bought a '98 SH to replace my '89 FJ1200 which I sold to my brother. I'm anxious to see if the torque is relatively the same as what I'm familiar with on the FJ.
As for being able to find Superhawk's on the market....not a problem.



Karl

grampi

The SH should have more low and mid range grunt than the FJ. The FJ is an inline 4, and though it, as well as some other inlines have been designed to produce a flatter powerband than what is traditionally seen in inlines, they usually don't pack the low end punch of a v-twin or a v-4. I remember when the Suziki Bandit came out. There was much hoopla about how flat its torque curve was. While it had a much flatter torque curve than most inlines, it still didn't compare to the V's. I worked with a guy who had a Bandit when I owned my V-Max. He claimed his Bandit would outpull my Max in a top gear roll-on. It wasn't even close. My Max would walk away from his Bandit at a fairly rapid rate. I'd guees the SH would do the same to the FJ, but that's just a guess since I haven't ridden a SH yet, though I have ridden an FJ.

grampi

Anyone in the Dayton area?

mikstr

I too have often wondered how the VTR compares to the FJ in rool-on acceleration. Granted it has been a few years since I last rode a FJ but I do recall them being very strong in roll-ons (and racall Motorcyclist magazien getting phenomenal roll-on accel results with them).

The thing with the VTR (and surely all v-twins) is that because they have heavy flywheels (due to need to smooth out the uneven firing order) they don't really feel as though they are pulling hard but the speedo tells a different story. The big advantage of the V engine is the way it hooks up precisely due to the uneven firing order (fewer big bangs as opposed to many closely timed small ones). I personally do not subscribe to the urban myth that a v engine automatically has a flatter powerband than an I-4. The engine's state of tune (and hence the shape of its power curve) is determined by such variables as cam and igntion timing, intake and exhaust dimensions and design,... and NOT by firing order. While a standard I-4 will never be able to hook up out of corner like a v-twin (ie. in low traction condition), it is due to the firing order and not the actual power output. Put both in an ideal traction test (ie. roll-on on dry pavement) and the effect of the firing order disappears and what you are left with is power curve vs power curve.

Anyhow, to get back to the topic at hand, I would be curious to learn of your findings if trying a roll-on comparo with a FJ.

cheers
Mikstr

grampi

I've been searching the net for some info on this, but I'm not having much luck. I do remember a guy I used to ride with when I had my Max had an FJ, and its roll-on performance wasn't as good as the Max's. Remember the Max was the roll-on king for a long time. I have been able to find a roll-on time of 2.78 sec from 60-80 mph for the SH, which is pretty impressive, and I'm guessing that would make it comparable to the Max.

I agree with you to a certain extent about how the two engine types make their power however, I also believe the v-twin design is inharently better for building an engine with a flat torque curve. Sure, you could design an I-4 to produce the low and mid RPM punch of comparable sized v-twins, but it would have absolutely nothing on the top end. Using the same design approach for a v-twin would produce an engine with increadible low and mid range punch, while still maintaining a decent amount of top end power.....much like the SH.

mikstr

I don't mean to strart an argument or offend but, at the end of the day, an engine is a fancy airpump (or compressor). That being said, other than any tuning differences that result from exhaust/intake scavenging and the like, teh quantity of air entering and leaving the engine is a function of the variables I had listed earlier (cam timing, ...). I am quite certain that if you took two individual VTR cylinders adn mounted them in a vertical twin arrangement (keeping cam timing and all other important variables the same) that the resulting engine's power curve would be virtually identical to the VTR's (again, save for variances caused by intake and exhaust scavenging). I truly fail to see how altering the sequence of the firing order has any effect on torque output. It affects HOW the power is put to the ground (hence, for example, teh Harley XR's dominance on dirttracks against the XS650 based Yamahas in the mid and late 70's) but NOT the actual output (in essence, you are taking two individual cylinders and combining their output...add 2+2 in any sequence you want, it will always give you 4).

In terms of the performance numbers, the 2.78 is a nice number indeed and compares quite favourably to some of the more powerful iron on the road today. One must not forget, however, that the same magazine (Motorcyclist) reported a 5.00 two years later! Which is correct? Other magazines have also gotten different times (CW had gotten 3.5 seconds I beleive in both teh 50-70 and 70-90 ranges). There are just too many variables at work (headwind,...) I believe.

All things considered, I really like the roll-on performance of my bike (especially with the mods) but I have never yet had the opportunity to measure it against anything else.

cheers
Mikstr

grampi

You're not starting an argument at all, I welcome the input. You may be right in saying everything completely depends on airflow and timing and not engine type. I could just be programmed to think v-twins are somehow a better design for producing a nice, flat powerband because the vast majority of v-twins I've ridden have been this way. On the other side of the coin, the vast majority of the I-4's I've ridden haven't had nearly the low and mid range punch of the v-twins. That certainly doesn't make my theory correct. It does however make v-twins more attractive to me as I absolutely love having power on tap at any RPM. I can't stand bikes that you have to twist up tight before they start making some decent power, regardless of how fast they are once you have. A friend of mine had one of the Yamaha 600 sporties (I don't remember the model) a few years back that he let me take it for a spin. The bike ran like a raped ape once you hit about 7-8K, but below that, it could barely get out of its own way. I didn't like it for that very reason.

superbling

The 'hawk doesn't have a 2.78 sec 60-80 roll on. They were on crack or 5th gear or something during that one test. It's more likely around 5 that other reports (motorcyclists) have shown.

Stock, the bike is geared for EPA noise tests and mileage. Shorter gearing is a very popular mod and the VTR takes to it like a duck to water.

Very Important distinction: IIRC the bikes being discussed here: vmax, v65, fj1200, bandit all have 5 speed trannies. The VTR is a 6.

grampi

Maybe that time was accomplished in 5th gear. It sounds almost like 6th gear is a pure overdrive.