rc51
04-24-2012, 07:20 PM
#5
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Montreal
Posts: 5,631
Many, but definitely not all (for a few reasons, notably lack of specialized tools and decent work space, also the skills and knowledge for the more advanced and critical stuff). I am more of a tinkerer with a great deal of curiosity to understand how everything works and a keen desire to push the envelope.....
04-24-2012, 07:29 PM
#7
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Montreal
Posts: 5,631
Immediate post-rebuild run was 122 bhp and 77 lb-ft. I have made a few mods since (most important being re-timing the cams, but also airbox mods, HRC ignition, DLC-coated tappets, Krankvent sump breather) and it pulls noticeably stronger now, leading me to realistically estimate it must be in the area of 130 and 80 or more lb-ft now...... A definite sleeper....
04-25-2012, 06:52 PM
#9
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 218
rc51 kicks ***! I have one. only prob ever was a freyed wire that was hard to detect because of a relay that also happened to go at the same time, it confounded my diagnostics greatly...
rc51 is pretty easy to work on.
rc51 is pretty easy to work on.
04-29-2012, 08:07 PM
#11
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 218
They are 2 totally diff bikes.
The RC is a beast on the track, and makes you feel great. The handling of the hawk doesn't even compare.... but then again I don't think you should perhaps compare them in this regard. People with more experience then myself on many other bikes say that it has the best brakes that have come stock on a bike, they really do perform well, hence they are on the whawk at this moment. suspension is decent in stock form, perfectly fine for my ~185lb weight geared.
I have not had any reliablity issues with the hawk, thus they are both great imo. 70K miles on the hawk and 20K on the rc...
The hawk has a bit more torque down low but the torque and the hp of the RC in the mid+ is no comparison.
I can't comment on the ergo, it's been a while since I've thrown a leg over the rc... (living elsewhere but soon to be reunited)
The RC is a beast on the track, and makes you feel great. The handling of the hawk doesn't even compare.... but then again I don't think you should perhaps compare them in this regard. People with more experience then myself on many other bikes say that it has the best brakes that have come stock on a bike, they really do perform well, hence they are on the whawk at this moment. suspension is decent in stock form, perfectly fine for my ~185lb weight geared.
I have not had any reliablity issues with the hawk, thus they are both great imo. 70K miles on the hawk and 20K on the rc...
The hawk has a bit more torque down low but the torque and the hp of the RC in the mid+ is no comparison.
I can't comment on the ergo, it's been a while since I've thrown a leg over the rc... (living elsewhere but soon to be reunited)
Last edited by 20_rc51_00; 04-29-2012 at 08:19 PM.
05-13-2012, 07:18 AM
#14
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 218
nice congrats! I miss the RC.
check here for the most insane mods. durbahn.de the guy reinvented the RC
also if you are interested in a 1300cc mod you can check here Motorrad Tuning von KAINZINGER - The Tuning Company
check here for the most insane mods. durbahn.de the guy reinvented the RC
also if you are interested in a 1300cc mod you can check here Motorrad Tuning von KAINZINGER - The Tuning Company
Last edited by 20_rc51_00; 05-13-2012 at 07:22 AM.
05-13-2012, 07:52 PM
#15
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Asheville, North Carolina
Posts: 949
G-Dawg, congrads on your find.. Which year RC-51 did you buy.. Has 20-RC51 said TOTAL different bikes (RC-51, and the S-hawk) I own a few of the RC-51s and more than that in S-hawks.. Please specify your opinion of Ergo?
You can work the suspension on both bikes, as mine have a be amazed in handling.
Yet There were more than a few top magazines articles written on the performance of the RC-51 brakes change the sprockets(15 frt, 43 rear) to take care of the low RPM opertunities (that the S-hawk already has)
Ask - if you have any questions, or needs of parts..
You can work the suspension on both bikes, as mine have a be amazed in handling.
Yet There were more than a few top magazines articles written on the performance of the RC-51 brakes change the sprockets(15 frt, 43 rear) to take care of the low RPM opertunities (that the S-hawk already has)
Ask - if you have any questions, or needs of parts..
05-18-2012, 08:00 PM
#16
Junior Member
Squid
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 27
It is a 2004 . It is definitely a different bike than the superhawk. As far as the ergo the superhawk is more comfortable it seems from what little I have had the chance to ride the rc51 so far. the chain and sprockets were changed just before I bought the bike to 15frt, 41 rear, how much better would the 43 rear make it? When its time to change again I may go to that combination. What exhaust would you suggest for the rc51, slipon? Thanks everyone.
05-19-2012, 08:15 AM
#17
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Asheville, North Carolina
Posts: 949
WWWWellll, By popular opinions -Sato slip-ons make the most power and are very well made. And very hard to find- Sato stopped production of exhaust components in 2010.
Akrapovic, Yoshimura(RS3), are both very well made, and sound pleasant- And plentiful to purchase.
IF you like making noise, with no benefit.. there is always Two sisters, GPR, D&D(Decibel Dominators), etc...
Search RC51 forum, Speedzilla, RogueRC51 for members selling there exhausts..
Both of my RCs(2003,2006) have the Sato slip-ons. 2003 has the Ti /with PCIII , 2006 has the carbon(to match the Blk) with the PCIII . Both PCIII were programmed by Mike at D.Kyle racing to match the slip-ons...
Akrapovic, Yoshimura(RS3), are both very well made, and sound pleasant- And plentiful to purchase.
IF you like making noise, with no benefit.. there is always Two sisters, GPR, D&D(Decibel Dominators), etc...
Search RC51 forum, Speedzilla, RogueRC51 for members selling there exhausts..
Both of my RCs(2003,2006) have the Sato slip-ons. 2003 has the Ti /with PCIII , 2006 has the carbon(to match the Blk) with the PCIII . Both PCIII were programmed by Mike at D.Kyle racing to match the slip-ons...
Last edited by 1971allchaos; 05-19-2012 at 08:20 AM.
05-28-2012, 07:16 PM
#19
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Asheville, North Carolina
Posts: 949
G-dawg.. I have a few other RC51 riders, that I ride with that have the ladybirds.. Best way to get a set is to contact simonkobejapan on RC51 forum...
The ladybirds are well made.. and seem to have good power benefits.. Just a bit louder than the Satos..
Ladybirds would be my first choice , only if -I needed a set(exhaust)
The ladybirds are well made.. and seem to have good power benefits.. Just a bit louder than the Satos..
Ladybirds would be my first choice , only if -I needed a set(exhaust)
06-01-2012, 06:43 AM
#22
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 218
RC51 was faster on the track with me on it then my comparable skill level friend on a 2007 gsrx750. The RC would walk away out of the corners and couldn't keep up on the straight. Much more then the 600 little more maybe the same as a 750, but I guess it depends who is riding.
06-01-2012, 08:03 PM
#23
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Asheville, North Carolina
Posts: 949
But technology hasn't stopped... 1 liter bike puts about 50hp more (170-185 hp), and suspension has improved..
AS stated above- You can buy an improved, more powerful 1 liter bike now.. Just doesn't mean that it is needed or can be used on the street..
06-02-2012, 06:56 AM
#25
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 218
06-02-2012, 07:23 AM
#26
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Skurup, Sweden
Posts: 6,109
Sure... 55.661411,13.361167 - Google Maps
You do know the SP2 has 136 bhp at the crank as stock? So getting around 140 to the wheel isn't even a great challenge?
You do know the SP2 has 136 bhp at the crank as stock? So getting around 140 to the wheel isn't even a great challenge?
Last edited by Tweety; 06-02-2012 at 07:34 AM.
06-02-2012, 09:53 AM
#28
Moderator
MotoGP
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Gettysburg, Pa
Posts: 5,071
06-03-2012, 12:58 AM
#29
Out of my mind, back in 5
MotoGP
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Skurup, Sweden
Posts: 6,109
Well... My widdle airplain doesn't have the fuel capacity to go across the big puddle... Otherwise I'd pop over and pick you up... How about I supply coffee and cookies when you drop by? Or even a bed if you like...
06-03-2012, 08:44 PM
#30
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 218
Sure... 55.661411,13.361167 - Google Maps
You do know the SP2 has 136 bhp at the crank as stock? So getting around 140 to the wheel isn't even a great challenge?
You do know the SP2 has 136 bhp at the crank as stock? So getting around 140 to the wheel isn't even a great challenge?
I just might come see it in person one day, I have friends in Danmark. Perhaps a new one in Sweden too.
Last edited by 20_rc51_00; 06-03-2012 at 08:46 PM.
