SuperHawk Forum

SuperHawk Forum (https://www.superhawkforum.com/forums/)
-   Modifications - Performance (https://www.superhawkforum.com/forums/modifications-performance-29/)
-   -   what should my superhawks hp be? (https://www.superhawkforum.com/forums/modifications-performance-29/what-should-my-superhawks-hp-20337/)

cameron Oct 3, 2009 07:54 AM

what should my superhawks hp be?
 
i have wondered for awhile what my hawks hp numbers should be. i know stock is 103bhp. i have jet kit,slipons.and K&N filter. the reason i ask is on oct 10 there is supposed to be free dyno runs. so with only these mods what should the hawk be making?

Wicky Oct 3, 2009 07:57 AM

http://homepage.mac.com/spaderunner/filechute/dyno.gif

cameron Oct 3, 2009 08:25 AM

thanks for the dyno sheet. hopefully ill be able to post one soon.

Red_Liner740 Oct 3, 2009 11:27 AM

u're looking at about 100whp stock if its in good tune and about 105 with a few mods....pipes which require a rejet to get it back to a good tune.

mine put down 105whp

cameron Oct 3, 2009 12:27 PM

so if im running under 105 i should be looking into my jetting? i thaught stock the superhawk had 103hp.so basically 800$ got me 2hp lol.

Red_Liner740 Oct 3, 2009 12:39 PM

uh no, the jet kit just allows u to run more or less fuel for the available air...it in itself doesn't add more hp, unless your bike is tuned bad.

its the exhaust pipes and air filters and other add ons that can change the volumetric efficiency of an engine. but for you to gain the advantage of the additional air coming in, u have to add more fuel....hence the jet kit.

drew_c14 Oct 3, 2009 12:47 PM

That 103 you keep mentioning isn't at the wheel. So if you get to around 103 like shown above with K&N and slip on's you're doing fine.

Here's the funny part, go back to the stock air filter and you'll actually find yourself pulling more power with the correct tune.

cameron Oct 3, 2009 12:49 PM

well i have the K&N filter,yoshi pipes,and the dyno jet kit. so if im not producing 105 with this setup then wouldnt my jetting be off? this bike pulls like a raped ape,i had the valves checked earlier this year with a carb synch. i doubt i have anything machanically wrong besides the K&N wich i should return for stock.

i have read the vtr has 110hp at the cranck and 103 at the wheel?
http://www.motorcyclespecs.co.za/mod...a_vtr1000f.htm

so what is a vtr1000f stock horsepower ?

drew_c14 Oct 3, 2009 12:52 PM

I'm not saying K&N is a bad thing, people in the past have just been able to produce better numbers with the stock air filters. In the interest of money of the life of the bike I'd say K&N all the way. The extra little power isn't going to make a difference at all.

Tweety Oct 3, 2009 03:45 PM


Originally Posted by cameron (Post 237303)
well i have the K&N filter,yoshi pipes,and the dyno jet kit. so if im not producing 105 with this setup then wouldnt my jetting be off? this bike pulls like a raped ape,i had the valves checked earlier this year with a carb synch. i doubt i have anything machanically wrong besides the K&N wich i should return for stock.

i have read the vtr has 110hp at the cranck and 103 at the wheel?
http://www.motorcyclespecs.co.za/mod...a_vtr1000f.htm

so what is a vtr1000f stock horsepower ?

All available sources say 110-113 at the crank, with a few differences between years and countries... And 100-103 at the wheel...

I had 101 something at the wheel bone stock before fiddling with anything... I got to about 104 something with bafflectomy and jetting... Now I'm in the vicinity of 106-107 with Jardine's, velocity stacks and a K&N with a airdam like stock plus a bit of seeing too to the combustion chambers and such, and added an FC to tune it...

And I'm thinking of possibly, mayby, perhaps doing some more internal work, and swapping some parts while I'm swapping out the flywheel...

But then again, I'm pretty sure the money I've already spent on upgrading the chassis is peanuts compared to what I'll spend gaining 2-3 hp more... And I'm pretty sure it won't be worth it... And it's stupid... But that hasn't stopped me yet, so we'll see...;)

8541Hawk Oct 3, 2009 09:02 PM


Originally Posted by cameron (Post 237303)
well i have the K&N filter,yoshi pipes,and the dyno jet kit. so if im not producing 105 with this setup then wouldnt my jetting be off? this bike pulls like a raped ape,i had the valves checked earlier this year with a carb synch. i doubt i have anything machanically wrong besides the K&N wich i should return for stock.

i have read the vtr has 110hp at the cranck and 103 at the wheel?
http://www.motorcyclespecs.co.za/mod...a_vtr1000f.htm

so what is a vtr1000f stock horsepower ?

It also depends what year it is. The first 2 years made a little more power. :cool:

nuhawk Oct 3, 2009 09:18 PM


Originally Posted by Tweety (Post 237327)
All available sources say 110-113 But then again, I'm pretty sure the money I've already spent on upgrading the chassis is peanuts compared to what I'll spend gaining 2-3 hp more... And I'm pretty sure it won't be worth it... And it's stupid... But that hasn't stopped me yet, so we'll see...;)

You guys are better than the newspaper. Carry on! There's nothing more creative than boredom. And it's not even winter yet!

Tweety Oct 4, 2009 01:19 AM

Not in your neck of the wood perhaps... Here the late autumn/winter storms have started... It's raining horisontal just now and I opted for 4 wheels going to work since I couldn't stand up straight without holding on to something when I got out of the house...:(

mikstr Oct 4, 2009 05:52 AM

Honda claimed 109 hp at the crank which yields 98-100 bhp. Obviously there are some production variances. One must also take into account the type of dyno used as some read higher (Dynojet) and some lower (Superflow).

cameron Oct 4, 2009 07:46 AM

well i hope to get on the dyno soon. and i just wanted some rough numbers. so it sounds like anything from 100-105hp should be acceptable. thanks guys and because my hawks a 98 im shooting for 105.999 lol

Tweety Oct 4, 2009 07:58 AM


Originally Posted by mikstr (Post 237393)
Honda claimed 109 hp at the crank which yields 98-100 bhp. Obviously there are some production variances. One must also take into account the type of dyno used as some read higher (Dynojet) and some lower (Superflow).

Actually on the 97/98's they claim 112... So a bit more at the wheel too...

Chester345 Oct 19, 2009 11:37 AM

Torque numbers? With mods, is anyone flirting with 80 at the wheel? (Ft-lb, not Nm)

We need more cowbell...

uchi Oct 20, 2009 04:34 AM

anyone bypass the carbs coolent lines and check to see if that did anything?

Tweety Oct 20, 2009 05:44 AM

In terms of hp... nope... doesn't do anything... But it changes the behaviour on cold starts and really hot days a bit... I wouldn't recommend it since you in your climate probably have some cold morning in the start/end of the season? And no hot scorhcíng days either...

uchi Oct 20, 2009 06:32 AM

Oh ok. I figured that same as with cars when u bypassed it it wouldn't heat up the air going into the motor as much. Did you say it somehow affects hot starts or just cold starts?

Tweety Oct 20, 2009 08:02 AM

Cold starts...

AdamK Oct 20, 2009 08:08 AM

Dumb question
 
:confused:Sorry for butting in on a whole different blog but what are CCT's and how hard are they to replace?

uchi Oct 20, 2009 08:14 AM

Cam chain tensioners. Not hard but you can't be a retard when you do them.

Thanks tweety. She starts fine cold in the summer. Its these cooler months where I find I need to slide out the choke as I'm starting her.

Hotbrakes Oct 20, 2009 08:47 AM

Increasing max power isn't all that counts though. The gained power throughout the entire range is what makes the bike faster. Sure, more top end is great, but if you look at the dyno chart previously posted, there is a gain of 10hp in the meat of the powerband. THAT is where the money talks. Unless you're only drag racing (booorrrriiinnngggg....).

L8RGYZ Oct 20, 2009 09:55 AM


Originally Posted by uchi (Post 239548)
Cam chain tensioners. Not hard but you can't be a retard when you do them.

OK, I guess not hard... but if you miss/mess up a step you can easily frag your valve train.

uchi Oct 20, 2009 11:01 AM

Agreed. But that's why you take your time and make sure you follow the steps while doing it.



Originally Posted by L8RGYZ (Post 239562)
OK, I guess not hard... but if you miss/mess up a step you can easily frag your valve train.


8541Hawk Oct 20, 2009 12:29 PM


Originally Posted by uchi (Post 239531)
anyone bypass the carbs coolent lines and check to see if that did anything?

Greg has dyno charts that show you lose power if you remove them. I also tried it before he did the dyno runs and can tell you my bike ran better with them installed but have no dyno chats to prove it.

COLE Oct 20, 2009 02:32 PM

come on yall, who cares just ride the hell out of em and enjoy it while it last, epa is wantin to band motorcycles bc the put out more emissions than cars do ha they ll have to catch me first

uchi Oct 21, 2009 03:28 PM

interesting info, but why does it loose power? is it because the bike isnt getting up to proper operating temp or its taking too long to get there? i know on cars you do this bypass and it makes a difference in the way the car performes for the better. i believe what you guys are saying im just trying to figure out why :)

cameron Oct 21, 2009 03:46 PM

i never did get the free dyno. turned out we had a make up game for my sons peewee league football. oh well maybee some day.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:34 PM.


© 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands