Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Birds said:

Surprised someone hasn't created a motorbike with a long range tank on it for touring...something 50-60L etc.

Wouldn't that be an extra 60kg above the center of gravity?

If that bike gets laid down, there's no way the 65yo retirees who would own such a cruiser would be able to pick it up without a support crew.

59 minutes ago, Odium said:

Wouldn't that be an extra 60kg above the center of gravity?

If that bike gets laid down, there's no way the 65yo retirees who would own such a cruiser would be able to pick it up without a support crew.

Mount it low and improve the balance!

Saw a learner getting someone to help him get his 250 off the ground the other day. They really should teach learners how to do that by themselves at the course...

E85 used to be unquestionably worth the dollars even with same power levels, because it was cheaper or at least on par with 98 for running costs and the engine ran happier/safer on it

Now only really worth it if you have a substantial increase in power and midrange from it, which you now pay for with the higher cost

I usually switch to 98 in winter for easier starts and range

33 minutes ago, Leroy Peterson said:

Do like a mid-drive refuel. Requires support vehicle.

went to winton last year, left with full tank and five jerry cans @ 22l each. Total of 175lt. i didn't participate in the last session coz i cooked the brakes and still had to stop just before i got home and top up to make sure i made it. I easily burn over 100l at sandown which is just down the road. On track, usage is close to 1km/l   #E85life #emptywallet #needunitedshares

1 minute ago, Birds said:

E85 used to be unquestionably worth the dollars even with same power levels, because it was cheaper or at least on par with 98 for running costs and the engine ran happier/safer on it

Now only really worth it if you have a substantial increase in power and midrange from it, which you now pay for with the higher cost

I usually switch to 98 in winter for easier starts and range

I've put 98 in a few times just to purge/clean the fuel system and felt like punching myself in the nuts every time. Engine is so much smoother and lively on ethanol. i'd rather pay the premium but United are still price gouging kents.

30 minutes ago, admS15 said:

A9X torana drop tank is what you need. That's additional to your standard tank :) Has the R finished being tuned yet?

A9X is my inspiration of course, why wouldn't you use it for a inspiration?

Tuner said it's close to being finished - need to do some cold starts he said. 

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Very decent bit of kit. Definitely black it out I reckon.  
    • Because people who want that are buying euros. The people with the money to buy the aftermarket heads and blocks aren’t interested in efficiency or making -7 power, they’re making well over 1,000hp and pretty much only drive them at full throttle  best way to way make money is know your customer base and what they want and don’t spend money making things they don’t want. 
    • It's not, but it does feel like a bit of a missed opportunity regardless. For example, what if the cylinder head was redesigned to fit a GDI fuel system? It's worth like two full points of compression ratio when looking at modern GDI turbo vs PFI turbo. I'm pretty reliably surprised at how much less turbo it takes to make similar power out of a modern engine vs something like an RB26. Something with roughly the same dimensions as a -7 on an S55 is making absolutely silly power numbers compared to an RB26. I know there's a ton of power loss from things like high tension rings, high viscosity oil, clutch fan, AWD standby loss, etc but it's something like 700 whp in an F80 M3 vs 400 whp in an R33 GTR. The stock TF035HL4W turbos in an F80 M3 are really rather dinky little things and that's enough to get 400 whp at 18 psi. This just seems unwise no? I thought the general approach is if you aren't knock limited the MFB50 should be held constant through the RPM range. So more timing with RPM, but less timing with more cylinder filling. A VE-based table should accordingly inverse the VE curve of the engine.
    • I've seen tunes from big name workshops with cars making in excess of 700kW and one thing that stood out to me, is that noone is bothering with torque management. Everyone is throwing in as much timing as the motor can take for a pull. Sure that yields pretty numbers on a dyno, but it's not keeping these motors together for more than a few squirts down the straight without blowing coolant or head gaskets. If tuners, paid a bit more attention and took timing out in the mid range, managed boost a bit better, you'll probably see less motors grenading. Not to name names, or anything like that, but I've seen a tune, from a pretty wild GT-R from a big name tuner and I was but perplexed on the amount of timing jammed into it. You would have expected a quite a bit less timing at peak torque versus near the limiter, but there was literally 3 degrees of difference. Sure you want to make as much as possible throughout the RPM range, but why? At the expense of blowing motors? Anyhow I think we've gone off topic enough once again lol.
    • Because that’s not what any of them are building these heads or blocks for. It’s to hold over over 1000hp at the wheels without breaking and none of that stuff is required to make power 
×
×
  • Create New...