Nobody's revealing horsepower these days. The first time I really noticed was in December when I was at the KYMCO booth asking how their 250 Venox cruiser can go freeway speeds. What horsepower does it have? I asked the rep at the booth, who quickly replied, "We don't reveal the horsepower because it doesn't matter, you have to measure different aspects...blah blah blah" and I went away thinking that they didn't want to tell anybody because it was so low. But now I've been reviewing all these really high-powered bikes and they don't talk about horsepower either. I asked a few people why horsepower is considered a wanky measure, and it my dad (as usual), gave the best answer. I look forward to your wisdom on this topic, too.
Well that depends. There is torque horsepower and brake horsepower.
They both have meaning if measured the same way. If you put a Harley
and a Yahama in 6th at 30 mph and lay down on both, the Harley will
probably leave the Yahama for a while because the torque hp of a Harley
is probably greater than the Yahama. However when they both get wound
out and up the Yahama will probably leave the Harley. So for a horsepower
to have true meaning it must be stated like "687 foot pounds of torque
at 3200 rpms at full throttle," or something like that.
You want a farm
tractor or semi to have a lot of torque. You want a racer to have a lot
of brake horsepower at high rpms. You can use gears to help match them up. An
example of the numbers being phony goes like this: A 100 watt light bulb
generally puts out more light than a 60 watt bulb, but it doesn't need
to, because the wattage is just an indication of the power it uses. It has
nothing to do with the light it produces. But we have been hoodwinked
in to thinking blindly that it does. So horsepower in general means
this bike is more powerful than that one. But who cares if the
horsepower tests are only real above 150 mph?
2 + 2 does not = 4 if you are adding 2 cups of water to 2 cups of popcorn.
I also found a nice little writeup about torque and horsepower in fairly plain English by Bruce Augenstein as related to automobile engines, which translates well to motorcycles, I am assuming, where the author states this, some of which I can relate to:
Torque is the only
thing that a driver feels, and horsepower is just sort of an esoteric
measurement in that context. 300 foot pounds of torque will accelerate you
just as hard at 2000 rpm as it would if you were making that torque at
4000 rpm in the same gear, yet, per the formula, the horsepower would be
*double* at 4000 rpm. Therefore, horsepower isn't particularly meaningful
from a driver's perspective, and the two numbers only get friendly at 5252
rpm, where horsepower and torque always come out the same.
From there, my eyes start glazing over, and I find myself still wondering how a consumer is supposed to compare power between one bike and another without having to have a math degree. Because despite understanding torque and horsepower -- which this article thankfully provides in an easy-to-digest manner -- the manufacturers don't give us the numbers. And considering all this, I can hardly blame them.
Still, when I compare specs on the two bikes below, nothing in the numbers tells me that the Vulcan is going to give me an overall smooth and powerful cruiser ride, and the Boulevard is going to rip me off the back of the bike if I turn the throttle on a little too hard, right?
Kawasaki Vulcan Classic
Published specs:
Engine 4-stroke, liquid-cooled, SOHC, four valve per cylinder, 50° V-twin
Displacement 1,552 cc
Bore and Stroke 102.0mm x 95.0mm
Compression Ratio 9.0:1
Belt Drive
Transmission 6-speed with overdrive
Found with some research:
Torque peak of 108 ft-lbs at 2750 rpm
HP peak of 89 at 5000 revs
Suzuki Boulevard M90
Published specs:
Engine 4-stroke, 2-cylinder, liquid-cooled, OHC, 54° V-twin
Displacement 1,462 cc
Bore and Stroke 96.0mm x 101.0mm
Compression Ratio 9.5:1
Shaft Drive
Transmission 5-speed, constant mesh
Torque (can't find)
HP (can't find)
If you can tell me - it would be much appreciated.
Recent Comments