By Jamsfalco on Wednesday, July 17, 2002 - 03:25 am:

Hi all......i have a friend on the good old Performance Bike mag and he has sent me this today...HOW FAST ARE YOU?

Performance Bikes magazine have booked RAF Woodbridge in Suffolk on Monday 5
August for readers to have a crack at speed testing their bikes, for a
feature in the mag. It's where PB held their speed records bash in the
current issue, and the 2.2 mile runway will have timing gear to measure
standing start quarter miles and kilometres, and flying quarters and kilos.
So you'll get to test the acceleartion and top speed of your bikes all day
long, and fast types will be invited to the record attempts (production and
modded classes) next year.

There will only be a small charge to attend (like £20 or less), so anyone
interested should ring Alan Seeley on 01733 468093 to register (you cannot
just turn up as the RAF base has strict security - its the standby strip for
the space shuttle!)

Go on, let's see how fast you are...

A great chance to get some proof for that conversation down the pub......  

By Jamsfalco on Wednesday, July 17, 2002 - 03:27 am:

The bit i forgot.............


Its open to riders of all bikes and when you speak to the nice Mr Seeley tell him you saw the post on this website...

Have fun  

By 94c4 on Wednesday, July 17, 2002 - 01:26 pm:

Hey, I'll go
My Softail should be able to break the 20 sec. barrier on the quarter mile and creep all the way up to a staggering 100 mph.
0 - 60 in less then 10 seconds.
Not bad eh?

How's everybody here?
Just passing by to say hallo.
See ya!

Ciao  

By Oldgit on Wednesday, July 17, 2002 - 01:41 pm:

Now that sounds like fun, but I'm out of action.  

By Richandall on Thursday, July 18, 2002 - 08:56 am:

RAF Woodbridge is just a few miles up the road - maybe I'll give 'em a call.

I've never been over 110 and only use 1st gear to get my feet up so could be interesting.

- Rich  

By Befbever on Saturday, July 20, 2002 - 11:25 pm:

---

Quote:

So you'll get to test the acceleartion and top speed of your bikes all day long

---

By Richandall on Monday, July 29, 2002 - 03:48 am:

Spoke to Alan Seeley and am turning up on Monday for all day fun. At £20 can't be bad.

Need some technique here. Apart from turbocharging or fitting a mille changer and quickshift (next project) what hints or wheezes for a quick 1/4 miler? Can a sub 11 sec be done on a near standard falco? (tho not with me on it!)

- Rich  

By Esso on Monday, August 05, 2002 - 02:36 pm:

Just to let you guys know i did one of these runs at RAF BRIZE NORTON at the weekend an clocked up a 12.1 sec s/s 1/4mile unfortunately the stupid coppers speedgun wasn,t working so we couldn,t get a speed calc on that, bet it would,ve worked if he was trying to nick us on the A40 eh guys !PS bike topped out at 138mph so i guess its still restricted then ? 

By Richandall on Tuesday, August 06, 2002 - 03:49 am:

Couldn't break 13 sec in the 1/4 mile s/s despite 15 tooth sprocket & cans. Given a full mile run up to the start of the timed section could only get 140mph over the measured quarter (terminal velocity 142mph - 10Krpm in 5th with nothing more to come). The 'blade owner who maxxed out at 129mph must have gone home severely pissed off.

Encountered multiple unintended wheelies in the first s/s effort - big up, down, big up, down, into 2nd, up a little down a little etc. Not another Aprilia there. The event seemed mostly to attract Hyabusas, big kwackas and gixxers, blades, and even a 996. Plus the odd kamikaze special piloted by those cheerfully suicidal types that bungee off bridges. Why are they so short, is it something in the DNA or just impact damage. Some had come all the way from Brummiland to burn rubber and die.

The Woodbridge event was well worth the tenner PB asked us for. A well organised & upbeat event for enthusiastic big bore bikers. Weather bright & sunny, RAF security friendly, police entirely absent, and the only thing missing was a greaseburger & coke stand for when hunger and dehydration set in.

Maybe a few more Aprilias to season the event next time around?

- Rich  

By Racerxlilbro on Tuesday, August 06, 2002 - 07:20 am:

How close were the indicated speeds to the measured???  

By Richandall on Tuesday, August 06, 2002 - 08:57 am:

Sorry - with head on tank and staring at bluddy revcounter needle stuck on 10,000rpm in 5th, waiting to change up, never really looked at speedo.

What concerns me is, why wouldn't it go faster than 142??? The 15t sprocket should increase thrust and redline 5th gear quicker. It didn't. Could it be the SL chip 'n'cans aren't getting the optimum air/fuel ratio...

- Rich  

By Daz on Tuesday, August 06, 2002 - 10:31 am:

Could be, also...

Tyre pressures?
Wind? (parp)  

By Andyjfalco on Tuesday, August 06, 2002 - 04:51 pm:

Hey Rich, your bikes not got the restrictors in the air box has it? As you know, I got 11.7 in the 1/4 mile (16 stone+,ahem) @ 119 mph. I thought you'd be quicker than that It's FUN though is'nt it. ..........................Have you cut the wire on the eprom? 

By Richandall on Wednesday, August 07, 2002 - 02:06 am:

racerxlilbor - had an inspired moment and toddled over to the bike, ignition on, press button B, wait a sec, Presto! VMax came up at 142mph - exactly matching the terminal velocity measured on the electronic timer. Spooky.

Daz - we had a steady headwind of about 15 - 20mph straight down the runway. The ZXR12 that followed me maxxed out at 162mph and he was very cross! I suppose that sort of fits the picture, as rolling resistance is negligible and pretty much constant according to the great Ken, who says air resistance is everything - so add back the wind vector and you get their respective top speeds. Incidentally, tyres were at 30/32 which I suppose is a bit low for VMax runs.

Andyj - the derestrict wire cut checked out positive when I was fitting your SL cans & chip. Together with my Rene airkit I should be getting near 120rwbhp - similar to the published figure for the RSV-R which with longer gearing and aerodynamic fairing has a VMax of 167 against the standard derestricted Falco's 157. But the extra rwbhp on my bike should allow me to hit the rev limiter in top to give around 160 on a 15t sprocket, other things (like windspeed) being equal.

But what do I know with just 3,560 careful miles under my biking breeches?

 

By Crmc33 on Wednesday, August 07, 2002 - 02:56 am:

I wonder if the bike would have achieved a higher Vmax if youd plopped it into sixth earlier?
With lower gearing (like a 15T sprocket) you end up pulling higher revs at a lower road speed. If your Falco's power drops off sharply somewhere between 9500-10000 rpm then you may not hit the redline in fifth and its better to hit sixth at lower revs so that the engine is placed at a meatier part of its torque curve.
The bike should then accelerate quickly until it hits the drop in the torque curve again. IMHO More revs doesnt always mean more speed.

The head wind wont have helped either tho.

Just a few thorts anyroad.  

By Richandall on Wednesday, August 07, 2002 - 03:56 am:

Crmc33 - I did wonder about that as I was hurtling toward the marker boards with the needle stuck at 10K in 5th! Your comment sent me back to Ken's driving force diagrams for the 42/15 sprocket ratio. He says

---

Quote:

This is a wide ratio transmission (typical for twins), especially through 1-2-3. For maximum acceleration, you are going to want to take the bike to redline (maybe the 5th-6th shift could be a little earlier). In the lower three gears, when you are forced to upshift by the rev limiter, you are going to notice a significant drop in acceleration in the next gear (this is not a good racing transmission). In particular, first is very low, and you probably won't want to downshift into it unless you're smooth. It's a common misconception that you want to shift at maximum power, or maximum torque. You really would want to shift whenever the next gear brings more drive force than the previous. With the possible exception of fifth gear near redline, this bike doesn't cross it's force curves.

---

By Litre1 on Wednesday, August 07, 2002 - 05:17 am:

Say it ain't so!!! The Falco is shown at 11.5, and the Futura is better at 11.4?! Sorry, but I can't believe that one!  

By Andyjfalco on Wednesday, August 07, 2002 - 12:02 pm:

Obviously the Futura has longer wheelbase and or lower rider height. We all know the Falco likes to weeeeeeley rather than go forward Much more fun!