arsenalrocks
Well-known member
164.4whp.....claimed 195bhp, haha, yeah righthttp://www.motorcycle-usa.com/12/1453/4/Motorcycle-Blog-Post/Ducati-1199-Panigale-Horsepower-Torque.aspxstill ~20whp down from the King!
LMAO@ Ducati 1199's dyno number
- Thread starter arsenalrocks
- Start date
arsenalrocks
Well-known member
This is the funny part
ucati should stop claiming it has the most powerful engine of all superbikes, cause clearly it does not!They should learn from BMW, always underrate their engines for both car+bikes
ucati should stop claiming it has the most powerful engine of all superbikes, cause clearly it does not!They should learn from BMW, always underrate their engines for both car+bikes
dr_sarcasm
Well-known member
Uh, that's what I was telling myself...not sure what the OP is going on about...
E.g. My Mustang stock was claimed at 300 "bhp", but in truth churned out around 250rwhp...
Hp takes into account parasitic loss from all the components, whereas "bhp" is the claimed number.
:dontknow:
Last edited:
arsenalrocks
Well-known member
thanks bud
arsenalrocks
Well-known member
see post #4, obviously whp < bhp with about 10-15% powertrain loss
i wonder how bmw reduces the parasitic loss in the s1000rr to so little. it has 193 bhp, and whp is like 185. losing 8 hp. while the 1199 loses 30hp
dr_sarcasm
Well-known member
So...uh...then what is it you're gloating about in your first post then, given you seem to be rational enough to make the distinction?
arsenalrocks
Well-known member
b/c BMW always underrates their engines (unlike Ducati)the 1st version of the N54 engine makes well over 330bhp at the crank, they choose to only claim 300bhpsame with the new N20 2.0L twin scroll, makes over 220whp, but they choose to only claim 240bhpseriously, Ducati should take a good look at itself and ask "really, does my engine really makes 195hp at the crank?"btw 1199's track time is about 2s off from the s1000rr, according to the latest MCN shootout
Magazines don't consistently use the same dyno setup for testing bikes. I found on that site alone, one dyno figure for the S1000RR at 175rwhp, and another at 183rwhp. If you're comparing bikes, it pretty much has to be from the same article.
:lol: you do realize that the advertised horsepower is based on numbers from an ENGINE dyno right? The 195hp is measured brake horsepower... it's a real number. There isn't a manufacturer in the world which advertises wheel horsepower.
In BMWs case they simply under-report their brake horsepower, or use some different method of measure.
arsenalrocks
Well-known member
good point, but they did compare the 1199 whp# to the 1198's, on the same dynoand 1199 only gained 14whp over the previous modelI am not sure even the +14whp is enough to beat the zx-10r, which is the wildly considered the 2nd most powerful engine behind BMW.
"only" 14whp :lol:
Did anybody really think a twin was gonna beat the inline 4s for peak horsepower? Noobs.
arsenalrocks
Well-known member
Yes Rossi. I see your point. I am actually laughing at the 84.55lb-ft of torque measured at the wheel from this powerful, fearful L-twin.I think the s1000rr's peak torque is close to 80lb-ft....
"only" 14whp :lol
Torque is really more a function of displacement... where the torque happens is a little more up to geometry and other factors...
who cares about bhp on bikes you don't own...? Are you going to write Ducati an angry letter?
nesobriquet
Well-known member
Stock Ducati's are well known to have tall gearing. This is done to meet exhaust db levels and emissions for import to this country. Because of this, rear wheel horsepower numbers are prone to having a greater disconnect with crank hp comparatively with inline 4's. That said, seat-of-the-pants feel in how that hp is exploited will always be distinctly different between those two performance tuned engine configurations regardless of what the actual dyno numbers reveal.
OMG,they lied? That's it,i'll sell my Duc's and buy SV's to save my soul.
