pounds and horsepower

[tstruyk]

of course it a sliding scale and you would need to re-equate the new mass plus HP to get a more accurate estimation... right??  

I flunked college algebra 3 times I am in finance....  :-/

thank the lord for calculators  ;D

[K3 Chris Onwiler]

WTB 225 HP SV650. :-[

[ecumike]

I have to disagree a bit here... let's see if I have what you're saying right.

For example... I've been a lazy fat a$$ during the off season and I weigh 180 pounds.  Let's say that in addition to my R1 superbike I also have a RS125.  You're saying that I will proportionally go faster on the R1 if I lost, say, 15 pounds?  I know there are a lot of little people that race 125s that when they move up to a bigger bike don't do as well because they lose their advantage.  It seems like you have more to gain by losing weight the smaller the bike you ride is.  I mean, that's half the reason I bought a rocketship... so I wouldn't have to starve myself... are you telling me that I may have to start eating Broccoli again?  ;D

Yea.. b/c the power to weight ratio is smaller on the R1.

[Team-G]

All makes sense....but,  isn't torque more important than hp?  Not saying you don't need hp, but torque is the ability to change velocity (accelerate) and hp maintains velocity (constant rear wheel speed) under dynamic load conditions.

And, if you do the flywheel calc's, its better to have more rotational mass in the rims (fly wheel effect) for torque and loose the weight in my a$$ (non-rotational mass; unless of course, I crash).  So save the money on the light wheels and quit eating pasta...right??

[PaulV]

You Got it D_Dog, one open Bar in the Polar-Optics trailer!
After the races of coarse 8)

Bring your own salads, I'll be the one grilling the steaks :)

[ecumike]

Yea, but just as a basic statement of rotational mass... it's easier to turn and accelerate (2) 10 pound wheels vs. (2) 20 pound wheels.

[Super Dave]

Ok, so you're a very good rider.  And you race a two bikes. One bike makes about 40% more power, which is the difference between a 600 and a 1000.  But it only nets you .75 of a second, which is the difference between a 1000cc four vs a 600cc four at some smaller tracks.

You'll have to loose 175 pounds on the 600 package to make up the power to weight ratio...for less than a second.

Hmmmmmm

[ecumike]

Right...  and as well... weight has an effect on cornerspeed right?... so you lose weight and 'gain' power, but you'd also gain corner speed.  All else being equal.

[Super Dave]

Then the question is...

Is everything equal?

If it were, then only the best power to weight ratio would win.

[ecumike]

well yea, we're not talking about how to win,  we're talking about how you can 'theoretically' increase HP by shedding weight.  Now the arguement of spending $300 for a gym membership, or for a race school/track day is another thing.  :)

I think money is better spent on improving your skill instead of trying to shed a couple lbs. just to give you an extra couple milliseconds or so per lap time... unless you're consistently riding near exact lap times and at the to of your class and you need to find an edge.

[a13x]

I've also heard this theory stated as:

"For every 1 lbs of weight you lose you gain X HP on ACCELERATION"

Meaning a 340lb 75hp Hawk is going to accelerate up to it's top speed faster than a 380lb 75hp one. Not a 340/75 Hawk going to have a faster top speed than a 380/75 one.

Sort of makes sense to me.. again just another way I've heard it explained.

Personally I'd rather gain that Mythological HP on acceleration over top speed anyday.

[G 97]

Ok,You'll have to loose 175 pounds on the 600 package to make up the power to weight ratio...for less than a second.

Hmmmmmm

So I should have started my diet last year?  ;D