Re: Hey Bass

["Bob La Londe" <nospam@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Bob La Londe" <nospam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:452b0a8f$0$19713$88260bb3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Mark Leuck" <m..leuck@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:17-dna02Xc9Hd7fYnZ2dnUVZ_v2dnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> "Bob La Londe" <usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:07ydnTEs5odXPrfYnZ2dnUVZ_vmdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> I have to admit that is where my experience is limited.  I have never
>> owned
>>> a scooter of any kind.
>>
>> Exactly
>
> I don't see why a light weight with a 650 motor wouldn't absolutely smoke
> most stock Harleys off the line.  Especially if it will rev higher and has
> a decent clutch system.  (even if it doesnt have a manual clutch it has
> some form of clutch(es))  Heck before the twin cam came out in 2002 the
> the stock touring bikes wouldn't even break the century mark.  If they did
> it was down hill with a tail wind.  The Dynas and some of the softtails
> were a little faster because they were lighter and tuned slightly
> different, but not all that much faster.  The twinky is a little faster
> than the Evo but again, not that much.
>
> Mark, I have owned a number of Harleys and one thing I am not is delluded
> about what they will do.  Except for the V-Rod VRSC(A,B,X) (I owned one of
> these too) if you saw a "fast" Harley it was modified.  You could try and
> argue in favor of the Buell, but that is a limited production "modified"
> motorcycle.  It is not a stock Harley.  Buell is to Harley like Shelby is
> to Ford.  And then its based around the sportster engine which is tuned
> much hotter for a lighter bike than the motors running in any of the full
> size Harleys.
>
> Let me give you some more detailed info.  A stock 96" (just came out this
> year as a stock engine size) FXD Dyna Super Glide only developes about 65
> bhp according to Harley.  The dyno chart on it is in their accessories
> book where it shows improvement when using their stage 1 or stage 2
> performance aftermarket upgrades.  Now, it does produce a ton of torque
> from about 3000 RPM.  In fact they claim it devlopes 92 ft/lbs, but when
> you look at their dyno chart the graph shows it as much lower.  That
> particular bike should accelerate very well, but you wind a little scooter
> up to redline and feather the clutch and it should be interesting.
>
> I know my numbers on current production are right on because I just picked
> up the current book from Bobby's shop this morning since I am considering
> buying a new FXD.
>
> Of course when it gcomes to hole shot and acceleration off the line there
> are a number of factors.  If that little (650 ain't that little. My 650
> Seca turbo would run nearly 200 (198 twice) mph on radar and would pull
> wheelies in any gear when running under 100) scooter breaks traction its
> all over for it in a drag race.  If that Harley is running a hard compound
> touring tire it will probably break loose just as quick as that little
> scooter though. So then it becomes a matter of rider skills and the
> machines have very little to do with the results.  Now I doubt that Robert
> has much rider skill (no dis Robert. You just have not been riding that
> many years) but neither do most of the butt jewlery riding BAMBI's out
> there either.
>
> Tack on that the BAMBI sitting next to Robert at the light was probably
> trying to "pose" and impress everybody with his butt jewelry and was
> probably left slacked jaw and dumfounded when Robert punched the gas and
> took off at a decent rate on what looks like a toy scooter.  Heck I would
> probably have sat there flabbergasted when I had it demostrated to me what
> a "scooter" could do.  I remember the 250 scooters Honda came out with
> more than a decade ago blew us all away when we discovered they would run
> 65 all day long without overheating even in the desert heat.
>
> --
> Bob La Londe
> Fishing Arizona & The Colorado River
> Fishing Forums & Contests
> http://www.YumaBassMan.com


Ok here is some more:
Burgan Specs
Engine Type: 638 cc, liquid cooled, Parallel Twin, 4-stroke
Engine Bore and Stroke: 75.5 mm x 71.3 mm
Compression Ratio: 10.5:1
Valves DOHC, 4 valves/cylinder
Carburetion: fuel injection 32 mm
Ignition System: Electronic Ignition System: (Transistorized)
Claimed Horsepower: 50 hp (37.3 kW) @ 7000 rpm
Maximum Torque: 60 Nm (44.3 ft. lbs) @ 5000 rpm
Transmission type: 5 speed
Final Drive: Belt
50HP is not to bad for a 650 although there are certainly some that develope
a lot more.  The torque is in line as well.  10.5:1 compression.  Wow.  I
bet it demands premium at the pump.

Now lets look at some other things.
Dry Weight (without fluids): 238 kg (524.7 pounds)

Holy crud.  This thing is a cow.  Thats a ton for a "scooter"  My first
"real" motorcycle didn't weigh that much... Well, it didn't develop 50 HP
either though.  LOL.

That gives it a fair power to weigh ratio though.  Actually not to far off a
Stock Evo Harley.

Anyway.  The specs seem to indicate that it could certainly have pulled away
from a Bambi at a light who was busy posing on his butt jewelery.  LOL.  In
reality it would probably have lost ground to any experienced rider who
really wanted to race.  The biggest problem with the Burgman as a
performance machine is the lack of a manual clutch.  No way to wind it up
and slip the clutch.  Still at 50HP and 44 lbs of torque it should be able
to get up and scoot.

--
Bob La Londe
Fishing Arizona & The Colorado River
Fishing Forums & Contests
http://www.YumaBassMan.com





--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com