It seems that the real power zone for this bike starts at about 4000 rpm and pulls from there. I'm somewhat diapointed at the performance below that level. Does this sound right or is this why people put power commanders on this bike?? 
I'm Not An Expert, But Do You Agree With This.
- Thread starter spine60
- Start date
Help Support Yamaha FJR Motorcycle Forum:
twowheelnut
R.I.P. Our Motorcycling Friend
I dunno... I'm not the type to wind it out in every gear and yes, there is more fun to be had above 4k, but I'm pretty happy with the power below that mark...
As far as the PCIII, users claim an increase in power of 3 or 4 ponies, but can you really feel that small a difference? Again, I dunno...
As far as the PCIII, users claim an increase in power of 3 or 4 ponies, but can you really feel that small a difference? Again, I dunno...
radman
R.I.P. Our Motorcycling Friend
If you have a motor that revs to 9 thou, it is unreasonable to expect much below the halfway point. That it does as well as it does (and I agree with TDub) is testament to the miracle of FI. I personally think the Feej has a great lower band, smooth, torquey, and tractable. Must have been a while since you've ridden a high horse carbed sport screamer.
Compare.....
R1
ST1300
FJR1300
The FJR is a European Dyno run from www.fjr1300.info
BMW K1200
Sorry, the ST and the BMW don't have a torque line.
Maybe this means nothing to you, but the FJR has plenty of torque/power and will walk all over others in its class.
Maybe you need a sportbike ??
Last edited by a moderator:
Howardrg
Well-known member
There are people out there who have buts as accurate as a dyno. They can tell if 3 - 4 horses have been added. I can't
Howard
Howard
I have to agree with the flow on this one. I think the Feejer has adequate if not great low end torque. But then again that is for me and without a PC. If you are not pleased with it maybe a different type of bike would be in order. I don't know another "sport-tourer" that has this good of a performance level. IMHO B)
markjenn
Well-known member
The bike has good low-end power, but compared to a sport bike, it's working against a lot of weight. If you really want to push, you have to rev it - you can't just lazily pull out of corners like you can on a light bike with a lot of power like a ZX-10.
PC's are typically put in to help throttle response, but by themselves, are not going to show noticeable increases in power.
- Mark
PC's are typically put in to help throttle response, but by themselves, are not going to show noticeable increases in power.
- Mark
Bike Effects
Well-known member
I'll add my two cents as well. This bike has great low end/midrange. The Power Commander would do little to help out in the power department. You may get 3HP, and that would be at the power peak. Maybe Yanktar could tell us what the Power Commander did compared to stock at, lets say 3500 RPM.
exocet
Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2005
- Messages
- 23
- Reaction score
- 0
If you want more low end grunt you need to get a V-twin. This bike is an I-4 and they will always have the mid and top end punch and be somewhat lacking down low. This bike is more mid than top. Right where it'll be used the most, and right where a sport touring platform oughtta be.
I do know what you mean, as I do miss my V-twin sportbike, but you know what? My Pappy has been riding since the early 50's and he told me when I was a wee little lad,
"Son, every bike is a compromise".
Sanders
Hastings Mn
PS There is no way in HELL this bike puts out 158 BHP stock
I do know what you mean, as I do miss my V-twin sportbike, but you know what? My Pappy has been riding since the early 50's and he told me when I was a wee little lad,
"Son, every bike is a compromise".
Sanders
Hastings Mn
PS There is no way in HELL this bike puts out 158 BHP stock
Last edited by a moderator:
Skippy
Well-known member
Your quite right, it does not put out 158HP, and if you were to look at the chart again you would see that was for the Yamaha R1..duh!!
When I added the PC3 to my 05 it went from a somewhat rough running 119RWHP to 127.1RWHP and improved the low end snatch that it had previously.
As for low end power, if it doesn't have enough for you....downshift, and hold the hell on.
Skippy
SilveradoSlick
Well-known member
I haven't heard of anyone buying a Power Commander for low-end grunt. Combatting surging, cooler running, and the ability to adjust the fuel/air mixture for engine/intake/exhaust modifications are the primary reasons for a PC. It's also a great way to spend a few hundred more bucks on the bike.
OrangevaleFJR
R.I.P. Our FJR Riding Friend
I don't agree either. I frankly can't believe that anyone has power complaints about this bike. I suppose I haven't been spoiled by Hyabusas, or R1's with all sorts of aftermarket boosts.
But come on...at the power levels we are talking about, the greatest determining factor in a race between the FJR and any of these bikes mentioned is the skill and confidence of the rider, not the hp or torque.
Some people seem to swear by the PCIII and I can't because I haven't tried it. I do know that the FJR is awesome as a stock bike and I don't agree with the sentiment that the low RPM performance is sluggish. I find it even tempered and competent. You could go get the new R1200RT. That 1200cc twin has Torque a plenty...have fun bashing helmets with your pinnion in slow maneuvers.
But come on...at the power levels we are talking about, the greatest determining factor in a race between the FJR and any of these bikes mentioned is the skill and confidence of the rider, not the hp or torque.
Some people seem to swear by the PCIII and I can't because I haven't tried it. I do know that the FJR is awesome as a stock bike and I don't agree with the sentiment that the low RPM performance is sluggish. I find it even tempered and competent. You could go get the new R1200RT. That 1200cc twin has Torque a plenty...have fun bashing helmets with your pinnion in slow maneuvers.
Windjammer
Well-known member
It doesn't have to be that way. Gasoline powered inline engines were used in farm equipment for many years and gave excellent low rpm performance. Where the power is located in any given engine's powerband depends on cam timing, ignition timing, fuel delivery, air delivery, and overall engine design. The reason your FJR makes its best power after 4-5000 RPM is because it was designed to do so - it is a SPORT-touring bike, and most of its buyers want the high performance engine.
You could detune your FJR motor (at great cost), and significantly improve the low RPM performance. But in the process you would lose much of your top end power. To do this, you would have to put in different camshafts with less valve overlap, you'd need the PCIII, and ignition timing would have to be changed as well. A spendy PITA in other words.
Another option is adding a supercharger to boost airflow at all RPM, then adding a PCIII to adjust fuel flow. In this case, you'd need to lower compression by some means and you would have to run Premium fuel at all times. Also a PITA.
If low end torque is really your reason for living, another bike is the easiest and cheapest option. But having an inline engine doesn't preclude the possibility of low RPM power.
BobbyBlue
Arrhythmia and Blues
Hey Spine, Ya gotta let the butler have a day off and you do the piloting my friend !!!
Bobby
Bobby
Here are some more Dynos.
The ST1300 is at 50-55 HP and just below 70 lb-ft torque and is pushing 80 or more pounds more than an ABS FJR 1300.
At the same RPM, the FJR1300 65 HP and 85 lb-ft of torque.
Except for the 1700 rpm dip, and most of us don't ride much at 1700 rpm, the FJR is all over the other sport tourers aside from the ZZR, and the zzr dominates only with HP, and falls behind the FJR in torque all through the power band.
Ron
The ST1300 is at 50-55 HP and just below 70 lb-ft torque and is pushing 80 or more pounds more than an ABS FJR 1300.
At the same RPM, the FJR1300 65 HP and 85 lb-ft of torque.
Except for the 1700 rpm dip, and most of us don't ride much at 1700 rpm, the FJR is all over the other sport tourers aside from the ZZR, and the zzr dominates only with HP, and falls behind the FJR in torque all through the power band.
Ron
O
outrace
Guest
My R1 has NOTHING below 7000 rpm
My FJR has NOTHING above 7000 rpm
One has a close ratio trans, the other has a wide ratio trans. The FJR is easy to ride at a sane-to-quick pace. The R1 is easy to ride at a quick to INSANE pace.
Try short-shiftin the FJR and use plenty of throttle. Spinning the motor only generates revs, not power. I can make the FJR move pretty damned quickly by staying between 2500 and 6000. (The R1 is best between 8000 and 12000.
My FJR has NOTHING above 7000 rpm
One has a close ratio trans, the other has a wide ratio trans. The FJR is easy to ride at a sane-to-quick pace. The R1 is easy to ride at a quick to INSANE pace.
Try short-shiftin the FJR and use plenty of throttle. Spinning the motor only generates revs, not power. I can make the FJR move pretty damned quickly by staying between 2500 and 6000. (The R1 is best between 8000 and 12000.
Penforhire
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2005
- Messages
- 219
- Reaction score
- 1
I guess it depends on what bikes you are used to. The FJR tears up all my past 2-wheel rides at any RPM above idle. So it has enough torque down low to me. You expecting a nitrous hit?
Craig in Denver
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2005
- Messages
- 63
- Reaction score
- 0
Amen.
Been doin' it for decades. These motors like to be loaded. :agent:
O
oldgoat
Guest
My previous bike was a CBR 1000rr. The FJR 1300's low end is alot stronger. The FJr falls short on the top end power, which is to be expected. i think you should try a sports bike. Then you can compare the power differences. i think after compariing you'll agree the FJR has great low end power.
Similar threads
