With the FJR 88% of the torque is available from 3500-6000 and the torque curve is relatively flat , so for reasonable power this is a logical "normal " range of operation
As seen in the accompanying dyno-chart for the, much vaunted, 45* V-Twin:
The 'sweet spot' in the torgue curve is about 1,000 rpm wide. Compare that with the FJR's that's 2 1/2 times wider.
So much for: "the massive torgue of the v-twin"....?
These are the engines (the reportedly 'torquey' ones) that
need a 6-speed tranny (just to be near the engine's operating range).
Good marketing -- you can't believe everything you hear.... :blink:
How are you defining "sweet spot"? You also can't directly compare RPM ranges between bikes; you have to compare relative RPM ranges as percentages of the available RPM range. Like this...
I'll define "sweet spot" as the RPM range where 90% or more of peak torque is available. Using the dyno chart from a stock FJR
here, I came up with the FJR's sweet spot ranging from 4.9k to 8.2k RPMs. That's a 3.3k RPM wide "sweet spot".
Using the dyno chart you supplied for some unidentified Harley/Buell, it's "sweet spot" ranges from somewhere before the beginning of the dyno run to 2.8k RPMs, then again from 3.4k to 5.3k RPMs. This Harley/Buell has 2 "sweet spots", one being at very low RPMs. The low "sweet spot" is what gives the perception of a "torquey" engine, because much torque is available almost immediately off idle. The higher sweet is 1.9k RPMs wide.
Ignoring the Harley/Buell's low end "sweet spot", the FJR's "sweet spot" is 1.7x the size of the Harley/Buell. But let's convert the RPMs to percentage of available RPMs:
FJR "sweet spot": 54.4% to 91.1% of available RPMs (covering 36.7% of the RPM range)
Harley/Buell "sweet spot": 59.6% to 93% of available RPMs (covering 33.4% of the RPM range)
The size and location of the "sweet spots" are actually pretty similar, with the Harley/Buell having an advantage of another "sweet spot" at very low RPMs. The difference comes from the overall RPM range and the gear ratios required to translate those RPMs to reasonable road speeds.
Comparing the dyno charts, there's a decent difference in peak torque values: ~86 ft-lbs for the FJR and ~76 ft-lbs for the Harley/Buell (FJR has ~13% more torque). However, the FJR can have lower overall gear ratios to convert its larger RPM range to road speed; this lower gearing further multiplies the torque advantage that the FJR has over the Harley/Buell. If the Harley/Buell was geared to achieve the same theoretical (RPM-limited) top speed, the Harley/Buell's gearing would be 1.63x that of the FJR, which leads to the FJR's actual torque at the wheel being multiplied by 1.63 relative to the Harley/Buell. That 13% torque advantage now becomes an 84% advantage.