After bying my Raider a year ago, I couldn't reconcile my disappointment in its acceleration with its max (and WELL marketed) dyno torque of 103 (@ 2600). In comparison, my anticipated Max (and my former B-King) only generate between 60-80 (@ 2600). In my naiveté, I expected the Raider to rule...and it did not...by a long shot.

I finally took some time to research both meaning (and pitfalls) of dyno charts, torque, horsepower, etc. My current understanding is that if a motor has a significantly higher rev-range, AND can continue to increase (or at least sustain) its torque throughout most of that range, then the <strong>effective </strong>acceleration will be superior; due to the proportional mutiplication of the relative rpms. The other missing factor which we don't see on charts is how quickly a motor can run through its range.




In light of the above, I can now see why the Raider's spec didn't translate into <strong>real world </strong>performance. With the Max slightly surpassing the Raider's max torque* by 6600 rpm, continuing on until about 9000, AND likely flicking through that whole range much quicker, I can only imagine what to expect! (* Raider torque drops off very quickly after 4000 rpm and completely dies shortly after 5000.)

To be fair, the Raider's acceleration is superior for the briefest moment at the lower rpms. But let's keep <strong>momentary performance </strong>a bedroom-only subject...

Thoughts?
Saint

Saint wrote:
This is true. The acceleration is something you have to experience. Describing it to someone else is very difficult. "subliminal" Pull the trigger!

With proper mods a Vmax will make 100ft lbs of torque from 3500rpm up, and continue to make torque up to 120+ft lbs @ 9k+ rpms.

The torque from the 'max motor is what makes it such a joy to ride......you can loaf along in 4th or 5th gear and just roll the throttle up to insane speeds and never shift!

Amazing!!

Took the Dawg to town yesterday......and reading this thread, I couldn't help but think this the narration of my ride

The Po_Po would have thought so too.....up and down the throttle and speedometer at whim, its difficult to describe how in one second its the 65mph po-po-free speed limit, the next you're at triple digits and another you're seeing break lights in your rear view mirror from that low profile trooper you just passed, going the other way.

...difficult to describe so one must dumb it down to those beautiful words the that define the VMAX...

....torque....horsepower....response....quickspeed....brute...beast....smoke.....spin.....SMILE!!!!!



---PeaDawg

(btw...the po-po gave up before he started... I was day dreaming and had just relaxed & backed off the throttle, when he came across me & hit is break lights......plus the line of cagers I had just passed might have changed his mind about the quick U-turn and easy V-ticket.)

Another person mis-lead by torque advertisements. See some of my other threads on HP and torque or research it yourself. The bottom line is torque has nothing to do with acceleration, contrary to what most people believe. Power is what produces acceleration and top speed. Low power = low acceleration regardless of what the torque number is.

Why do you think Harley specs their torque but not their HP for their ancient pushrod engines? It is because their torque number looks huge which people have been mis-lead for many years to think that means acceleration which it does not. If HD published their HP number, people would be shocked at how low it is (about 70 to 75 HP) for the size of the engine. Notice that HD does publish the VROD power number because it is decent (about 125 HP).

PeaDawg wrote:
Nicely put PeaDawg !

vmaxmercer