I think the main reason had to due with noise contraints and the design of the exhaust...
There is a pretty big safety factor built in there. On the stock Valkyrie they cut off at 7250 rpm and we run our blown Valks well over 8000 rpm. My buddy than ran his Valk at Bonneville held 8600 rpm for over two miles without any ill affect to the motor.LOV2KRZ said:The rev limiter is an engine safety feature and is designed to kill the fuel injectors before red line is reached to save the engine from over spinning. It doesn't make sense to have the engine rev limit set higher than red line.
As for the gearing you are correct, the Rune is geared differently then the wing but not by much. Also they do not share the same cam shaft.
Hi KenCrawleySC If you look inside any combustion chamber the intake valve or valves will always be bigger than the exhaust.KenCrawleySC said:How come the 6 little exhaust holes in the mufflers are smaller than the 6 throttle body throats? I live in south carolina. here, we dont need no stinkin' smog stuff. :x
It must be nice to get info from Honda.LOV2KRZ said:I called Honda and they told me that the rev limiter kicks in at 6k rpm, same as the Wing. I think red line is actually a little higher then the 6k rpm, I think I read somewhere its about 6400 rpm.
I don't know where you get the Gold Wing has more power than the Rune. Look at this test and see where the Rune ran the 1/4 at 12.42 and the Wing ran a 12.82. They are almost the same weight (less that 10 pounds difference). I have a 04 wing and a Rune and the Rune will wax the Gold Wing.ELP_JC said:Does anybody have the HP and TQ numbers? A graph? How about REDLINE? Is it the same 6K as the wing?
One of the bike magazines recently made the comment the rune (cruiser of the year) makes LESS power and torque than the wing :? , but didn't give numbers. It's surprising due to the fact the Rune is a hair lighter than the Wing, has much less GVWR due to being a solo bike, AND has 6 individual TBs vs the Wing's 2 (this usually means higher HP). both Wing and Rune meet 2008 emissions, so that's not the reason.
Just curious if somebody has the skinny on this issue.
JCELP_JC said:Adrian, you're wrong on the 1/4 difference; here's the quote from the test you linked:
"At the dragstrip the hefty 888-pound (when fuel laden) Rune outdid the Gold Wing (which weighs -- yikes -- only 10 pounds more) by a 10th of a second with 12.42 at 107.23 mph, and it actually gets spanked by its (somewhat) wispier relation, the VTX 1800C, which scored an impressive 12.21 at 107.48 mph"
That means the Wing clocked 12.52 with them. The reason it's barely quicker than the Wing is for its lower gearing (check Honda's website), not due to more power. I had an '01 Wing too, and it had enough power for me, so the Rune won't be a problem (lack of power is not an issue with me).
I read about the lower power in either Motor Cyclist or Cycle World (don't recall the numbers, but were pretty close). My question still is: Why all the 'hot rodding' (individual TBs, hotter cams, premium fuel, etc) for either the same or lower power? Just doesn't make sense, especially coming from 'performance first' Honda.
It'd be nice to see back to back power curves from both machines, on the same dyno. I'm more interested in torque curves than power peaks, by the way (which were not discussed on any tests).
Hope everybody enjoyed their weekend.