• Required reading for all forum users!!!

    Welcome!
    Register to access the full functionality of the GSResources forum. Until you register and activate your account you will not have full forum access, nor will you be able to post or reply to messages.

    A note to new registrants...
    All new forum registrations must be activated via email before you have full access to the forum.

    A Special Note about Email accounts!
    DO NOT SIGN UP USING hotmail, outlook, gmx, sbcglobal, att, bellsouth or email.com. They delete our forum signup emails.

    A note to old forum members...
    I receive numerous requests from people who can no longer log in because their accounts were deleted. As mentioned in the forum FAQ, user accounts are deleted if you haven't logged in for the past 6 months. If you can't log in, then create a new forum account. If you don't get an error message, then check your email account for an activation message. If you get a message stating that the email address is already in use, then your account still exists so follow the instructions in the forum FAQ for resetting your password.

    Have you forgotten your password or have a new email address? Then read the forum FAQ for details on how to reset it.

    Any email requests for "can't log in anymore" problems or "lost my password" problems will be deleted. Read the forum FAQ and follow the instructions there - that's what we have one for...

  • Returning Visitors

    If you are a returning visitor who never received your confirmation email, then odds are your email provider is blockinig emails from our server. The only thing that can be done to get around this is you will have to try creating another forum account using an email address from another domain.

    If you are a returning visitor to the forum and can't log in using your old forum name and password but used to be able to then chances are your account is deleted. Purges of the databases are done regularly. You will have to create a new forum account and you should be all set.

Horsepower figures

Ride a modern 1000 sportbike for a week and that should kill any thought that your 11000E is wheelie prone. :p

Yeah, I know (I've read every issue of Cycle World cover to cover for over 20 years).

I just don't like radiators or fairings on bikes. Or luggage racks. Or saddle bags. Or crash bars. Or...

You get the idea. I want to see my engine (and it better have cooling fins!)
 
Yeah, I know (I've read every issue of Cycle World cover to cover for over 20 years).

I just don't like radiators or fairings on bikes. Or luggage racks. Or saddle bags. Or crash bars. Or...

You get the idea. I want to see my engine (and it better have cooling fins!)

Well put. The simpler bikes are, somehow, on many levels more satisfying and ... fun.
 
Why not, if its not burning oil, kept in tune etc etc and runs like a stripped a$$ ape...I would bet'cha it would be about the same hp. In some cases even a bit more since the rings are seated in good.
You are assuming that because it is not burning oil, it's just like brand new. Fact is, he did not get a dyno pull done this year in stock form before the pipe and jet so we don't know for sure how much hp it had. I can tell you though, when a friend of mine bought a 14 year old (at the time) GS1100E that ran just fine, no oil burning or smoking, and was pure stock, it definitely did not have as much hp as they did when brand new. How do we know? Trap speeds at the drags, we knew people who had these things brand new in the early 1980s and therefore knew what a fresh one was capable of back in the day.
 
Comparing dragstrip trap speeds has its own set of variables, though. I have the feeling that Jay Gleason got higher trap speeds than Joe Schmoe.
 
You are assuming that because it is not burning oil, it's just like brand new. Fact is, he did not get a dyno pull done this year in stock form before the pipe and jet so we don't know for sure how much hp it had. I can tell you though, when a friend of mine bought a 14 year old (at the time) GS1100E that ran just fine, no oil burning or smoking, and was pure stock, it definitely did not have as much hp as they did when brand new. How do we know? Trap speeds at the drags, we knew people who had these things brand new in the early 1980s and therefore knew what a fresh one was capable of back in the day.
There was also apparently large differences noted at the drags by otherwise identical bikes later attributed to manufacturing tolerances in head work. While I might tend to agree that aging might reduce up, 30 year after on this case the old gs seems to be improved with age which is less likely the case.
 
Comparing dragstrip trap speeds has its own set of variables, though. I have the feeling that Jay Gleason got higher trap speeds than Joe Schmoe.
True, but we were comparing to actual people that we knew, not to the magazine articles of the day. It was far enough away from theirs that it was obvious the engine was not as sharp as new.
 
You are assuming that because it is not burning oil, it's just like brand new. Fact is, he did not get a dyno pull done this year in stock form before the pipe and jet so we don't know for sure how much hp it had. I can tell you though, when a friend of mine bought a 14 year old (at the time) GS1100E that ran just fine, no oil burning or smoking, and was pure stock, it definitely did not have as much hp as they did when brand new. How do we know? Trap speeds at the drags, we knew people who had these things brand new in the early 1980s and therefore knew what a fresh one was capable of back in the day.

I don't know, I bet my Suzukis runs better now than it did when brand new...
 
You are assuming that because it is not burning oil, it's just like brand new. Fact is, he did not get a dyno pull done this year in stock form before the pipe and jet so we don't know for sure how much hp it had. I can tell you though, when a friend of mine bought a 14 year old (at the time) GS1100E that ran just fine, no oil burning or smoking, and was pure stock, it definitely did not have as much hp as they did when brand new. How do we know? Trap speeds at the drags, we knew people who had these things brand new in the early 1980s and therefore knew what a fresh one was capable of back in the day.

I'm not assuming anything. Not burning oil indicates good sealing rings and valve seals not leaking.. Then again this is all academic and really doesn't mean much. We just enjoy our rides.
 
1327 10-1 38rs's and thinking 145-150 hp. Ran 9.23 at 141mph last year. With me at 210 plus leathers... and going to do it again tomorrow!
Curt
 
1327 10-1 38rs's and thinking 145-150 hp. Ran 9.23 at 141mph last year. With me at 210 plus leathers... and going to do it again tomorrow!
Curt

I was going to say "thinking" don't count, but if you weigh 210 and ran 9.2, then all I can say is, well done, sir.
 
1327 10-1 38rs's and thinking 145-150 hp. Ran 9.23 at 141mph last year. With me at 210 plus leathers... and going to do it again tomorrow!
Curt

Good luck.
I am going to Bradenton tomorrow 1/8 mile. It is going to be hot it hit 90* today here.
 
I'm thinking an expert, champion could turn a 10.7 on my 1100EZ, maybe better (99.3 rear wheel HP, no center stand).

I'm thinking I'd be lucky to run a 12.2 on her (165 lbs.). I've never raced anywhere but the streets.
 
I'm thinking an expert, champion could turn a 10.7 on my 1100EZ, maybe better (99.3 rear wheel HP, no center stand).

I'm thinking I'd be lucky to run a 12.2 on her (165 lbs.). I've never raced anywhere but the streets.

Even given the variability of dyno setup measurements it is a. Damn sight more accurate in determining relative quickness vs trying to factor the rider effects out of a quarter mile time.
 
I'm thinking an expert, champion could turn a 10.7 on my 1100EZ, maybe better (99.3 rear wheel HP, no center stand).

I'm thinking I'd be lucky to run a 12.2 on her (165 lbs.). I've never raced anywhere but the streets.

10.70's won't happen with any rider but i'm sure you yourself could run in the 11's after a few passes.
 
So can you tell me why my dyno torque numbers are so much closer to what Suzuki claimed in 1982?

1982 claimed power 108 bhp @ 8500 rpm
1982 claimed torque 67.6 lb.-ft. @ 6500 rpm

Last week 99.30 hp @ 8400 rpm
Last week 67.73 lb.-ft. @ 6500 rpm

(1100EZ w/V&H street megaphone, APE pods)

The 1982 claimed numbers are according to the July 1982 issue of Cycle World.
 
So can you tell me why my dyno torque numbers are so much closer to what Suzuki claimed in 1982?

1982 claimed power 108 bhp @ 8500 rpm
1982 claimed torque 67.6 lb.-ft. @ 6500 rpm

Last week 99.30 hp @ 8400 rpm
Last week 67.73 lb.-ft. @ 6500 rpm

(1100EZ w/V&H street megaphone, APE pods)

The 1982 claimed numbers are according to the July 1982 issue of Cycle World.

I probably can't explain it to you but all the consensus information is in the thread I referenced and it explains it to me.
 
Quite a few passes, I'm thinking. But thanks for the confidence.

if you take off like leaving from a stop light briskly...
then just power shift it a couple hundred RPM before peak HP RPM's through the gears and cross the finish line.
your a little guy at 165lbs...
if you do what i posted you would be mid 11's real easy and you would only get quicker.
 
Back
Top