REAR WHEEL HP

[Tripps]

I'm not sure, but I think you're saying you wouldn't notice 50 extra horsepower? I'm skeptical.

 

[WyldCFH]

I'm not sure, but I think you're saying you wouldn't notice 50 extra horsepower? I'm skeptical.

Not what i am saying at all. Between the 2 bikes, Diavel& tuned R3, a couple tenths of lbs/hp would be nearly unnoticeable riding them back to back.

You of course would notice the torque

 

[Tripps]

Gotcha, I agree

 

[Dr.D]

The TFC model does have different valves so it might be easiest to rev higher and have more hp gains.

 

[chrisw]

Well, u probably hit the max power 10% of the time. The torque the looks and the noise are there all the time

So basically classic with new tyres and a blower / engine kit for 5K = Wolf in sheep's clothing at a lot less cash.
The comfort is that if I want a tarmac ripper I can, but I'm quite happy nailing sports bikes with my measly 140 HP and 150Lbs of Torque for now. Grin

Love the new R3's just because its got a 2500cc engine and its pretty.

 

[Daytonastar]

It's the torque that makes it for the R3.

Based on HP alone, the Diavel has a better power to weight ratio
R3 642/157 = 4.09 lbs/hp (this is using the TFC power figures from Art in OP and the reported weight of the TFC)
Diavel 538/139 = 3.87 lbs/hp (this is curb weight, making it even better as the TFC figures are dry weights)

Not a lot, but one figure is not enough to claim superiority unless that is all someone cares about.

So I just took delivery a week ago of my TFC. And I traded in my XDiavel against it, and prior to that I had a Diavel. So I do have some touch points on these things, albeit I’m still in the break in period of the new one.

First comment on power to weight, you need to add your weight as a rider to the calculation. This will reduce the gap to the lighter, less powerful bike. It’s pointless considering it without, as the rider weight will always be present. I mean if you had a 50lb 50hp bike, that would have insane power to weight (1:1) until you got on it (5+:1 - yeah you are, check the **** mirror fat boy) - exaggerated example but you get my point.

Second, the way the bikes motors perform are completely different. The XD kicks on like crazy past 6k, where the Triumph has to upshift. The Triumph is waaaay more refined.

‘Third, The riding position on the TFC owns the XD. Feet forward may be a preference in some people, but on massive power bikes it sucks. Hard acceleration, feet lift off pegs. High top speed, wind pressure pushes feet off pegs. Plus in as much as you can’t have a wallowy 300kg 180hp bike, they are quite firmly sprung and damped. If you are feet forward, bumps and expansion joints play like a jackhammer on your spine. In a more normal riding position, at least some of the weight is supported by your legs. Potential GT owners beware, a quick test ride won’t highlight this.

 

[IMFASTTOO]

Not what i am saying at all. Between the 2 bikes, Diavel& tuned R3, a couple tenths of lbs/hp would be nearly unnoticeable riding them back to back.

You of course would notice the torque

WELL the retuned Rockets are much faster with that 50 hp just ask STEEL he will give us the scoop hes making 170 HP with his 140,000 mile 2006

 

[Lamonster]

So I just took delivery a week ago of my TFC. And I traded in my XDiavel against it, and prior to that I had a Diavel. So I do have some touch points on these things, albeit I’m still in the break in period of the new one.

First comment on power to weight, you need to add your weight as a rider to the calculation. This will reduce the gap to the lighter, less powerful bike. It’s pointless considering it without, as the rider weight will always be present. I mean if you had a 50lb 50hp bike, that would have insane power to weight (1:1) until you got on it (5+:1 - yeah you are, check the **** mirror fat boy) - exaggerated example but you get my point.

Second, the way the bikes motors perform are completely different. The XD kicks on like crazy past 6k, where the Triumph has to upshift. The Triumph is waaaay more refined.

‘Third, The riding position on the TFC owns the XD. Feet forward may be a preference in some people, but on massive power bikes it sucks. Hard acceleration, feet lift off pegs. High top speed, wind pressure pushes feet off pegs. Plus in as much as you can’t have a wallowy 300kg 180hp bike, they are quite firmly sprung and damped. If you are feet forward, bumps and expansion joints play like a jackhammer on your spine. In a more normal riding position, at least some of the weight is supported by your legs. Potential GT owners beware, a quick test ride won’t highlight this.

I'm a feet forward rider and I have no issues that you speak of. Watching many of the motorcycle reviews from the press they were quite surprised how much they liked the feet forward posture. One reviewer said he wanted the R but they gave him the keys to a GT and after a days ride he preferred the GT over the R. I don't think potential GT owners have to worry about anything and if they find they don't like it they can change to mid style pretty easy and affordably. Enjoy your ride.

 

[mexican]

I will just keep reading the comments until i strike it rich and buy one

 

[IMFASTTOO]

So comparing dry weight of both...

Stock new R3 TFC - 642/157 = 4.09 lbs/hp
Stock new Diavel - 481/139 = 3.46 lbs/hp

As Art suggested earlier in this thread, just a tune will get you 50hp. No proof, just his suggestion...
Tuned new R3 TFC - 642/207 = 3.10 lbs/hp

It'll take a professional drag racer to notice any difference. Certainly an average, everyday R3Owners.net member won't be able to tell by the seat of the pants.
So again I say, it is the torque that makes the difference.

NOT sure couid make more than 50 HP with the new Rocket the new bikes are even more restricted than the older Rockets so we find out soon