Have you ever wondered about how your bike’s street performance might stack up against another bike.Â Well, the folks over at Motorcyclist Online are there to help you out.Â They have the actual dyno results and performance numbers of every bike they’ve tested.
I was reminded of that again, because, after my test ride of the BMW’s, I really wanted to see how they stacked up to each other in street performance.Â The results are interesting, because one of my concerns about buying an RT–assuming my insurance settlement is enough to cover it, of course–was whether I’d find the performance anemic compared to my FJR.
According to that actual tests that Motorcyclist has performed, the results are:
|Bike||HP (HP @ RPM)||Torque (lb. – ft. @ rpm)||1/4 Mile (sec. @ mph)||Top Gear Roll-OnÂ (60-80 MPH)|
||101.1 @ 7500||78.0 @ 6250||11.68 @ 118.8||4.30|
||127.6 @ 8900||79.3 @ 8100||11.30 @123.7||3.80|
|HD V-Rod||109.3 @ 8250||74.3 @ 7000||11.31 @115.0||4.05|
|FJR1300AE||127.2 @7900||89.6 @ 6800||11.86 @ 118.8||4.02|
Well, I must say this comes as a surprise.Â First, it seems that the AE is slower off the start than the RT, with a 1/4 time that’s 2/10 second slower than the RT.Â Where the RT loses out is in the grunt at rolling from 60-80 in 6th gear, as the FJR does it 3/10 second faster rolling on in fifth.Â I suspect that a 5th gear roll-on would be closer on the RT.
Another surprise is how close the performance between the K1200GT is to the Harley V-Rod.Â That’s about a dead heat.Â I suspect the K1300GT has some performance increase though. But for a cruiser (sport-cruiser?) the V-Rod is pretty hot.
But, based on the numbers above, I don’t see that the performance difference between the RT and the FJR AE model, like I have, would be particularly noticeable.Â And based on handling alone, I can already see that I can hustle the RT faster through the corners than I can the FJR.
Can you hear me talking myself into it?
I really want to know what that insurance settlement is gonna be, now.