R100RS top speed.

Discuss all things 1970 & later Airheads right here.
User avatar
SteveD
Posts: 4902
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 3:29 am
Location: Melbourne, Oz.

Re: R100RS top speed.

Post by SteveD »

Rob Frankham wrote: The point is, when dealing with speed cameras, that 10% assumed over read can turn out to be quite expensive...
Rob
Which is why I got myself one of those 85mph speedos, which is remarkably close to the gps, even though the ratio isn't correct for the final drive.
SteveD wrote:I have the 80mph speedo (1.078) on the bike with 33:11 FD now, and today I rode it to work, with a gps to "validate" the speeds against kph.

The speedo...
@ 38mph (61.1) shows gps speed 60kph
@ 50 mph (80.5) shows gps speed 80kph.
@ 63mph (101.4 kph) shows gps speed 100kph.

That's pretty close, even considering the gps in the tank bag method might add a minor error in eyeball co-relation of the speeds.
Top indicated speed is now 85mph! :D
Cheers, Steve
Victoria, S.E.Oz.


1982 R100RSR100RS supergallery. https://boxerboy81.smugmug.com/R100RS
2006 K1200R.
1994 R1100GS.
User avatar
dwire
Posts: 403
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 1:15 pm
Location: OHIO

Re: R100RS top speed.

Post by dwire »

All of the talk about inaccurate "speedo's" makes me want to point out something often not thought of (and I am unsure if it ever applied to BMW's as I've never seen their warranty cards before...)

Someone made the statement that the (a) speedometer is only accurate at 0MPH/ 0KPH and that is indeed correct of all measuring devices, there as always are exceptions, but not really relevant to what we are talking about and a Pandora's box discussion for some other day. Very good observation though.

What is not often associated with speedometers that indicate a faster speed than reality is the affect on the odometer. This is an additional reason why even my '03 Jeep was set from the factory to be wrong, wrong, wrong. It is a linear error that gets worse with increased speed, which makes sense as this is 100% digital and is calculated from the pulses received by the onboard computer from the sensor. Now, to illustrate what I speak of, due to this intentional built-in error, on a 100 mile trip with an average speed of about 50MPH (using GPS satellites down to 1 meter accuracy and yes there was a leg of four-lane 65MPH in there...) the mileage is off by 5 miles - the odometer indicates an extra 5 miles for every 100. Now two things, one think warranty. Second, think of how when MotorWeek tells you that in their tests they saw "X" much better gas mileage than was reported on the EPA sticker. (Though now-a-days, I'd hope they'd stick to satellites and other methods for speed and distance data...)

I know the procedure for EPA testing at TRC here in Ohio as I was once an employee; you can't cheat it. Telling folks the following two things is valuable to manufacturers and dealers alike...

"Sorry you are just outside of warranty"

"You know, I read that PM or MotorWeek saw an extra 5 miles to the gallon over the sticker; these (sticker) estimates are conservative for sure." (Likely story...)

BTW, the Jeep read wrong from the dealer with factory tires installed and zero modifications - day two of ownership I tested it all properly via satellites and then later with the same wheel sensors and DAQ systems used at TRC for the EPA ratings. If you look enough, you'll find some chip replacements for the vehicle (they used to be EEPROMS; likely FPGA's these days...) that among all the wonderful things they state the replacement chip will do for you Jeep, they mention "Fixes THE speedometer error..." Keep this in mind. Class action anyone? :D

I always wondered as a young man why the police did not mind me flying by at 63MPH in a 55 and pulled me over for going 55MPH in a 55MPH zone simply out of suspicion I might be "intoxicated." Explains a lot; not forgiving authorities, simply speedometer error. I now ONLY use GPS, doppler or other similar type systems - (think things like radar...) to set my speed with cruise control these days in my Jeep... :-)

For what it's worth.

And yes, I payed cash for a new transmission in my '95 Buick Rivera that had about 83 miles logged over warranty... BASTARDS --> I EVEN WORKED FOR GM! (OK, got the transmission cheap by picking it up from the loading dock at the Cincinnati regional parts distribution center with my GM badge and some signatures on the invoice.)

I also got the last laugh on the dealer too - their mechanic stripped the coolant lines' threads in the tranny's case and ruined that new transmission. They had to buy a new one out of their own pocket as well as eat all the double labor too - and the dealer paid more than I did for the replacement... He He!!!
1971 R75/5 (SWB)
If you're going to hire MACHETE to kill the bad guy, you better make damn sure the bad guy isn't YOU!
User avatar
vanzen
Posts: 1438
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 2:29 pm
Location: Hidin' in the Hills

a simple ratio calculation

Post by vanzen »

Rob Frankham wrote:
It's a bit dangerous to assume that all BMW speedos are innacurate...
Yes, assumptions are always dangerous and often incorrect.

However, from the factory, as new, and with factory installed tires,
the amount of speedometer error on an airhead is "fixed" by vehicle manufacturer agreement
to be 10% at @ 60 mph.
This calculated amount of error is a conscious, deliberate, and consistent fact.

There will be NO speedometer error at 0 mph, 10% x 0 = 0.
As soon as the mc begins moving – a certain amount of error exists,
and obviously, 10% of 70 mph results in a greater indicated mph vs actual mph difference
than 10% of 20 mph. A simple ratio calculation.

Airhead speedometers are mechanical / electrical devices, and as such,
will be subject to malfunction due to wear, dirt, moisture, and neglect.
Speedometer error that is greater or lesser than the prescribed 10% can come from several causes
but most commonly is due to nonstandard tire diameter, in which case the error is:
% error = [100x(1 - "new diameter"/"standard diameter")]+[10].

We all want to fixate upon tire width, but even a slightly different diameter / circumference
as measured with the tire inflated and on the rim
than those few tires prescribed in your owner's manual
result in a significant speedometer reading change.
Rob Frankham wrote:The point is, when dealing with speed cameras, that 10% assumed over read can turn out to be quite expensive...
vanzen@rockerboxer.com wrote:
European Union member standards:
. The indicated speed must never be less than the actual speed,
i.e. it should not be possible to inadvertently speed because of an incorrect speedometer reading.
The point is:
If indicated speed is less than actual speed on your airhead,
a situation that would warrant an expensive encounter with an officer of the law or a speed camera,
fault must be attributed to the neglect or ignorance of the owner.
Image
Sunbeem
Posts: 1032
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 4:42 am
Location: Bentham Lancaster England.

Re: R100RS top speed.

Post by Sunbeem »

Although I rather like not knowing how fast my '78 dual-plugged RS Motorsport will go, I opened the throttle yesterday on the motorway. (Naturally I did this experiment on the astral plane for legal reasons).
The needle rose smartly to 110 mph, the only ill effect being a shaking of the windscreen, but at that point I felt the engine lose thrust, almost as if it was "tightening up."
Dropping back to 85, everything felt fine again, no rude noises, or pungent aromas --

Judging by the way she romped up to 110, there was plenty left -- but I do wonder what was going on.
Valve bounce ? (Tappets recently checked). Fuel shortage ? (One tap open).

Comments welcome.

Sunbeem.
One day more -- one day less.
User avatar
Rapid Dog
Posts: 96
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 9:46 am

Re: R100RS top speed.

Post by Rapid Dog »

Anyone seen this? Seems about what I'm getting. R259 with a 32/11 rear-end appx 97mph at 5K...

http://www.largiader.com/articles/gearing/
Deleted User 62

Re: R100RS top speed.

Post by Deleted User 62 »

Sunbeem wrote:Although I rather like not knowing how fast my '78 dual-plugged RS Motorsport will go, I opened the throttle yesterday on the motorway. (Naturally I did this experiment on the astral plane for legal reasons).
The needle rose smartly to 110 mph, the only ill effect being a shaking of the windscreen, but at that point I felt the engine lose thrust, almost as if it was "tightening up."
Dropping back to 85, everything felt fine again, no rude noises, or pungent aromas --

Judging by the way she romped up to 110, there was plenty left -- but I do wonder what was going on.
Valve bounce ? (Tappets recently checked). Fuel shortage ? (One tap open).

Comments welcome.

Sunbeem.
Sounds like fuel shortage, the poor thing needs all it can get at WOT. Open those petcocks!
Chuey
Posts: 7632
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:56 pm

Re: R100RS top speed.

Post by Chuey »

Yes, both petcocks should be open for any riding. And, the tank should not be low on fuel when using wide open throttle. I've read that here. So if you are on your reserve, don't do a top speed run.

Chuey
User avatar
macdaddy
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 5:46 pm
Location: Travelers Rest S.C.

Re: R100RS top speed.

Post by macdaddy »

fuel filters will also starve it wfo
Sunbeem
Posts: 1032
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 4:42 am
Location: Bentham Lancaster England.

Re: R100RS top speed.

Post by Sunbeem »

Filters jettisoned a while back, both taps in future, thanks chaps, I'll keep you posted.


Sunbeem. Racing around Bentham ...
One day more -- one day less.
Motorhead
Posts: 391
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 8:30 pm

Re: R100RS top speed.

Post by Motorhead »

GUYS GUYS its the fuel........................ it lost it balls :roll:
Post Reply