Ah, I see why our speeds differ. You're using the 8500 RPM redline whereas I'm using the 9500 RPM rev limiter. I'm running a 180/55, which is a little smaller than stock, so I lose about 2.5 MPH at the top of 5th. Regardless, you're entirely correct that it doesn't make enough power to get up there, especially in my case with a lack of fairings.
Building an ST1300 from the ground up.
- Thread starter Mandrake
- Start date
Looking across the web I did find where someone posted they held a 147mph top speed (as recorded by GPS) on a stock ST1300.
So with your digital dash... let us know what you can hit, we all want to know!
Well, an opportunity presented itself at the last minute, and I went out there today instead of waiting 'till Monday. The upside? Way cheaper. The downside? No full straight, since we were on the west half of the track.
Observations:
-The coolant never got above 197.3?. The air temps were in the mid 80's, but that's as hot as it got, and it hit that as I was exiting the track after a 20 minute session. I have no idea what it was during my time on the track, but I'd suspect 185- 190ish. I'm not sure if this is common knowledge or not, but the fans come on at 212? and shut off at 209?. I know you guys just have bars that light up on your dash with no empirical values assigned.
-The highest speed achieved was 107 MPH.
-This thing has some monster drive coming out of the turns like I've never felt before. So much so that I was able to pull on a Ducati 848 down the straight.
-The pegs need to be about 2" higher. Thank God they're on hinges because they hit waaaaaaaaaaay before the knee pucks. So much so that I didn't even get a knee down.
-That rear shock is garbage. Time for a Penske.
-Despite weighing about 125ish lbs. more than my RC51, the ST behaved best at the same tire pressure- 30 PSI F/R. Go figure.
-Wide bars make it hard to get off the bike properly.
-I felt like I could get way deeper into the brakes on this than on the RC51. I suspect it may have something to do with the lower center of gravity. The stock GSXR brakes did an awesome job of hauling all that weight down; I was actually pretty impressed. The stock GSXR springs are dead on perfect; I could feel the front end just barely kiss the bump stops just as I felt the rear leaving the pavement. Damping- wise, the front was pretty well sorted. I still think it could use some Ohlins internals, though.
-The clutch is the easiest to modulate hydraulic clutch I've ever ridden, period. On the brakes, it was so easy to feather to keep the rear from skidding, it wasn't even on my mind. Granted, I think it has a heavy lever, but it's just so damn smooth.
All in all, today was a success. I couldn't push it that hard, mainly due to the pegs limiting the fun. A track bike, it is not, at least in the form it's in what with the low pegs and rear shock. However, I didn't build it as a track bike and with that in mind, it did phenomenally. I'll post some pictures when I get them.
Observations:
-The coolant never got above 197.3?. The air temps were in the mid 80's, but that's as hot as it got, and it hit that as I was exiting the track after a 20 minute session. I have no idea what it was during my time on the track, but I'd suspect 185- 190ish. I'm not sure if this is common knowledge or not, but the fans come on at 212? and shut off at 209?. I know you guys just have bars that light up on your dash with no empirical values assigned.
-The highest speed achieved was 107 MPH.
-This thing has some monster drive coming out of the turns like I've never felt before. So much so that I was able to pull on a Ducati 848 down the straight.
-The pegs need to be about 2" higher. Thank God they're on hinges because they hit waaaaaaaaaaay before the knee pucks. So much so that I didn't even get a knee down.
-That rear shock is garbage. Time for a Penske.
-Despite weighing about 125ish lbs. more than my RC51, the ST behaved best at the same tire pressure- 30 PSI F/R. Go figure.
-Wide bars make it hard to get off the bike properly.
-I felt like I could get way deeper into the brakes on this than on the RC51. I suspect it may have something to do with the lower center of gravity. The stock GSXR brakes did an awesome job of hauling all that weight down; I was actually pretty impressed. The stock GSXR springs are dead on perfect; I could feel the front end just barely kiss the bump stops just as I felt the rear leaving the pavement. Damping- wise, the front was pretty well sorted. I still think it could use some Ohlins internals, though.
-The clutch is the easiest to modulate hydraulic clutch I've ever ridden, period. On the brakes, it was so easy to feather to keep the rear from skidding, it wasn't even on my mind. Granted, I think it has a heavy lever, but it's just so damn smooth.
All in all, today was a success. I couldn't push it that hard, mainly due to the pegs limiting the fun. A track bike, it is not, at least in the form it's in what with the low pegs and rear shock. However, I didn't build it as a track bike and with that in mind, it did phenomenally. I'll post some pictures when I get them.
The front tire is actually smaller in diameter than stock- mine's a 120/70- 17, just a standard sportbike front. The front end works very well. I really need to dig up my pencil drawing and take a picture so you guys can see the geometric comparison with a stock front end, but it's very close.
The GSXR fork legs are only 17mm shorter than stock, and factoring in the smaller diameter front wheel, my front end is a grand total of 29.7mm (1.17") shorter than stock. Yes, that would reduce the rake and trail. However, the offset of the ST1300 trees are 45mm, whereas the GSXR trees are only 30mm. In case you don't know, offset is the distance from the center of the stem to the center of the fork legs. By reducing the offset by 15mm, this increases trail (and decreased the wheelbase) by 15mm. Without my notes, I can't go into any more empirical specifics than that, but the trail is nearly identical to stock, and that's more critical than rake as far as stability goes. Rake does factor in, but to a lesser extent and with a wider margin of error.
The GSXR fork legs are only 17mm shorter than stock, and factoring in the smaller diameter front wheel, my front end is a grand total of 29.7mm (1.17") shorter than stock. Yes, that would reduce the rake and trail. However, the offset of the ST1300 trees are 45mm, whereas the GSXR trees are only 30mm. In case you don't know, offset is the distance from the center of the stem to the center of the fork legs. By reducing the offset by 15mm, this increases trail (and decreased the wheelbase) by 15mm. Without my notes, I can't go into any more empirical specifics than that, but the trail is nearly identical to stock, and that's more critical than rake as far as stability goes. Rake does factor in, but to a lesser extent and with a wider margin of error.
BakerBoy
It's all small stuff.
STurgisSTeele
When did I become the "Old Man"!?
What a great read! An awesome project bike that looks like it's working very good for you. Be curious how it looks after the finishing touches you spoke of earlier.
First, some pics from the track day.
Or if that's not showing up, try this: https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/10537077_10152268520547102_3097399661846281177_n.jpg?oh=764636a53d72633a6c0bebd8db4a36e4&oe=5473C52F&__gda__=1415323449_4fdf5fecefbb69d72a9d6f04c11b50a5
That's it. A professional photographer goes out there and shoots from the infield, but I'm not going to pay $15 per picture download, so here's the links. Ignore the watermarks.
http://www.stephenwclark.com/p16139131/e177b9b45
http://www.stephenwclark.com/p2860077/e5cced38
http://www.stephenwclark.com/p2860077/e460395d
http://www.stephenwclark.com/p2860077/e2e0d1875
http://www.stephenwclark.com/p16139131/ec3cde36
So today, some sportbike friends and I did a 350-ish mile ride today and had a ball. It was great to not only be able to keep up with them, but to not be all sore after the longest leg which was about 75 miles. My gas gauge isn't accurate yet due to a lack of calibration, so I've only dared to do 165 miles on a tank so far and have found that there's still about a gallon left. I'm not using the sub tank, so I only carry 5.5 gallons. That's still more gas and distance than I'm using to having with me, so I'm really digging the range this thing has.
I was also able to find some level ground to open it up. 143 MPH into a 10- 15 MPH headwind at about 4900' MSL. Temps were in the mid 80's. Under ideal conditions (no wind), I'd speculate 150- 155 MPH would be terminal. Assuming it doesn't have a 149 MPH limiter like you guys are saying. Not bad for a naked bike, I think.
So that's a wrap, fellas. A little over 1200 miles, a track day, and a long (for me) ride under its belt with no leaks, stuff falling off, or bad habits. I'm calling this one done. It's been a long road that was surprisingly less difficult than I had initially imagined. The few hurdles I had to overcome weren't very big set backs. I'd like to thank you all again for the help and encouragement over the past year and a half, and I'm glad that so many have enjoyed this thread. I'll check back from time to time to see if anyone has questions or whatnot, but otherwise, I'll see you all in the spring time with it all back together, detailed, painted and polished.
Or if that's not showing up, try this: https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/10537077_10152268520547102_3097399661846281177_n.jpg?oh=764636a53d72633a6c0bebd8db4a36e4&oe=5473C52F&__gda__=1415323449_4fdf5fecefbb69d72a9d6f04c11b50a5
That's it. A professional photographer goes out there and shoots from the infield, but I'm not going to pay $15 per picture download, so here's the links. Ignore the watermarks.
http://www.stephenwclark.com/p16139131/e177b9b45
http://www.stephenwclark.com/p2860077/e5cced38
http://www.stephenwclark.com/p2860077/e460395d
http://www.stephenwclark.com/p2860077/e2e0d1875
http://www.stephenwclark.com/p16139131/ec3cde36
So today, some sportbike friends and I did a 350-ish mile ride today and had a ball. It was great to not only be able to keep up with them, but to not be all sore after the longest leg which was about 75 miles. My gas gauge isn't accurate yet due to a lack of calibration, so I've only dared to do 165 miles on a tank so far and have found that there's still about a gallon left. I'm not using the sub tank, so I only carry 5.5 gallons. That's still more gas and distance than I'm using to having with me, so I'm really digging the range this thing has.
I was also able to find some level ground to open it up. 143 MPH into a 10- 15 MPH headwind at about 4900' MSL. Temps were in the mid 80's. Under ideal conditions (no wind), I'd speculate 150- 155 MPH would be terminal. Assuming it doesn't have a 149 MPH limiter like you guys are saying. Not bad for a naked bike, I think.
So that's a wrap, fellas. A little over 1200 miles, a track day, and a long (for me) ride under its belt with no leaks, stuff falling off, or bad habits. I'm calling this one done. It's been a long road that was surprisingly less difficult than I had initially imagined. The few hurdles I had to overcome weren't very big set backs. I'd like to thank you all again for the help and encouragement over the past year and a half, and I'm glad that so many have enjoyed this thread. I'll check back from time to time to see if anyone has questions or whatnot, but otherwise, I'll see you all in the spring time with it all back together, detailed, painted and polished.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 6, 2008
- Messages
- 6,183
- Age
- 66
- Location
- Lompoc, California
- Bike
- 07 & 12 ST1300A
- SPOT
- LINK
- STOC #
- 8057
We are glad that you are enjoying that bike!! Have fun and stay safe!
Throttlejockey
Padden is my hero
I'm glad you stuck with it. I can't wait to see the finished product!
Well, gentlemen, spring has arrived early in Utah. Unfortunately, things didn't progress this winter the way I had hoped, so all that talk of paint and powder coat and dropped jaws just didn't pan out. Such is life. I did manage to tidy up a few minor details with the wiring harness.
After some cautious exploration up one of our favorite mountain passes today, one of the fellows I frequently ride with and I decided to compare bikes. He has a '12 BMW S1000RR and at first, you'd think that would not be much of a comparison. His weighs 458 lbs. and has 197 HP with all the electronic rider aids. Mine's about 525 lbs. with what- 125 HP? I brought up the weight difference in riders, mainly that while his bike weighs about 75 lbs. less than mine, I weigh about 80 lbs. less than him.
It was at this point we got our phones out and pulled up dyno charts of the two bikes. At no point does the BMW ever make more torque than the ST, and the ST makes as much torque at 2800 RPM as the BMW does at peak. Comparing the two bikes RPM for RPM, the BMW makes less power until it hits 9500 RPM, or about 60 MPH in first gear (the BMW's first gear, not the ST's).
Neither of our bikes have tuners. I just have the Tyga Moto Maggot slip ons, and he has a Taylor Made full exhaust. Other than that, both bikes are bone stock, power wise. He has about 5000 miles on his, and my engine has about 48,000 and change on it. Both bikes have stock sized rear tires and stock gearing. Temp was low 70's.
After some discussion, we decided that the best comparison would be to drag race from a roll. That is, clutch out, first gear, rolling at about 5 MPH. We did this partially because he has launch control and I'm horrible at launches, and also to fully compare the two engines power delivery from just off idle. He figured I'd have a slight jump on him and then he'd pass me before I got out of first. I countered that he'd probably pass me at around 60- 75 MPH because that's where his bike starts making some big numbers and he won't have to shift until he hits 92 MPH.
So off we rode out to a road with a nice flat mile long straight in the middle of nowhere with no traffic, houses or trees. The deal was that he'd honk his horn three times and on the third honk, we go for it.
Anyone care to guess the outcome?
Think it was close?
Think he mauled me?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
On the 3rd honk, we went WOT and he immediately disappeared behind my peripheral vision. I just started banging off gears and focusing on the job at hand, waiting for him to come rocketing past me.
So how fast was I going when he get around me? Well, that's the silly part... he didn't. I was coming up on my mental braking marker, so I shut it down towards the top of 4th at about 123- 125 MPH, and he was still in my mirror. He was coming up real fast by that point and we both guess he would have passed me by the time I'd gained another 8- 10 MPH. As a side note, you'll remember several pages back that my bike maxed out at 143 MPH with a 15 MPH headwind, to give you some idea just how deep into my performance envelope we were. Neither of us could believe it, and I accused him of either sand bagging or forgetting to take his bike out of rain mode, so we did it two more times, each with relatively the same result.
We ran out of time by that point, but the results were so remarkable, we plan on doing more comparisons with different start speeds. The next time out, I'll put a GoPro on my tail facing rearward.
So there you have it. According to our uninstrumented, unscientific, illegal as hell, and as- close- to- equal- as- we can- make- it test, the ST1300 engine can give the S1000RR engine a solid run for its money.
As I sit here editing my post for clarity, I pause to contemplate the personality of this engine. Since day one, I've been amazed in particular by this engine. It's unlike anything I've ever experienced on two wheels and really is something special. However, looking at the size of the ports and header pipes while considering the relatively low compression ratio, I wonder how it would respond to some head work, cams, a bump in compression, and a bigger, shorter set of headers? Maybe go a step further and add forged rods, stiffer valve springs and a stand alone engine management system to allow it to spin up to 11,000- 12,000 RPM? Or, how fast could I spin it and have it survive? What would the limiting factor be in how much power this engine can produce? What part between the crank and the rear tire would break first? Would first gen Hayabusa levels of power and torque be out of the question? What about forced induction? Does anyone have a spare engine laying around they'd care to donate?
Perhaps when I have the budget for it, rather than doing the paint and powder coat as advertised, I should explore what this engine has to offer. What do you guys think- make it a beauty, or make it a beast?
After some cautious exploration up one of our favorite mountain passes today, one of the fellows I frequently ride with and I decided to compare bikes. He has a '12 BMW S1000RR and at first, you'd think that would not be much of a comparison. His weighs 458 lbs. and has 197 HP with all the electronic rider aids. Mine's about 525 lbs. with what- 125 HP? I brought up the weight difference in riders, mainly that while his bike weighs about 75 lbs. less than mine, I weigh about 80 lbs. less than him.
It was at this point we got our phones out and pulled up dyno charts of the two bikes. At no point does the BMW ever make more torque than the ST, and the ST makes as much torque at 2800 RPM as the BMW does at peak. Comparing the two bikes RPM for RPM, the BMW makes less power until it hits 9500 RPM, or about 60 MPH in first gear (the BMW's first gear, not the ST's).
Neither of our bikes have tuners. I just have the Tyga Moto Maggot slip ons, and he has a Taylor Made full exhaust. Other than that, both bikes are bone stock, power wise. He has about 5000 miles on his, and my engine has about 48,000 and change on it. Both bikes have stock sized rear tires and stock gearing. Temp was low 70's.
After some discussion, we decided that the best comparison would be to drag race from a roll. That is, clutch out, first gear, rolling at about 5 MPH. We did this partially because he has launch control and I'm horrible at launches, and also to fully compare the two engines power delivery from just off idle. He figured I'd have a slight jump on him and then he'd pass me before I got out of first. I countered that he'd probably pass me at around 60- 75 MPH because that's where his bike starts making some big numbers and he won't have to shift until he hits 92 MPH.
So off we rode out to a road with a nice flat mile long straight in the middle of nowhere with no traffic, houses or trees. The deal was that he'd honk his horn three times and on the third honk, we go for it.
Anyone care to guess the outcome?
Think it was close?
Think he mauled me?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
On the 3rd honk, we went WOT and he immediately disappeared behind my peripheral vision. I just started banging off gears and focusing on the job at hand, waiting for him to come rocketing past me.
So how fast was I going when he get around me? Well, that's the silly part... he didn't. I was coming up on my mental braking marker, so I shut it down towards the top of 4th at about 123- 125 MPH, and he was still in my mirror. He was coming up real fast by that point and we both guess he would have passed me by the time I'd gained another 8- 10 MPH. As a side note, you'll remember several pages back that my bike maxed out at 143 MPH with a 15 MPH headwind, to give you some idea just how deep into my performance envelope we were. Neither of us could believe it, and I accused him of either sand bagging or forgetting to take his bike out of rain mode, so we did it two more times, each with relatively the same result.
We ran out of time by that point, but the results were so remarkable, we plan on doing more comparisons with different start speeds. The next time out, I'll put a GoPro on my tail facing rearward.
So there you have it. According to our uninstrumented, unscientific, illegal as hell, and as- close- to- equal- as- we can- make- it test, the ST1300 engine can give the S1000RR engine a solid run for its money.
As I sit here editing my post for clarity, I pause to contemplate the personality of this engine. Since day one, I've been amazed in particular by this engine. It's unlike anything I've ever experienced on two wheels and really is something special. However, looking at the size of the ports and header pipes while considering the relatively low compression ratio, I wonder how it would respond to some head work, cams, a bump in compression, and a bigger, shorter set of headers? Maybe go a step further and add forged rods, stiffer valve springs and a stand alone engine management system to allow it to spin up to 11,000- 12,000 RPM? Or, how fast could I spin it and have it survive? What would the limiting factor be in how much power this engine can produce? What part between the crank and the rear tire would break first? Would first gen Hayabusa levels of power and torque be out of the question? What about forced induction? Does anyone have a spare engine laying around they'd care to donate?
Perhaps when I have the budget for it, rather than doing the paint and powder coat as advertised, I should explore what this engine has to offer. What do you guys think- make it a beauty, or make it a beast?
Replacement engines are relatively cheap on ebay. Would be interesting to see what the block can do. Personally I would say go beast. We know the beauty.
veefore
See you at my intervention!
Make it a beast!!!!!!! That is remarkable, as I read your post I thought for sure he'd come by well before then. As far as reliability, a close friend of mine does all of my work and owns an independent shop. He works on everything .........including a fair amount of American v twins. The term he has used when describing this engine is under stressed...........
Last edited:
Chance
Taming the dragon!
Really fun read! You've got a real talent for writing. Enjoying your build as well. My .02? See how far you can push it! It's your bike, lol, why not?
Thanks for the read, I'm with the make it a beast crowd.....have fun......ff
Reginald
cyclepoke
With a another engine you can do both. Bit of a pain to switch out for beauty or beast as the mood strikes you.
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2005
- Messages
- 9,518
- Location
- Cedar City, Utah
- Bike
- 12/04 ST 1300s
- 2024 Miles
- 000420
- STOC #
- 5901
Great read! Glad to hear the ST did so well.
How about a supercharger? They put them on V65 Sabres!
How about a supercharger? They put them on V65 Sabres!
The torque characteristics of this motor make it the most pleasurable bike I have ever ridden.
It would be very interesting to see how the 'beast' would perform!
I hope you go the next step & try it!!
It would be very interesting to see how the 'beast' would perform!
I hope you go the next step & try it!!
ToddC
Site Supporter
Beast Beast Beast !!!!!!!! I bet this motor would do amazing things.
T
T
BakerBoy
It's all small stuff.
Release the beast within! ! !
+1 on the supercharger ... that was my first thought as well.