Sport Bikes banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

· Calm like a bomb!
Joined
·
7,936 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
2002 954RR

Fuel consumption:
Min/Max/Ave
28/32/30

Peak HP:
130.8

Peak Torque:
67.2 @ 9000

Wet Weight:
429 lbs

2003 954RR

Fuel consumption:
Min/Max/Ave
31/47/38

Peak HP:
139.0

Peak Torque:
70.9 @ 12,000

Wet Weight:
434 lbs

OK now that the numbers are done...does anyone know what Honda did to the 03 954 model that increased the fuel effieciency so much, and bumped the hp/torque numbers? Obviously there is 5 added lbs of weight, but I cant seem to figure out exactly what it is. Fuel mapping? Internal tolerances? Anyone know? I am interested in trying to bump my fuel mileage up a bit as the 02 954 is a HOG by motorcycle standards. Thanks in advance.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
246 Posts
I am not sure what they did but I think it has something to do with the crossover passages between the cylinders. Best place to check would be the Sport Rider magazine, or any other bike magazine, website and look for a review of the '03. They are usually pretty good about listing the changes made between the year models and the affects of those changes.
 

· Calm like a bomb!
Joined
·
7,936 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
ryu954rr said:
I am not sure what they did but I think it has something to do with the crossover passages between the cylinders. Best place to check would be the Sport Rider magazine, or any other bike magazine, website and look for a review of the '03. They are usually pretty good about listing the changes made between the year models and the affects of those changes.

Yeah I've already done that...no dice.

I also checked for threads on the subject over at cbrforums.com and found nothing there either.

Interesting that there is no documentation on it. :rolleyes
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,302 Posts
Where did you get your numbers from? Were they from the same publication for each year?
Honda didn't really do anything to the 954 from '02 to '03. It is essentially the same bike, save some bearings. Remember that the same model of bike won't necessarily have the same readings as the next, and each dyno will read differently from the next.
That and it's not like they get a plethora of bikes to test and then average out the numbers.

And the 2002 fuel consumption sounds like it came from a UK site since their numbers are always lower.

Then again, I could be hitting the pipe again.
 

· Calm like a bomb!
Joined
·
7,936 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 · (Edited)
http://www.sportrider.com/bikes/146_weights_measurements/

I thought it was a fairly reliable source of info...hmmm.

Interesting points, but that is a big difference in numbers. However, since Honda was so focused on cutting weight with the 954, I did find it strange that the '03 model gained 5 of the 6lbs it lost from the redesign back.

It might just be nonsense or the euro model fireblade like you said. *shrug*

Edit: url
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,302 Posts
I think sportrider is good, but you could do the same tests and get different numbers as it's not an exact science. Actually if you look on the site it lists both test bikes as '02s. Also, 70.9 ft-lbs @ 12,000rpm seems a bit off to me since peak HP is listed at 11,500rpm.

It is curious though why they are so different. I look at that chart as a general indicator about hp, torque, etc, not as gospel.

Ah, who knows? Do you like your 954? That's all that matters.

and if you don't, I'll take it off your hands for cheap :)
 

· Calm like a bomb!
Joined
·
7,936 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
deftones156 said:
I think sportrider is good, but you could do the same tests and get different numbers as it's not an exact science. Actually if you look on the site it lists both test bikes as '02s. Also, 70.9 ft-lbs @ 12,000rpm seems a bit off to me since peak HP is listed at 11,500rpm.

It is curious though why they are so different. I look at that chart as a general indicator about hp, torque, etc, not as gospel.
Yeah, probably just ambient temp, humidity, fuel octane, blah blah junk. ha ha!

deftones156 said:
Ah, who knows?
I was more concerned about the fuel mileage than anything else... :)

deftones156 said:
Do you like your 954? That's all that matters.

and if you don't, I'll take it off your hands for cheap :)
I love my 954...you will keep your cheap hands off my woman! ha ha :lao

Thanks for the input deftones
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,302 Posts
okay, okay, simma down na!

Sportrider lists fuel consumption for my bike as 34/45/41 (min/max/ave), but with a mix of weekend riding and commuting I usually get around 45-48mpg. My last tank was 49 :) , and with straight HWY at 75mph I have done 53mpg! :banana

Maybe they beat on their test bikes more, maybe the numbers were just lower for them, or maybe I'm a pussy and need to open up the throttle a bit more. :urowned
Gotta keep it somewhat responsible though.

edit: going back to your original point, do you have a PCIII? If not, you can get one and get a custom map done to increase your MPG :cheers
 

· Calm like a bomb!
Joined
·
7,936 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
"Who is this a picture of?"

"Donna Summers"

"How would her name appear on her driver license?"

"Summer Donna"

"Slow it down"

"Su-mer-don-na!"

"Simmer down na!"

You mean to tell me that if I stay off the throttle I get better gas mileage? I guess that should be my first step towards stretching the fuel huh. ha ha ha

Ok so in summary...we can safely assume no changes were made to the 954 from early 02 to late 02. I smoke crack and post it for all to see and laugh at. Another productive thread ladies and gentlemen.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,302 Posts
Productive, indeed. I'm just whoring it up here and at fireblades.org to pass the time until my work day is done!
No, no changes that would drastically affect fuel consumption. PCIII if you can't refrain from being ham-fisted is my suggestion.
But what the hell do I know, I'm only a doctor...
 

· 1000cc of testosterone
Joined
·
230 Posts
Something looks wrong with the '02 numbers.

Every other site lists the bike with ~151 HP at the crank and 137 HP at the wheel. My '02 will get 30 (heavy on the gas on the track) to 45 (constant cruising) mpg. The 67 torque looks about right.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
deftones156 said:
okay, okay, simma down na!

Sportrider lists fuel consumption for my bike as 34/45/41 (min/max/ave), but with a mix of weekend riding and commuting I usually get around 45-48mpg. My last tank was 49 :) , and with straight HWY at 75mph I have done 53mpg! :banana

Maybe they beat on their test bikes more, maybe the numbers were just lower for them, or maybe I'm a pussy and need to open up the throttle a bit more. :urowned
Gotta keep it somewhat responsible though.

edit: going back to your original point, do you have a PCIII? If not, you can get one and get a custom map done to increase your MPG :cheers


Thats insane....I dont' get that much mileage out of my 954. I usually get around 132-140 miles before my fuel light comes on. Thats a combination of city and highway. Fuel light comes on after you have used about 3.7-4 gallons. Thats only about 35 MPG on average I am getting and my bike is 100% stock.

I wish I could get 45 MPG, your bikes not a California model with O2 sensor is it?
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top