998cc VS 1330cc engines

[ARtraveler]

BRZ one hot cookie too bad they went away from the all wheel drive...jtpollock

Being a Subaru fan, that was on my list of would like to own--until I found out it was not all wheel drive.

[Devious56]

Still being rather new to the Spyder world, let me ask, what is the red line of the 990 engine, I know the 1330 has an 8200 rev limiter. Just trying to do a little comparing since I've never ridden a two cyclinder Spyder.

David

[Firefly]

Anyone who cares to do a 998 vs 1330 test... I'll be at Spyderfest.
Let's run em'.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bob Denman]

Still being rather new to the Spyder world, let me ask, what is the red line of the 990 engine, I know the 1330 has an 8200 rev limiter. Just trying to do a little comparing since I've never ridden a two cyclinder Spyder.

David

I believe that the 990s would spin to 9,500 rpm.
They held the 991s to just a bit lower than that.

[Devious56]

I believe that the 990s would spin to 9,500 rpm.
They held the 991s to just a bit lower than that.

Thanks Bob, doesn't seem to be that much difference, 1500 rpm between the two. I wonder how many rt riders really wind them up, I know the folks I ride with keep them pretty much under 5,000 rpm. Pretty sedate performance. Yep, I'm prejudiced, like my 1330 motor. I just wind mine up as the situation requires. I think it runs pretty well, I know it will bang the rev limiter (8200 rpm) in first, second, and third gear, never had a reason to try 4th. And with 45 mpg, I think I'll keep it for a while. Hope to run into you one of these days (on foot, not riding). Catch you later.

David

[Bob Denman]

Having had both:
The 1330 will pull the 998's stickers off; when they start the run...
My 998 would run right up to 97 mph (indicated...), and then go into slow motion:
" ... 98 ... 99 ... 100 ... 101... "
The 1330 just sprints up to 97, and keeps pulling:
"98.. 99.. 100.. 101.. "
I never took my 998 past 101 mph, because I simply had no room.
The 1330 saw 109 mph, and was STILL pulling nicely, when we rode out to Missouri last year.

[jroberts650]

Having had both:
The 1330 will pull the 998's stickers off; when they start the run...
My 998 would run right up to 97 mph (indicated...), and then go into slow motion:
" ... 98 ... 99 ... 100 ... 101... "
The 1330 just sprints up to 97, and keeps pulling:
"98.. 99.. 100.. 101.. "
I never took my 998 past 101 mph, because I simply had no room.
The 1330 saw 109 mph, and was STILL pulling nicely, when we rode out to Missouri last year.

I think that's mainly because of the computer limiting speed for safety reasons..... So I've been told. Plus I'm sure aerodynamics plays a part in their top end speed. Kind of like pushing a barn darn down the highway.

[Bob Denman]

No... there is no, nor has there EVER been; any speed limiters on these bikes...
(Well... you could count the rev-limiter if you really have to! )

You're right: it's plain old aerodynamics, that holds these bikes back!

[blacklightning]

I have had both my spyders to about 105 mph (2014 RT & 2012 RSS) both bikes attained those speeds very easily, but the RSS definitely did it quicker and felt like it had plenty left. I had no desire to push either one any faster. But if i had to guess by the progression and rate that it picked up, the RSS was quicker and would have a higher top speed.

[Bob Denman]

No doubt...
But the RS presents a much smaller "barn door" to the wind.

[crazycanuck]

128mph

[Bob Denman]

On the Ducati??

[AeroPilot]

When my wife got her new 15 RT-S she handed down her old 11 base RT SM5 and I got to switch from my Road King to the 3 wheel life (it was time). I found out that all she needed to pull away with her on the new 1330 and me riding the 998 was to slow down or start out on a good uphill grade and then roll on the throttle. Heading west out of Denver on 70 was a good test or east out of Montrose on 50 the same.

There are many times the 1330 would leave me and be pulling away even though my weight on the RT pretty well matched her weight on the 15 RT-S. The torque was the difference and other than that the clear difference was in maintenance and stopping for fuel. Fun Fun

[DrewNJ]

No doubt... [emoji106]
But the RS presents a much smaller "barn door" to the wind.

Ain't that the truth! Being used to the RS I thought I was dragging an anchor on the RT.
Just a different ride, that's all.[emoji106]

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

[Bob Denman]

Ain't that the truth! Being used to the RS I thought I was dragging an anchor on the RT.
Just a different ride, that's all.[emoji106]

Amen...
And they're ALL pretty damn good!

[ARtraveler]

I believe that the 990s would spin to 9,500 rpm.
They held the 991s to just a bit lower than that.

That is where the red line indicator is. I have never been there on ANY of the 's. I usually chicken out somewhat south of 100 mph.

[Buckeye Bleau]

I for one love my RTL but I would gladly change it for the F3 for the lower CG and the ryding position.

My 990 engine works fine for me, all except the first shift I wait for 5000+ to make the move up and find that it performs fantastically for me. I don't need the arguement of the 1330 extra power.

That being said I would want to move to the 1330 for the MPG, but most importantly for the longer service interval, that may end up being the deal maker for me!

Just my lousy two and a half cents worth.

Joe

[bmccaffrey]

Had mine up to 116
Think that was about all she had RS
Now with all the bulky farkles and extra weight probably lot slower

[Warlock]

Anyone who cares to do a 998 vs 1330 test... I'll be at Spyderfest.
Let's run em'.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've already beaten a F3 S with mine and my wifes. I have a 08 and she has a 11 RSS. He had stock muffler with the cat bypass. Don't know if that hurt his low in speed or not. We didn't run top end, just 1/4.
David

[Bob Denman]

I've already beaten a F3 S with mine and my wifes. I have a 08 and she has a 11 RSS. He had stock muffler with the cat bypass. Don't know if that hurt his low in speed or not. We didn't run top end, just 1/4.
David

Nobody seems to get this...

You're trying to compare two engine/transmission combinations: in two vastly different-sized bikes.

Run a 2013 (or earlier) RT up against a 2014 (or later) RT, and you'll have the fairest possible comparison.

Or do you actually think that comparing a Mustang to a Station Wagon is entertaining?

[Firefly]

I've already beaten a F3 S with mine and my wifes. I have a 08 and she has a 11 RSS. He had stock muffler with the cat bypass. Don't know if that hurt his low in speed or not. We didn't run top end, just 1/4.
David

With all due respect.... you weren't running against me..... who knows if the person you were racing knows anything about how to race. With the Spyder the takeoff is everything.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DrewNJ]

Nobody seems to get this...

You're trying to compare two engine/transmission combinations: in two vastly different-sized bikes.

Run a 2013 (or earlier) RT up against a 2014 (or later) RT, and you'll have the fairest possible comparison.

Or do you actually think that comparing a Mustang to a Station Wagon is entertaining?

Depends on the station wagon I guess....How about any year RT against an old lady with a walker?

I try to stay out of these racing comments simply because I only have an old, antiquated, STOCK, first generation RS......so obviously it's HAS to be slower than the newer stuff.....

[Bob Denman]

Depends on the station wagon I guess....How about any year RT against an old lady with a walker?

I try to stay out of these racing comments simply because I only have an old, antiquated, STOCK, first generation RS......so obviously it's HAS to be slower than the newer stuff.....

Obviously...
I gave a 2008 GS a try out in Springfield once... it was a BLAST!
Was it quicker than my 2010 RT? Hell yeah!
Would it be quicker than a 2013 or later RS, with the 991 series engine? I never heard of a fair comparison.

[AeroPilot]

I was riding the 11 RT SM5 while the wife at 100 lbs lighter was on the 15 RT SE6. (post #38) My mass offset the 83 lbs that was added to the 929 lb weight on the old RTs to the 1012 lbs on the 1330/6 speed chassis ; Close to equal mass and air resistance profile; So the comparison was straight away about the 1330's 96 ft lb of torque vs the 70 ft-lb of torque coming from the 998. A race it was NOT, since I would NEVER take on my wifes riding ability haha. She has double the miles piloting these things and can twist that throttle when she wants to.. thats just not how we usually ride hmmmmm.....maybe thats why she traded up to the F3T??? maybe she DOES like to twist that throttle....I'm scr**ed.

[Warlock]

Nobody seems to get this...

You're trying to compare two engine/transmission combinations: in two vastly different-sized bikes.

Run a 2013 (or earlier) RT up against a 2014 (or later) RT, and you'll have the fairest possible comparison.

Or do you actually think that comparing a Mustang to a Station Wagon is entertaining?

Wasn't comparing it against a RT. I do believe the new RT's are stronger and faster than the ones with the 990 bikes. One of my friends has a new RT and at one point I had a 12 RT. His is stronger and faster than my one I had. I was referring to the F3 not the RT. I know that the RT are the grandpa station wagons
David