2013 R V's 2015 R

AKKutz said:

The heads do not cross reference to any of bike. Listed for the 15 R only.

Click to expand...

Thanks. The chambers on the old heads need to modified to allow for the SL pistons so suspected they would be different . The head gaskets as well should cross reference the SL bike as well ?

wilkson said:

Thanks. The chambers on the old heads need to modified to allow for the SL pistons so suspected they would be different . The head gaskets as well should cross reference the SL bike as well ?

Click to expand...

Head gaskets cross to SL and Pan R only. Interesting that the heads didn't cross reference the SL, since pistons are the same.

AKKutz said:

Head gaskets cross to SL and Pan R only. Interesting that the heads didn't cross reference the SL, since pistons are the same.

Click to expand...

I thought the same .

shakazulu12 said:

Damn, a Marelli system is a pretty drastic step for an ignition switch!

Bravo, let us know if you pull the trigger.

Click to expand...

I was looking at the factory SSTK harness before my elec' issue to eliminate
ABS Ignition etc + Rexxer SSTK type ECU re flash those parts are expensive for
what you get, now this potential MM system seems like more logical upgrade

I would think you would actually have way more support with the Marelli system through Boulder and BSD.

wilkson said:

Thanks. The chambers on the old heads need to modified to allow for the SL pistons so suspected they would be different . The head gaskets as well should cross reference the SL bike as well ?

Click to expand...

Hi Wilkson when you installed the SL pistons can you tell me what your squish clearance ended up at with SL gaskets, I would have thought with that size piston probably not safe to have anything less than 1.4 - 1.5 mm ?
Any spec' info on the Cam Degree settings, seen it mentioned several times but nobody is willing to post settings, I prefer using " Lobe Center " to degree V opening / closing

Thanks Sean

Hi Sean . I actually did not do the work myself so I am really am not too sure .
We did not use the SL gasket .

F Y I ...

for what it s worth ..... to have any indication at the diff between a 1199S and a 1299S as to performance...

a buddy of mine switched this winter, took his 1299S to Spa and dropped 5 seconds of on his 2nd outing..... from 2:52 to 2:47.... 3 of those can be attributed to the bike if guess....

grtz

I would bet the lap time drop can be related to the auto blipper down clutches downshifts. I'm sure it really helps slow things down in your head and can concentrate on trail breaking and entry,corner,exits. One less thing you need to think about.

Just my opinion if the rider is an intermediate to advanced track day rider And if that is the case why not just stuck with an 1199 base/S/R and throw on a blip box pro rather than taking the resale/trade in value hit. I'm a little bias as I have a 14' R I bought used for a good price but still want the 15' S :-D

The auto blipper is so good that it actually feels like cheating!

nvetro said:

I would bet the lap time drop can be related to the auto blipper down clutches downshifts. I'm sure it really helps slow things down in your head and can concentrate on trail breaking and entry,corner,exits. One less thing you need to think about.

Just my opinion if the rider is an intermediate to advanced track day rider And if that is the case why not just stuck with an 1199 base/S/R and throw on a blip box pro rather than taking the resale/trade in value hit. I'm a little bias as I have a 14' R I bought used for a good price but still want the 15' S :-D

Click to expand...

I disagree.

The clutchless downshifts doesn't save any time because it doesn't change where you have to apply the brakes or how hard you have to apply them. Your braking marker won't change. Whether you pull the clutch in or not, you are still braking at the same spot and applying the same brake pressure.

And on modern bikes with a good Slipper clutch, there is no need to blip on downshifts. There are only 2 corners in the entire Southeast where I blip on downshifts, and that is because I am banging downshifts with a good bit of lean angle while entering the corner in a very small window...meaning I can't afford to upset the chassis. Other than that, no blipping, ever.

Because there is no real need to blip, clutchless downshifting isn't faster, it is just easier. It does free up concentration and do the things you stated, but it doesn't change where you have to brake or how long you have to brake.

I would say the drop in lap times could likely be contributed to the improved geometry (improved handling), more mid-range/better acceleration and then maybe some other factors like better tires or different conditions.

sean999r said:

Rake kit came stock with the 14's already installed mine, move the front wheel approx 12mm closer to the radiator

Click to expand...

The rake kit only came with some of the '14's apparently. Mine did not come with the rake kit and I personally uncrated the bike myself. It did come with lots of lame stuff like catalytic converters, mirrors...lol.

And that rake kit isn't the same kit as a '15R front end. The '15R pulls the rake in AND extends the wheelbase 5mm after the .5 degrees is taken out. With the back at -4 and the '15R front geometry it is butter!
I listed part numbers on another thread regarding this mod.

Chaotic I disagree with you saying the auto blipper won't allow you to move your breaking marker deeper. I believe you have the theory that the bike is already at the 100% limit and breaking the deepest it can. What I mean is the rider (not the bike) can move his/her breaking marker deeper.

It's one less thing you have to do, which means you can move your breaking marker deeper due to the less amount of things you have to put together.

Let's face it, most if not all of us aren't WSBK or MotoGP riders the auto blipper will allow the vast majority of us to move our breaking markets deeper thus allowing us to be WOT longer around the track, and the fastest way around the track is being WOT as much as possible (Ken Hill).

I reckon it all depends on the level of rider we are talking about.

For somebody riding in the Novice or Intermediate track day groups, you might be right. Aside from that, I stand by my point.

Where one applies the brakes is (or should be) dictated by their available braking power, available front end traction and feel, the shape of the corner, track conditions, etc. Having to pull in the clutch or not while braking should not affect where someone applies the brakes.

You maximize acceleration out of the previous corner and get to WOT as quickly as possible, then maintain WOT until you reach your braking marker. Once at your braking marker, you smoothly go to max braking initiatlly, then trail off the brakes as you add lean angle. None of that has anything to do with what is going on with your left hand.

If one's braking marker is affected by their lack of available concentration on corner entry or their inability to maximize multiple tasks simultaneously, then they need seat time, laps and probably proper instruction more than anything else. That person is using the brakes to control their fear, rather than to control their speed. And in all honesty, that person probably shouldnt be riding a 200hp Superbike on the track to begin with.

Chaotic said:

I disagree.

The clutchless downshifts doesn't save any time because it doesn't change where you have to apply the brakes or how hard you have to apply them. Your braking marker won't change. Whether you pull the clutch in or not, you are still braking at the same spot and applying the same brake pressure.

And on modern bikes with a good Slipper clutch, there is no need to blip on downshifts. There are only 2 corners in the entire Southeast where I blip on downshifts, and that is because I am banging downshifts with a good bit of lean angle while entering the corner in a very small window...meaning I can't afford to upset the chassis. Other than that, no blipping, ever.

Because there is no real need to blip, clutchless downshifting isn't faster, it is just easier. It does free up concentration and do the things you stated, but it doesn't change where you have to brake or how long you have to brake.

I would say the drop in lap times could likely be contributed to the improved geometry (improved handling), more mid-range/better acceleration and then maybe some other factors like better tires or different conditions.

Click to expand...

I sort of don't understand the auto-blipper. I have a race slipper, always have, and I abuse the .... out of it. Drop 3 gears and let her do her job. Not sure how the blipper would ever help me.

If you watch really close, you will still see some world level riders (WSBK, WSS, and even Moto GP) still feathering the clutch in certain corners. The article I was reading about electronics mentioned that some riders still prefer to control engine braking themselves that way.

kope999R said:

F Y I ...

for what it s worth ..... to have any indication at the diff between a 1199S and a 1299S as to performance...

a buddy of mine switched this winter, took his 1299S to Spa and dropped 5 seconds of on his 2nd outing..... from 2:52 to 2:47.... 3 of those can be attributed to the bike if guess....

grtz

Click to expand...

autoblipper? I'd give 3 seconds of the difference to more power, and 2 seconds to improved geometry.

autoblipper does free up the mind, which is significant in a hard braking situation, where you really need to focus on the brakes, brake marker, how much room you have left, and keeping the bike stable while keeping the mind calm as you go from 170mph into a 35mph chicane.

yes, clutchwork is reflexive. if it isn't, one really ought not to be in anything but the novice group on a track. and clutch feathering is really the best way to truly fine-tune engine braking, which is all the more important on big V-twins.

but I love the autoblipper. I think EVERY motorcycle should have an up/down quickshifter

kope999R said:

F Y I ...

for what it s worth ..... to have any indication at the diff between a 1199S and a 1299S as to performance...

a buddy of mine switched this winter, took his 1299S to Spa and dropped 5 seconds of on his 2nd outing..... from 2:52 to 2:47.... 3 of those can be attributed to the bike if guess....

grtz

Click to expand...

1299 has alot more torque so maybe getting a better drive out of corners

reganc said:

1299 has alot more torque so maybe getting a better drive out of corners

Click to expand...

I plan to run back to back dyno runs with a Desmosedici RR with its race kit after my own mapping is complete. It's already obvious that the 1299S makes a lot more torque. If it makes equal or more horsepower and weighs less, then I'll be happy - the D16RR has been a performance benchmark for years, at least for Ducatisti.

kismetcapitan said:

I plan to run back to back dyno runs with a Desmosedici RR with its race kit after my own mapping is complete. It's already obvious that the 1299S makes a lot more torque. If it makes equal or more horsepower and weighs less, then I'll be happy - the D16RR has been a performance benchmark for years, at least for Ducatisti.

Click to expand...

i never thought the d16rr handled particularly well with its really stiff chassis and it felt short on it's claimed bhp numbers i remember at the time my 1098r felt faster and in my opinion the 1098r is a much better bike overall but it doesn't look like a gp bike. To say its been the benchmark for Ducatisti (whoever they are) seems a stretch.

the 1299 will stomp the D16rr on a dyno. Not that it really matters