04-22-2015, 01:30 AM
(04-21-2015, 01:15 PM)Rboe_imp Wrote: The R1 produces more power for many reasons that have little to do with liquid cooling. What they do produces so much waste heat they must liquid cool it so it won't melt.
It's also designed for a different market and mission. Like comparing a taxi to an F1 race car.
But I agree, big inline fours are on the way out with air cooling.
Rboe,
Exactly. I was not saying that liquid cooling produces twice the power. Liquid cooling produces no power and the water pump actually uses some. What I was saying is that power generation creates heat. Double the power and you more than double heat generation. A taxi cab and a race car are the same in this regard. They both must have sufficient cooling capacity to deal with the heat generated by whatever power level they produce.
The water cooled system in that R-1 is capable of keeping temperatures in check in an engine capable of generating 200 hp. What I'm saying is that the same exact engine that was air-cooled and detuned by 3% would not even come close to being able to keep temps in check. The motor would quickly self destruct. Meeting today's lean burn, catalyst equipped, emissions I think maybe 100 hp would be the limit for an air cooled 1000cc street bike. 120 hp tops but the heads and cylinder cooling fins would have to be massive and heavy.
Water cooling allows much higher power levels than air cooling. And we're not talking 3%, I'd say closer to 100%. Cheers.
Chip