How much HP can Yamaha's 426 produce

Joined
Aug 13, 2000
Messages
826
Likes
5
#1
In my never ending quest for a high HP dirt bike, I would like to know how much HP has been extracted from Yamahas engine. Big bore kits, stroking, whatever. All is fair game in my book. Even turbo's. Has anyone past the 50RWHP mark?

Chris
 

penguin

N. Texas SP
Joined
Feb 19, 2000
Messages
390
Likes
0
#2
Ask Ty Davis. when he exceeds the 50 hp level ,the bike blows up. Most mere mortals cannot handle 50 hp in the dirt anyway. there is a practical limit to how much hp is too much where dirtbikes are concerned.
 

weimedog

Damn Yankees
Joined
Nov 21, 2000
Messages
959
Likes
2
#3
A stock VOR 503 produces about 51 rear wheel HP. A KTM 520 about 52. The new VOR530 is going to beat that by about 5hp AND have a wider powerband. The VOR Supermotard itteration make even more. Bet both the big Husaberg and Big Husky make over 50 but I don't know for certain. Any of the big bore 2- strokes can put over 50 at the rear wheel! I think the VOR motor only weighs about 60lbs. I heard part of a discussion about building a bike for Pikes Peak and that was the number that came up when they were being compared to the old Rotax motors. I can check if your interested.:)

(Bet some of those mfg's would sell just a motor if you were going to build a bike...I know one that would):D

( You can find big bore two strokes cheap surrounded by motorcycles! LOL. Those Honda CR's can be made to crank out big HP reliably....and what about that Service Honda deal? Isn't that effectivly a plateform to build the Extreemly High HP dirt bike in a modern chassis?):eek:
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 28, 1999
Messages
6
Likes
0
#4
when it comes to comparing hp there can be quite a difference between rear wheel hp, countershaft, and crankshaft.
 

nephron

Dr. Feel Good
Joined
Jun 15, 2001
Messages
2,552
Likes
0
#5
When comparing 2 and 4 strokes, the life of the post correlates with the square of the number of combustion processes during a complete engine cycle.
 
Joined
Dec 10, 2000
Messages
1,490
Likes
1
#6
Originally posted by nephron
When comparing 2 and 4 strokes, the life of the post correlates with the square of the number of combustion processes during a complete engine cycle.
huh???:eek:
 

Rich Rohrich

Moderator / BioHazard
Joined
Jul 27, 1999
Messages
22,739
Likes
544
Location
Chicago
#7
Originally posted by nephron
When comparing 2 and 4 strokes, the life of the post correlates with the square of the number of combustion processes during a complete engine cycle.
Far from it. You already started another thread that is addressing the two-stroke versus four-stroke issues. Feel free to rant and rave to your heart's content in that thread. Just don't expect to take a thread asking a legitimate question way off-topic to serve as a vehicle for your personal agenda.

Love them or hate them, I could care less. Just try and stay on topic. :)
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2000
Messages
826
Likes
5
#8
Thanks for the replys. Rich, I was hoping you would shed some light on this subject. I really like riding Yamaha's big bore, I think the bike is exceptional. however I do desire quite a bit more power. Might be a good candidate for a turbo! A 9 to 1 piston for that bike would be a real oddity.

Chris.
 

Rich Rohrich

Moderator / BioHazard
Joined
Jul 27, 1999
Messages
22,739
Likes
544
Location
Chicago
#9
Chris - To answer your question. With the stock valve area I believe the 400/426 engine is good for about 50-54 reliable sustainable crankshaft horsepower using standard leaded race fuel. Going to bigger bores and longer strokes will fill in the area on either side of the torque peak but the small valve area is a bit of a limiting factor. I think it's possible to raise the peak horsepower revs with changes to the appropriate hard parts, but IMO there is little use in doing this with the existing valve area. Lots of people are selling "big valve" mods but I've yet to see evidence that they flow substantially better than the OEM setup. If you are looking for big peak horsepower numbers look for a four-valve engine with valve area in the 32-34% of bore area range. If you want an engine with a BIG wide table top flat torque curve then the 5 valve Yamaha is IMO the best starting point.

If I were interested in doing a project like you suggested I would look to the 600 Rotax engine. The good flat track tuners can get HP numbers well within the range you are looking for and they can do it with a high degree of reliability. You can purchase an engine for a reasonable price. OEM and performance parts availablility is exceptional and general knowledge of the engine's quirks is excellent. There is a huge used market for these engines as well.
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2000
Messages
826
Likes
5
#10
Thanks, Rich. I had never considered the Rotax. I do not believe that they are capable of 80RWHP though.

Chris
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2001
Messages
61
Likes
0
#11
I dynoed my bike, stock standard. It is a 2002 KTM 520exc. Put out 47 RWHP. Changed the jetting, put a new end cap on the muffler and repacked it.
Now puts out 54 RWHP.
It was stated from one professional rider, can't remember who, that 55 RWHP is about optimol. Any more would be unusable.
I would of been happy with 47 RWHP, but the way it made power was crap. Now the tourque curve is as flat as a 12yo;)
 
Joined
Aug 22, 2000
Messages
527
Likes
0
#13
Any 426 can be made to produce 50 hp on the dyno - the dyno just has to be calibrated to show that number.

Dyno numbers are relative. VERY relative.

Rear wheel dyno numbers are even more relative.

And anyway - are you really looking for a good peak hp number, or would you like some torque with that?

Horsepower numbers are meaningless. The dyno is an excellent diagnostic tool in the right hands - period.
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2001
Messages
61
Likes
0
#14
Like I said, I now have a very flat TORQUE curve. I would rather less horsepawer and a flatter torque curve then the other way around.
The end amount of horsepower was just a bonus.

And I cannot use it all!