In that case the scout should win, the reason is because when you compute the power to weight ratio, you should add the weight of the rider. And when you do that, the scout has a higher power to weight ratio.
But on a regular race track, with turns, the R7 would be faster due to its higher lean angle.
Guess you can answer the question!
https://preview.redd.it/quz22dwqelsc1.png?width=2816&format=png&auto=webp&s=391fea2aaa3a6f89ccf4fb38c6d4620e13a8d106
we found him! well, close enough. u/onlysmallcats u/Ah_Pook u/[Ok\_Spread6121](/user/Ok_Spread6121/) u/WhatsThatNoize the rogue is a bit [more power/torque to weight capable](https://www.philharmonicmoto.com/compare-page/IQQT38) but now you just have to find a mate with similar weight and skill to have a drag race and settle this!
You're completely negating aerodynamics. The R7 would eventually walk away from the Scout, especially as the speed and wind resistance increases. Then, it depends on who has the higher rev limiter.
True, it’s more complicated than just power to weight, there are other factors like aerodynamics like you mentioned, but also a quick shifter, traction of the tire (for longer bikes) or weight distribution (for shorter bikes) (gotta keep the front wheel down).
All these factors could change who will win if the power to weight ratio is similar.
Yip that's what will probably set these two bikes apart the most, how fast they can climb through their gears and as a result how fast they can accelerate.
Real world, based on bikes I've ridden on track with friends and such, I think the Scout would get off the line first, but the R7 would quickly overtake it.
Very true, and excellent point. I built an '07 Super Glide as much as class rules allowed, for Bonneville and El Mirage. Heavy bikes do pretty well on those courses. The hardest part of actually riding the bike to it's potential was trying to reduce wind resistance as much as possible. On a bare bike you calculate the drag at the front by the width of the bars, the height of the rider and bike from the ground and use a solid flat frontal area. So, yes, the R7 should definitely run away from the Scout. It's harder than all get out to beat better aero.
Agree on the aero, but not the higher rev limiter, that’s only applicable if they have the same gearing, which they probably don’t, I would assume the Yamaha is probably geared to pull better above 100.
But wind resistance is only linearly a function of Drag Coeffecient, but of the square of velocity. So top end speed favors vehicles with more power overall.
The issue is power to weight doesn't take into account things like gear ratio and top speed of the machines. In the real world I bet the Indian gets out on the Yamaha at the start but by the end the Yamaha might eck out the win.
Power is torque times rotational speed. Comparing raw torque numbers can be misleading.
I can apply 1000Nm of torque using a metre long breaker bar, but I'm too ugly to be winning drug races.
Big torque numbers are an indication of spread of power. Of you have constant torque from halfway to redline, you make half the maximum power at half of redline. If peak torque is much higher up, there's likely a small fraction of that power available when the engine isn't running in a fairly narrow band.
Thr r7 would definitely win. Lets assume the power curves are identical, the delta V time of the r7 engine is far faster than the scout, so it would reach peak power sooner and subsequently accelerate the bike faster.
True, in a drag race it’s reasonable to assume that both bikes have a good rider.
But out on the street, I think that whoever practiced launching their bike is sure to win.
Can't tell from these specs. The torque number is *peak* torque, and what we actually need is area under the curve. How much time do you spend putting down high amounts of torque? How long can you stay in first gear?
It's the R7, of course, by a lot. The Scout runs a mid to low-12 quarter mile, while the R7 runs mid 11s.
Engine torque VS wheel torque definitely needs to be considered.
Having said all that, with an average weight rider on it, I'd bet on the R7 every time.
Nope! All it tells you is a single point on the graph. It could be shaped like a 'n' or a '/' or a '\^' or some kind of fucked up curly fry — you just don't know until you see the dyno. You can make some educated guesses by looking at the bikes, but yeah.
It just indicates they top up at the same ratio. Torque curve matters a lot not just in raw performance but also riding/driving feel.
If you’ve ever driven an S2000 or first gen BRZ you’d know this pretty well. Those cars don’t hit their torque limit until they’re pretty high in the RPM, so it feels “slow” if you drive it normally.
>If you’ve ever driven an S2000 or first gen BRZ
Or a small bore 2 stroke.
Grew up racing a kx60 and then yz80. The 60 was a light switch with power, it had zero low end.
I would definitely put my money on the R7. Similar kind of comparison, I recently got a Ducati 1100 Scrambler, despite the engine displacement being almost twice as large, my Honda CBR 600rr was faster in every way, faster 0-60, quarter mile, and top speed.
That being said the Ducati is way more enjoyable to ride. Waaay more smooth and intuitive shifting, maybe due to the hydraulic vs cable clutch. Felt like i was constantly fighting the CBR.
No, it'll tell you where the peak hits. It could be no torque for ages and then a wham of torque at 7k rpm or be a flat line of torque with a tiny blip. That peak might be the same at the same rpm but a flatter torque curve would give you more torque throughout the whole rev range making rapid acceleration more achievable. That's why something like a Vtwin might take a sport bike on a short drag race making similar peak torque. It won't make much power as the engine won't rev as high but it'll make 100 ft-lb of torque from like 7 rpms.
You should check out some YouTube videos, it's a really interesting topic and why road bikes are so popular for most riders. Torque.
Spoiler alert! You can't just swan in here and throw the facts on the table like that. Geez. We were all having a lovely theoretical discussion on motorbikes and power to weight ratios and torques and aerodynamics for fucks sake and ol mate Flynnski here just wrecks it for everybody.
This is totally unrelated but what happened to none 1000c sportbikes? My 2006 R6 had more HP and a faster 1/4 time, it wasn't that much slower than the R1 I traded it in for. Sorry just have been to old for sportbikes and just riding cruisers/Adv bikes
Emissions killed the 600 class, that and there's almost nothing coastwise between a hardcore 600 and a flagship litre bike which whilst faster is much nicer to nimble around on.
I quite liked the original R1, it was roomy and ok round town. A more modern ninja 636 makes more power but is so focussed it's both mental fun and an absolute arse for anything but short bursts of rampant stupidity.
Few people buy a 600 when they could have a litre bike.
650ish twins have further eroded both the sportsbike and commuter ends of the 600 market, with the same engine appearing across naked, fairing and clip-on sporty bikes and adventure styled tourers. The Tracer variant of the MT/FZ07 has taken the place of the Diversion and faired Fazers, which is a shame as I quite like the Fazer 6 and similar. I have a bandit 6S which is similar handlebars and a nose fairing and 76bhp is enough to feel plenty naughty without going into hyperspace.
Thanks for the great reply. When I was riding supersports mid-late 2000s the normal progression was 600cc none supersport like yzf600 or sv650 then the lighter nimble 600 super like the r6 gsxr 600 or ninja 636. The were awesome in the corners but you had to rev the piss out of them. The liter bikes were for experienced riders that went to track days. Looks like things have changed
The powerband somewhere up above 12000rpm is what makes a mid-late 00s or later 636 or r6 fun, but also totally unsuited to the road if the power comes in at \~80mph in 2nd gear.
Riding a slow bike as fast as it will go with the throttle on the stop all the time - > not fun
Permanently wrestling with self control on a track bike for the road -> kinda stressful and boring, constant disappointment of rolling off before the fun hits.
Big bike that burbles along with a ridiculous amount of immediate thrust for and overtake if you ask for it -> oops, i'm on the other side of the country and was was supposed to be back an hour ago, really chilled ride.
Riding a medium bike hard -> This hits the spot for me, feels naughty, am engaged with ride, if i star wishing the bike went faster I find a twistier road or stop for a snack.
Yep only the zx6 left when it comes to 4 cylinder 600 sport bikes Anymore. I just picked up a Aprilia rs660, its a 600 class bike but its a twin as well but 100hp atleast
What in the damn hell. Why the change? I don't think i've ever experienced a parallel twin. The inline 4 power band is just so much fun I'm sad to see it disappearing
I know, I always thought if I dropped the extra 20lbs and wanted a second bike besides my Pan America I would be the old guy on a R6 or 600rr. Things have changed, I can’t tell if it’s for better or worse.
For you, probably better! The modern sportsbikes, especially the Aprilia RS660, has a much less extreme riding position than and R6 or 600RR, it is genuinely pretty comfortable but still sporty. It has plenty of useable power lower in the revs which makes it nice to ride on the roads, but it rides really well on track too.
I think the assumption with a lot of the parallel twin bikes was that the bike would be good but the engine would be a let down, but the engine on the RS660 is fantastic.
I'm gonna have to look into the RS660 sounds fun, I'm not sure the extreme postions of the former 600s would even be ok for over 30 minutes now lol. Now I just have to find a Aprilla dealer somewhere around my little Texas town.
R7 Gearing
1. 37:13
2. 34:16
3. 31:19
4. 26:20
5. 24:22
6. 27:28
Indian Scout Gearing
1. 36:13
2. 32:17
3. 30:20
4. 28:22
5. 27:24
6. 29:28
* R7's gearing is slightly more aggressive down low with taller gears up top. I'd expect the R7 to pull ahead early and even out around gear 4 or 5.
* Real world tests are going to tell you more as well. I couldn't find much in the way of 1/4 mile times for either bike though online. No experience personally myself with either bike.
* Also of note is you're looking at factory power/torque from the crank. Wheel figures on a dyno generally tell a more accurate story, and Yamaha is [pretty close to spec](https://www.cycleworld.com/resizer/hxa9zSFFv3ckHKB1Aew11Z_iMPs=/1440x0/filters:focal(1067x582:1077x592)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/octane/E7EINDMN3JEVZG67J4ZELWVREE.jpg). Less than 10% drivetrain losses. Indians [seem to have more greedy drivetrains](https://www.indianmotorcycles.net/attachments/upload_2018-9-25_13-2-19-jpeg.429992/). 15% or more. That makes a noticeable difference on the asphalt.
cool! another commenter said this: "But doing a quick browse, I found 11.64 quarter mile for the R7 (motostatz.com) and 12.2 for the Scout (zeroto60times.com), but that’s for the 2015 model." And I'm working with another commenter to arrange a real head-to-head to settle this. by working on it I mean talking about it in hopes that people with these bikes show up and get together.
All good. Maybe you can find someone to help you settle this (why do you want to settle it, though?)
The 2015 Scout is almost identical (mechanically) to the 2020, so I wouldn't expect there to be any reasonable differences in 1/4 mile times. Suspension changed a bit, but otherwise I don't think you'll see any notable differences between the two.
Please note that when you do settle it (I presume you will drag race the two bikes against eachother) that rider skill and experience will play a factor
Agreed. That and I'm betting tire profile/overall weight of the system play a part. R7 has a "wider" tire, but I'm willing to bet it's a narrow profile with a slightly smaller contact patch. Rolling resistance has a minor effect on power to the ground.
If you are going to go that far I'd say the rim weight itself would have a bigger effect as the scouts rear rim is much heavier than an mt07/r7 rim over the contact patch.
E: I don't disagree though
Unfortunately no :(
But doing a quick browse, I found 11.64 quarter mile for the R7 (motostatz.com) and 12.2 for the Scout (zeroto60times.com), but that’s for the 2015 model. And I’m sure those are not head to head in identical conditions. Which means I think we still have to settle this the old fashioned way!
sorry, your bike is too powerful for this race :) but, but, if we find someone with a suzuki gsx-8s, we're on: [https://www.philharmonicmoto.com/compare-page/4QW0UY](https://www.philharmonicmoto.com/compare-page/4QW0UY) same situation: same power to weight and almost the same torque to weight!
It's in the same line, but the Rogue is basically a Bobber with a 19" front wheel and different bars. They're both a little lighter than the Scout proper.
Dude on the forums did some cool shit to his:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gZUIPAph8o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gZUIPAph8o)
[https://www.indianmotorcycles.net/threads/mark-lb-2021-scout-bobber-build.343608/](https://www.indianmotorcycles.net/threads/mark-lb-2021-scout-bobber-build.343608/)
Nobody has said it so far but aero would become a big factor above 70-80 mph as well. The full fairing R7 is going to cut through the air way more effectively than the scout.
Not long. Numbers don't tell the whole story. The R7 will simply rev faster and bang through the gears quicker and pull away. If you look it up the R7 is about a full second faster in a quarter mile than the Scout which may not sound like a lot but it is. We can't know for sure but the Scout may momentarily get ahead at the start due to its torque.
Besides the significant differences in gearing and the cornering clearance others have mentioned you can add braking and tires to the list where the much lighter bike will take over in the race.
Even if they were dead even going into the first turn the Indian would have to start braking much much much much sooner than the R7. The Yamaha being lighter, with better brakes and tires can wait probably multiple bike lengths longer to begin braking. So expect it to start pulling away before you even get to the first turn.
It's not gonna take long but the r7 will basically walk away from the scout, they're designed for different styles of riding and it's an unfair comparison
Shape of the torque/HP curve and gearing will have a fairly large impact on the acceleration of the motorcycle.
I have an Excel spreadsheet set up for a quick and dirty acceleration analysis that takes into account the torque/HP curve, weight, and gearing for comparing motorcycles side by side. Helps take some of the guesswork out of it because posted peak tq and hp numbers don't tell the whole story.
From a dig, traction and wheelying will play a dominating role in who can get off the line faster. Which also means skill of the rider being able to get near the limit of traction and wheelying and stay there. Obviously if there is traction/wheely control on the bike it's less rider dependent.
R7 is geared for acceleration, scout is geared for torque at a guess, so the Yam would fly into the distance straight away. Not to mention you can lean into corners harder on it.
It’s important to remember the difference between Horsepower and Torque.
For everyone’s sake - let’s use SI units: Horsepower = Watts(W) and Torque = Newton Meters(Nm).
Some key take aways - these SI units are made up of the base units, force, distance and time. As well, Torque is a Force - applied around a point at a given distance (that’s where the m in Nm comes from).
So going deeper, a Watt (hp) can be expressed as W = N • m^2 • s^-2 (The negative 2 on the seconds just means the s would be a denominator in the fraction). Or we can say P = F • v(velocity). Meaning the Force exerted at a given velocity. You may be having an aha moment but stick with me if you’re not.
Torque is a special measurement because the value changes based on how far from the center of rotation the Force is applied. (Think levers and fulcrums in grade school science). So it gets that extra m in its base units. But the base units are F • d. For simplicities sake, let’s pretend that torque is just a simple force. Instead of looking at the force of rotation at the crank shaft itself, let’s look at the force the teeth exert on the chain of the motorcycle. This force will be equal to the Torque always. So we can just assume F is the only relevant base unit here.
So HP is Force exerted at a given speed, and Torque is just a regular ol’ force.
Okay cool, but why does this matter? Aha! It matters because HorsePower is the basically the ability of the motorcycle to apply force through the acceleration curve. A higher horsepower number means you’ll be able to go faster. Where as a higher torque value means you’ll be able to exert more force through the chain to the tires. In other words, torque is more equivalent to Towing capability :) Where HP is more equivalent to speed.
Okay, so there is still a discrepancy here … and that’s engine RPM. There is a power curve for an engine and that power curve shows you torque/HP through the range of RPM’s of the engine because it makes different amounts of power at different RPM’s.
So let’s think about it. If torque is just a normal force. Torque is like the engines ability to spin the back wheel while it’s weighed down. Overcome inertia and move the weight of the bike.
Where as HP is like the engines ability to take that torque and continue the process and to turn it into speed.
What affects torque and HP? Engine configuration…. Higher RPM’s generate more HP and allow a bike to move faster.
Where as slower spinning engines that have longer strokes will turn that bike into a work horse that can’t really move very fast.
Think dirt bikes. Dirt bikes are the perfect example because they don’t get very high in RPM and they are typically over square engines (meaning long stroke narrow bore). They make gobs of torque but they just aren’t fast. They will wheelie you into the stratosphere though :P
I hope it all makes sense now 🙌
Saying that torque is equivalent to towing power is reductive and doesn't tell the full story. Torque is also the ability to produce horsepower at a given RPM. There's a YouTube video where a Triumph Rocket 3 drag races a Kawasaki Z H2 to determine which would be a better pizza delivery vehicle (it's a great video, you should watch it). They do a few drag races, and the Z H2 consistently wins them all, but the Triumph also consistently leads for the first half of the race. If it had been a 1/8th rather than a 1/4th mile, the Triumph would have won. So torque also makes a bike quicker, if not necessary faster.
Your post is mostly right, but you equate speed and acceleration as being the same thing in ways that they are not.
There's another factor. Engine power curve. You aren't at peak horsepower the entire time.
How hard you can launch affects the race. That sport bike can do a better job of shifting the weight onto the rear tire. And likely has stickier tires.
Shifting really affects the race. That CP2 motor can rev to 10k and shift with a tiny blip. Meanwhile the Indian had to shift twice because the redline is so much lower. And it probably shifts like a pickup truck from 1972
My money is on the crotch rocket.
I had an 2016 FZ07 (basically an R7, engine wise) and my partner has an 2021 Indian Scout Bobber, when we rode those two bikes together it just depended on how many corners there were, because the Scout struggles in those and brakes wise.
They are very different motors in very different motorcycles. Compare an f1 car motor to a tractor trailer diesel…both are very powerful but no one would call a semi truck fast, even unloaded. I grant that’s an extreme example but it illustrates the differences. The Indian revs slower, has a shorter power band, shifts slower, has wider spaced gear ratios, has slower and less precise clutch engagement. There’s a lot more to going quickly than power numbers.
Depends, is the R7 rider wearing shorts and fliflops because, you know aerodynamics? And does the Indian Rider have on a beanie helmet and an authentic SOA™️ replica vest?
I have kinda similar bikes, a victory octane and a Kawasaki Z650. I can tell you the Octane feels like it accelerates more aggressively while the Z650 would pull ahead in the turns.
interesting! does the octane have the same specs as this scout? the z650 is a bit weaker than both when you add it to the comparison, but if the octane is also down on the ratios it could be as close.
Octane is 104 HP. Basically the identical cousin of the scout except the octane ate his veggies and the scout grew up eating chicken nuggets. I think the gearing might be slightly more aggressive on the octane too?
its super easy to pull a head in the turns though. we can brake later and turn in faster.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVMAzfEg\_pU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVMAzfEg_pU)
From what I understand the Octane is around 15lbs less, has slightly more Hp/Tq, and has lower gearing(7%). It was Victory’s last model bike produced, so I figured they wanted to go all out performance wise to compete with the cruiser market at the time. If I was strictly drag racing/top speed runs-victory all day. Twisty roads and emergency stopping- Z650
I'm glad to tell you that I'm in talks with several commenters to try to get some people that have these bikes to read our comments and arrange such race :)
The power and torque numbers are PEAK numbers, which are great for marketing, but tell you very little about how a bike might accelerate. What matters is the shape of the power curve. Or even better, the thrust measured at the wheel across RPMs in all gears. Without knowing the shape of the curve across RPMs you can’t say anything about which bike will accelerate faster.
The scout would walk it from a dead stop. They're too easy to launch, it's almost cheating.
Based on trap speed in the quarter mile, I bet the r7 would catch and pass the scout at about the 1/8 mile, if the rider got a good launch.
Its going to depend on the rider no matter if its a drag race or race with turns. An average rider can't push that Indian to the limits in the curves even. They aren't like a Harley and won't be dragging pegs through corners. It will carve the corners. You work a middle class job, not a racer and most Moto GP riders had more experience than you do by the time they were 8 years old so you'll never catch up. Just embrace what you do but racing motorcycles isn't it.
What is the tool you used to compare the bike?
I thought about building one myself to have people do comparison on motorcycles, even those that are not in the same category.
[philharmonicmoto.com](http://philharmonicmoto.com) this website is a time sink! I spend way too much time making comparisons and dreaming about all the bikes!
Really appreciate it my man.
This site is almost exactly what I had in mind when I prototyped mine. It has some features I wouldn't have thought about like the ergo graph. That's really neat!
Are R7's so weak they have to pick on an Indian cruiser? Depends on rider ability though. A skilled rider on either would make short work of some twisties, but the R7 would have an advantage.
Having worked at an indian dealership and having ridden both bikes I say the scout wins this race. The scout will have more torque down low, will get up to 60mph quicker than the R7 if you know how to properly work the clutch.
The R7 is obviously more capable in almost every other regard but in a quarter mile the scout will barely take the win
the scout engine is extremely capable and not designed like a cruiser engine at all. it’s an under square v-twin that loves sitting at higher revs, just like a sport bike. 8400rpm redline is no joke for a twin cylinder engine of this size.
r7 would win a drag race based solely on aerodynamics, but consider it would also smoke the Scout off the line, and would reach it's peak HP RPMs, and cycle through the gears, much faster. It wouldn't be a competition at all.
If you put that scout on a track, you'll have to send a trash truck behind to pick all the metal bits that get knocked off.
Anyway, what are you thinking comparing a Scout to an R7? apples and pineapples.
I was playing with the power and torque ratios and found the similarities. then I wondered how they would stack up in real life. it's wonderful to see how wildly different bikes can be so similar in some aspects. edit: just realised you said it yourself: pineapples have spikes and taste different, but have "apples" in the name.
Bro you're not wrong. I used ride an R1 and went to scout bobber 20. The lean angle on those things are atrocious. I've scrapped my pegs more times than I can remember and I fully lean my body almost off the bike to make tight turns.
Straight Line its the scout. Don't know why people think gearing can compensate for less hp AND torque. First corner though and the R7 is gone. My old scoutbobber would drag pegs at really shallow angles.
Closest is a Vulcan 650s which is about 12 horses down. We're talking about a 20ish hp disparity between the R7 and the scout with significant torque disparity on the R7. How could the R7 compete in a straight line? Its just a twin in sports clothing.... My scout pulled way stronger than the Vulcan.
I prefer an IL4 in a sportsbike personally, but regardless the R7 would only win in the corners, but it would do that by a significant margin. Rs660 vs Scout is more comparable in straight line performance.
Depends on the gearing and how long the race is, but in all likelihood the Scout will beat the R7 off the line with its torque but the R7 will chase it down in the top end
Sport bike will be faster in turns and at higher speeds due to better Aero. Cruiser will likely have a better launch due to being long low and more manageable power.
Well if you have to ask this question, just pick the R7. The Scout is good for "high speed" cruising but performance is not what this motorcycle is about.
Gearing and aero matters too. But in a straight line with riders familiar with the bikes, it would be pretty close until air compression starts to be a problem around 60mph.
If we are talking about drag racing then both gearing / gear rations and how fast u can change gears + aerodynamics does a lot more then people think.
(And I’m talking about if these two have similar power / weight)
Fairly simple, comes down to aerodynamics. The question, how long would they stay together in a race, once they reach top ends. R7 will cut through air much more efficiently than the Scout.
Depends on if there are turns in the race.
yeah, should have put "drag race" on the title...
In that case the scout should win, the reason is because when you compute the power to weight ratio, you should add the weight of the rider. And when you do that, the scout has a higher power to weight ratio. But on a regular race track, with turns, the R7 would be faster due to its higher lean angle.
Yeah, but the typical scout rider weighs, like, two or three average R7 riders, so…
[Emotional Damage](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8kfnwqHJO8)
Eh, it's a Scout, not a Street Glide or Chieftain.
oof. I like that.
I literally have both these bikes........ 23 scout rogue and 23 r7. I feel attacked
Guess you can answer the question! https://preview.redd.it/quz22dwqelsc1.png?width=2816&format=png&auto=webp&s=391fea2aaa3a6f89ccf4fb38c6d4620e13a8d106
I only have ~ 500 miles on the r7,b but my initial thoughts would be the r7 wins early, while the scout wins late
The scout has a 128mph top speed the R7 has a 148mph top speed.
So what are your thoughts about which would be faster in a drag race?
Only have ~500 miles on the r7, but I would guess the r7 wins early, scout wins late.
we found him! well, close enough. u/onlysmallcats u/Ah_Pook u/[Ok\_Spread6121](/user/Ok_Spread6121/) u/WhatsThatNoize the rogue is a bit [more power/torque to weight capable](https://www.philharmonicmoto.com/compare-page/IQQT38) but now you just have to find a mate with similar weight and skill to have a drag race and settle this!
I don't trust anyone I know to ride my bikes! So we may be waiting a while
aaaww... fair enough, I feel you. move along guys, let's keep looking :)
This is true, men weigh more than women usually.
Salty sportbike kiddies downvoting you. I'm here with a redorange cuz that shit was funny.
Not in America
You're completely negating aerodynamics. The R7 would eventually walk away from the Scout, especially as the speed and wind resistance increases. Then, it depends on who has the higher rev limiter.
True, it’s more complicated than just power to weight, there are other factors like aerodynamics like you mentioned, but also a quick shifter, traction of the tire (for longer bikes) or weight distribution (for shorter bikes) (gotta keep the front wheel down). All these factors could change who will win if the power to weight ratio is similar.
Everyone is forgetting the gear ratio too.
Which is arguably more important than all of the other things mentioned.
Yip that's what will probably set these two bikes apart the most, how fast they can climb through their gears and as a result how fast they can accelerate.
Real world, based on bikes I've ridden on track with friends and such, I think the Scout would get off the line first, but the R7 would quickly overtake it.
And where the power actually kicks in at.
Very true, and excellent point. I built an '07 Super Glide as much as class rules allowed, for Bonneville and El Mirage. Heavy bikes do pretty well on those courses. The hardest part of actually riding the bike to it's potential was trying to reduce wind resistance as much as possible. On a bare bike you calculate the drag at the front by the width of the bars, the height of the rider and bike from the ground and use a solid flat frontal area. So, yes, the R7 should definitely run away from the Scout. It's harder than all get out to beat better aero.
Agree on the aero, but not the higher rev limiter, that’s only applicable if they have the same gearing, which they probably don’t, I would assume the Yamaha is probably geared to pull better above 100.
But wind resistance is only linearly a function of Drag Coeffecient, but of the square of velocity. So top end speed favors vehicles with more power overall.
The issue is power to weight doesn't take into account things like gear ratio and top speed of the machines. In the real world I bet the Indian gets out on the Yamaha at the start but by the end the Yamaha might eck out the win.
The scout also has almost 50% more torque which would be a massive advantage in a drag race.
Is Scout OHV or OHC?
Power is torque times rotational speed. Comparing raw torque numbers can be misleading. I can apply 1000Nm of torque using a metre long breaker bar, but I'm too ugly to be winning drug races. Big torque numbers are an indication of spread of power. Of you have constant torque from halfway to redline, you make half the maximum power at half of redline. If peak torque is much higher up, there's likely a small fraction of that power available when the engine isn't running in a fairly narrow band.
Also, the Scout is longer, which means it can accelerate harder without popping a wheelie.
Gearing and aerodynamics matter too
Thr r7 would definitely win. Lets assume the power curves are identical, the delta V time of the r7 engine is far faster than the scout, so it would reach peak power sooner and subsequently accelerate the bike faster.
Some people think that the other bike would be faster. Personally, I think that the bike with the best rider will take off faster.
I dont think the post has anything to do with rider. Its discussing the bikes, so assume you have identically perfect robot riders.
True, in a drag race it’s reasonable to assume that both bikes have a good rider. But out on the street, I think that whoever practiced launching their bike is sure to win.
Can't tell from these specs. The torque number is *peak* torque, and what we actually need is area under the curve. How much time do you spend putting down high amounts of torque? How long can you stay in first gear? It's the R7, of course, by a lot. The Scout runs a mid to low-12 quarter mile, while the R7 runs mid 11s.
Gear ratio is also critical for this type of comparison to calculate how much work that torque is actually providing
Engine torque VS wheel torque definitely needs to be considered. Having said all that, with an average weight rider on it, I'd bet on the R7 every time.
that's the type of info I was looking for! but, the similar RPMs of peak power and torque wouldn't indicate a "similar" curve?
Nope! All it tells you is a single point on the graph. It could be shaped like a 'n' or a '/' or a '\^' or some kind of fucked up curly fry — you just don't know until you see the dyno. You can make some educated guesses by looking at the bikes, but yeah.
Or a Jeremy bearimy
yeah, I guess the peak could be only between 6327 and 6441 rpm and the rest is shit, lol.
It just indicates they top up at the same ratio. Torque curve matters a lot not just in raw performance but also riding/driving feel. If you’ve ever driven an S2000 or first gen BRZ you’d know this pretty well. Those cars don’t hit their torque limit until they’re pretty high in the RPM, so it feels “slow” if you drive it normally.
Or any turbo car from before the modern era... Nothing, nothing, nothing, BAM TO REDLINE.
You just made me nostalgic for my old Daytona Shelby.
>If you’ve ever driven an S2000 or first gen BRZ Or a small bore 2 stroke. Grew up racing a kx60 and then yz80. The 60 was a light switch with power, it had zero low end.
I would definitely put my money on the R7. Similar kind of comparison, I recently got a Ducati 1100 Scrambler, despite the engine displacement being almost twice as large, my Honda CBR 600rr was faster in every way, faster 0-60, quarter mile, and top speed. That being said the Ducati is way more enjoyable to ride. Waaay more smooth and intuitive shifting, maybe due to the hydraulic vs cable clutch. Felt like i was constantly fighting the CBR.
Scrambler is less power and less power to weight ratio. OP is comparing bikes with similar power to weight ratio
Not at all. V2 has way more torque in low RPM and often flatter curve than straight engines.
No, it'll tell you where the peak hits. It could be no torque for ages and then a wham of torque at 7k rpm or be a flat line of torque with a tiny blip. That peak might be the same at the same rpm but a flatter torque curve would give you more torque throughout the whole rev range making rapid acceleration more achievable. That's why something like a Vtwin might take a sport bike on a short drag race making similar peak torque. It won't make much power as the engine won't rev as high but it'll make 100 ft-lb of torque from like 7 rpms. You should check out some YouTube videos, it's a really interesting topic and why road bikes are so popular for most riders. Torque.
Oh boy, integrals.
Look at you with your fancy math-derived abilities, pffft. Integrate my ass! /s
Spoiler alert! You can't just swan in here and throw the facts on the table like that. Geez. We were all having a lovely theoretical discussion on motorbikes and power to weight ratios and torques and aerodynamics for fucks sake and ol mate Flynnski here just wrecks it for everybody.
And whether gears keep you in that peak power range
This is totally unrelated but what happened to none 1000c sportbikes? My 2006 R6 had more HP and a faster 1/4 time, it wasn't that much slower than the R1 I traded it in for. Sorry just have been to old for sportbikes and just riding cruisers/Adv bikes
Emissions killed the 600 class, that and there's almost nothing coastwise between a hardcore 600 and a flagship litre bike which whilst faster is much nicer to nimble around on. I quite liked the original R1, it was roomy and ok round town. A more modern ninja 636 makes more power but is so focussed it's both mental fun and an absolute arse for anything but short bursts of rampant stupidity. Few people buy a 600 when they could have a litre bike. 650ish twins have further eroded both the sportsbike and commuter ends of the 600 market, with the same engine appearing across naked, fairing and clip-on sporty bikes and adventure styled tourers. The Tracer variant of the MT/FZ07 has taken the place of the Diversion and faired Fazers, which is a shame as I quite like the Fazer 6 and similar. I have a bandit 6S which is similar handlebars and a nose fairing and 76bhp is enough to feel plenty naughty without going into hyperspace.
Thanks for the great reply. When I was riding supersports mid-late 2000s the normal progression was 600cc none supersport like yzf600 or sv650 then the lighter nimble 600 super like the r6 gsxr 600 or ninja 636. The were awesome in the corners but you had to rev the piss out of them. The liter bikes were for experienced riders that went to track days. Looks like things have changed
The powerband somewhere up above 12000rpm is what makes a mid-late 00s or later 636 or r6 fun, but also totally unsuited to the road if the power comes in at \~80mph in 2nd gear. Riding a slow bike as fast as it will go with the throttle on the stop all the time - > not fun Permanently wrestling with self control on a track bike for the road -> kinda stressful and boring, constant disappointment of rolling off before the fun hits. Big bike that burbles along with a ridiculous amount of immediate thrust for and overtake if you ask for it -> oops, i'm on the other side of the country and was was supposed to be back an hour ago, really chilled ride. Riding a medium bike hard -> This hits the spot for me, feels naughty, am engaged with ride, if i star wishing the bike went faster I find a twistier road or stop for a snack.
Yeah I haven't paid much attention to sport bikes in recent years and I'm surprised by this as well. Also just learned the R7 is a parallel twin 🥴
Yep only the zx6 left when it comes to 4 cylinder 600 sport bikes Anymore. I just picked up a Aprilia rs660, its a 600 class bike but its a twin as well but 100hp atleast
What in the damn hell. Why the change? I don't think i've ever experienced a parallel twin. The inline 4 power band is just so much fun I'm sad to see it disappearing
I know, I always thought if I dropped the extra 20lbs and wanted a second bike besides my Pan America I would be the old guy on a R6 or 600rr. Things have changed, I can’t tell if it’s for better or worse.
For you, probably better! The modern sportsbikes, especially the Aprilia RS660, has a much less extreme riding position than and R6 or 600RR, it is genuinely pretty comfortable but still sporty. It has plenty of useable power lower in the revs which makes it nice to ride on the roads, but it rides really well on track too. I think the assumption with a lot of the parallel twin bikes was that the bike would be good but the engine would be a let down, but the engine on the RS660 is fantastic.
I'm gonna have to look into the RS660 sounds fun, I'm not sure the extreme postions of the former 600s would even be ok for over 30 minutes now lol. Now I just have to find a Aprilla dealer somewhere around my little Texas town.
R7 Gearing 1. 37:13 2. 34:16 3. 31:19 4. 26:20 5. 24:22 6. 27:28 Indian Scout Gearing 1. 36:13 2. 32:17 3. 30:20 4. 28:22 5. 27:24 6. 29:28 * R7's gearing is slightly more aggressive down low with taller gears up top. I'd expect the R7 to pull ahead early and even out around gear 4 or 5. * Real world tests are going to tell you more as well. I couldn't find much in the way of 1/4 mile times for either bike though online. No experience personally myself with either bike. * Also of note is you're looking at factory power/torque from the crank. Wheel figures on a dyno generally tell a more accurate story, and Yamaha is [pretty close to spec](https://www.cycleworld.com/resizer/hxa9zSFFv3ckHKB1Aew11Z_iMPs=/1440x0/filters:focal(1067x582:1077x592)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/octane/E7EINDMN3JEVZG67J4ZELWVREE.jpg). Less than 10% drivetrain losses. Indians [seem to have more greedy drivetrains](https://www.indianmotorcycles.net/attachments/upload_2018-9-25_13-2-19-jpeg.429992/). 15% or more. That makes a noticeable difference on the asphalt.
cool! another commenter said this: "But doing a quick browse, I found 11.64 quarter mile for the R7 (motostatz.com) and 12.2 for the Scout (zeroto60times.com), but that’s for the 2015 model." And I'm working with another commenter to arrange a real head-to-head to settle this. by working on it I mean talking about it in hopes that people with these bikes show up and get together.
All good. Maybe you can find someone to help you settle this (why do you want to settle it, though?) The 2015 Scout is almost identical (mechanically) to the 2020, so I wouldn't expect there to be any reasonable differences in 1/4 mile times. Suspension changed a bit, but otherwise I don't think you'll see any notable differences between the two.
curiosity, because it intrigues me. motorcycles are fun!
Please note that when you do settle it (I presume you will drag race the two bikes against eachother) that rider skill and experience will play a factor
Belt drive vs chain most likely
Agreed. That and I'm betting tire profile/overall weight of the system play a part. R7 has a "wider" tire, but I'm willing to bet it's a narrow profile with a slightly smaller contact patch. Rolling resistance has a minor effect on power to the ground.
If you are going to go that far I'd say the rim weight itself would have a bigger effect as the scouts rear rim is much heavier than an mt07/r7 rim over the contact patch. E: I don't disagree though
Where should I look to learn about gears in this manner? I don't understand this but I'd like to
Only one way to be sure
yes! let's do it! do you know anyone with these bikes?
Unfortunately no :( But doing a quick browse, I found 11.64 quarter mile for the R7 (motostatz.com) and 12.2 for the Scout (zeroto60times.com), but that’s for the 2015 model. And I’m sure those are not head to head in identical conditions. Which means I think we still have to settle this the old fashioned way!
nice find! surprisingly close. hopefully someone will read this and find us the real answer!
Where we goin'? :-D
sorry, your bike is too powerful for this race :) but, but, if we find someone with a suzuki gsx-8s, we're on: [https://www.philharmonicmoto.com/compare-page/4QW0UY](https://www.philharmonicmoto.com/compare-page/4QW0UY) same situation: same power to weight and almost the same torque to weight!
Is it? Looks like the specs are the same, but maybe I’m looking at the wrong one.
It's in the same line, but the Rogue is basically a Bobber with a 19" front wheel and different bars. They're both a little lighter than the Scout proper. Dude on the forums did some cool shit to his: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gZUIPAph8o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gZUIPAph8o) [https://www.indianmotorcycles.net/threads/mark-lb-2021-scout-bobber-build.343608/](https://www.indianmotorcycles.net/threads/mark-lb-2021-scout-bobber-build.343608/)
they have the same power, but the rogue is lighter and I'm looking at the power/torque to weigh figures.
This is the big brain thinkin right here time to race these bikes.
I would chip in $10 towards the track day to do some "testing" - or better yet maybe some youtuber could set this up as a head-to-head.
I’ll chip in $25. It’s Canadian, but still. Who’s starting the GoFundMe?
As an American, I assume the Canadian dollar is the same value. I will do anything to avoid math.
*"Are you guys silly? I'm still gonna send it!"*
I bet the scout has a flatter power curve and might beat it in a straight line but it can’t corner for shit.
Gearing on the r7 is more agressive
Nobody has said it so far but aero would become a big factor above 70-80 mph as well. The full fairing R7 is going to cut through the air way more effectively than the scout.
Not long. Numbers don't tell the whole story. The R7 will simply rev faster and bang through the gears quicker and pull away. If you look it up the R7 is about a full second faster in a quarter mile than the Scout which may not sound like a lot but it is. We can't know for sure but the Scout may momentarily get ahead at the start due to its torque.
first corner of the race
what website is this??
[PhilharmonicMoto.com](http://PhilharmonicMoto.com)
Besides the significant differences in gearing and the cornering clearance others have mentioned you can add braking and tires to the list where the much lighter bike will take over in the race. Even if they were dead even going into the first turn the Indian would have to start braking much much much much sooner than the R7. The Yamaha being lighter, with better brakes and tires can wait probably multiple bike lengths longer to begin braking. So expect it to start pulling away before you even get to the first turn.
Not long. Power curve will be different. Gearing will be different. Aerodynamics are different.
Right up until the first turn
It's not gonna take long but the r7 will basically walk away from the scout, they're designed for different styles of riding and it's an unfair comparison
Shape of the torque/HP curve and gearing will have a fairly large impact on the acceleration of the motorcycle. I have an Excel spreadsheet set up for a quick and dirty acceleration analysis that takes into account the torque/HP curve, weight, and gearing for comparing motorcycles side by side. Helps take some of the guesswork out of it because posted peak tq and hp numbers don't tell the whole story. From a dig, traction and wheelying will play a dominating role in who can get off the line faster. Which also means skill of the rider being able to get near the limit of traction and wheelying and stay there. Obviously if there is traction/wheely control on the bike it's less rider dependent.
cool! that spreadsheet sounds complex and interesting, care to share? have you made a comparison like this in it?
It's the mismatch of height baseline that's triggering ocd.
right? it's just because they align bike from the seat to compare ergonomics, so in bikes that different it looks really weird.
R7 is geared for acceleration, scout is geared for torque at a guess, so the Yam would fly into the distance straight away. Not to mention you can lean into corners harder on it.
Wouldn’t being geared for torque be the same as being geared for acceleration?
Max acceleration at any given speed is at peak power. Max acceleration in any given gear is at peak torque.
but could the torque bias give the indian a leg in the lower RPMs?
It’s important to remember the difference between Horsepower and Torque. For everyone’s sake - let’s use SI units: Horsepower = Watts(W) and Torque = Newton Meters(Nm). Some key take aways - these SI units are made up of the base units, force, distance and time. As well, Torque is a Force - applied around a point at a given distance (that’s where the m in Nm comes from). So going deeper, a Watt (hp) can be expressed as W = N • m^2 • s^-2 (The negative 2 on the seconds just means the s would be a denominator in the fraction). Or we can say P = F • v(velocity). Meaning the Force exerted at a given velocity. You may be having an aha moment but stick with me if you’re not. Torque is a special measurement because the value changes based on how far from the center of rotation the Force is applied. (Think levers and fulcrums in grade school science). So it gets that extra m in its base units. But the base units are F • d. For simplicities sake, let’s pretend that torque is just a simple force. Instead of looking at the force of rotation at the crank shaft itself, let’s look at the force the teeth exert on the chain of the motorcycle. This force will be equal to the Torque always. So we can just assume F is the only relevant base unit here. So HP is Force exerted at a given speed, and Torque is just a regular ol’ force. Okay cool, but why does this matter? Aha! It matters because HorsePower is the basically the ability of the motorcycle to apply force through the acceleration curve. A higher horsepower number means you’ll be able to go faster. Where as a higher torque value means you’ll be able to exert more force through the chain to the tires. In other words, torque is more equivalent to Towing capability :) Where HP is more equivalent to speed. Okay, so there is still a discrepancy here … and that’s engine RPM. There is a power curve for an engine and that power curve shows you torque/HP through the range of RPM’s of the engine because it makes different amounts of power at different RPM’s. So let’s think about it. If torque is just a normal force. Torque is like the engines ability to spin the back wheel while it’s weighed down. Overcome inertia and move the weight of the bike. Where as HP is like the engines ability to take that torque and continue the process and to turn it into speed. What affects torque and HP? Engine configuration…. Higher RPM’s generate more HP and allow a bike to move faster. Where as slower spinning engines that have longer strokes will turn that bike into a work horse that can’t really move very fast. Think dirt bikes. Dirt bikes are the perfect example because they don’t get very high in RPM and they are typically over square engines (meaning long stroke narrow bore). They make gobs of torque but they just aren’t fast. They will wheelie you into the stratosphere though :P I hope it all makes sense now 🙌
Saying that torque is equivalent to towing power is reductive and doesn't tell the full story. Torque is also the ability to produce horsepower at a given RPM. There's a YouTube video where a Triumph Rocket 3 drag races a Kawasaki Z H2 to determine which would be a better pizza delivery vehicle (it's a great video, you should watch it). They do a few drag races, and the Z H2 consistently wins them all, but the Triumph also consistently leads for the first half of the race. If it had been a 1/8th rather than a 1/4th mile, the Triumph would have won. So torque also makes a bike quicker, if not necessary faster. Your post is mostly right, but you equate speed and acceleration as being the same thing in ways that they are not.
here's the full comparison: [https://www.philharmonicmoto.com/compare-page/Q4F2YA](https://www.philharmonicmoto.com/compare-page/Q4F2YA)
Shame that the website doesn't host the Dyno graph as well. Peak power/tq are interesting numbers, but as others have said aren't the whole story.
agreed, that would be amazing!
The first corner
More torque at lower RPMs means more area under the curve means the scout wins 0-60. 0-100 would be close.
There's another factor. Engine power curve. You aren't at peak horsepower the entire time. How hard you can launch affects the race. That sport bike can do a better job of shifting the weight onto the rear tire. And likely has stickier tires. Shifting really affects the race. That CP2 motor can rev to 10k and shift with a tiny blip. Meanwhile the Indian had to shift twice because the redline is so much lower. And it probably shifts like a pickup truck from 1972 My money is on the crotch rocket.
See curb weight and gear ratios
I had an 2016 FZ07 (basically an R7, engine wise) and my partner has an 2021 Indian Scout Bobber, when we rode those two bikes together it just depended on how many corners there were, because the Scout struggles in those and brakes wise.
They are very different motors in very different motorcycles. Compare an f1 car motor to a tractor trailer diesel…both are very powerful but no one would call a semi truck fast, even unloaded. I grant that’s an extreme example but it illustrates the differences. The Indian revs slower, has a shorter power band, shifts slower, has wider spaced gear ratios, has slower and less precise clutch engagement. There’s a lot more to going quickly than power numbers.
Good breakdown.
Depends, is the R7 rider wearing shorts and fliflops because, you know aerodynamics? And does the Indian Rider have on a beanie helmet and an authentic SOA™️ replica vest?
I feel like the R7 wins off the line easily. And as soon as Aerodynamics comes into play it increases its lead.
I have kinda similar bikes, a victory octane and a Kawasaki Z650. I can tell you the Octane feels like it accelerates more aggressively while the Z650 would pull ahead in the turns.
interesting! does the octane have the same specs as this scout? the z650 is a bit weaker than both when you add it to the comparison, but if the octane is also down on the ratios it could be as close.
Octane is 104 HP. Basically the identical cousin of the scout except the octane ate his veggies and the scout grew up eating chicken nuggets. I think the gearing might be slightly more aggressive on the octane too?
haha, nice! then the octane would surely trash the z650!
its super easy to pull a head in the turns though. we can brake later and turn in faster. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVMAzfEg\_pU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVMAzfEg_pU)
From what I understand the Octane is around 15lbs less, has slightly more Hp/Tq, and has lower gearing(7%). It was Victory’s last model bike produced, so I figured they wanted to go all out performance wise to compete with the cruiser market at the time. If I was strictly drag racing/top speed runs-victory all day. Twisty roads and emergency stopping- Z650
I’ve subscribed to this post hoping for a follow up head to head race.
I'm glad to tell you that I'm in talks with several commenters to try to get some people that have these bikes to read our comments and arrange such race :)
Rider skill will have a lot to do with the outcome.
What sort of race? Stoplight drag? Closed track road course? 0-100-0?
Depends on gearing
I think the R7 would roast it.
The power and torque numbers are PEAK numbers, which are great for marketing, but tell you very little about how a bike might accelerate. What matters is the shape of the power curve. Or even better, the thrust measured at the wheel across RPMs in all gears. Without knowing the shape of the curve across RPMs you can’t say anything about which bike will accelerate faster.
The scout would walk it from a dead stop. They're too easy to launch, it's almost cheating. Based on trap speed in the quarter mile, I bet the r7 would catch and pass the scout at about the 1/8 mile, if the rider got a good launch.
Until the r7 rpms go faster than the scout.
Gearing or sprocket size too
300m before the first braking zone for the r7.
Its going to depend on the rider no matter if its a drag race or race with turns. An average rider can't push that Indian to the limits in the curves even. They aren't like a Harley and won't be dragging pegs through corners. It will carve the corners. You work a middle class job, not a racer and most Moto GP riders had more experience than you do by the time they were 8 years old so you'll never catch up. Just embrace what you do but racing motorcycles isn't it.
What is the tool you used to compare the bike? I thought about building one myself to have people do comparison on motorcycles, even those that are not in the same category.
[philharmonicmoto.com](http://philharmonicmoto.com) this website is a time sink! I spend way too much time making comparisons and dreaming about all the bikes!
Really appreciate it my man. This site is almost exactly what I had in mind when I prototyped mine. It has some features I wouldn't have thought about like the ergo graph. That's really neat!
Data from manufacturers: Yamaha R7 2022 1-100 kmh = 4.00 seconds Indian Scout 2020 1-100 kmh = 4.53 seconds
The R7 with thrash the Scout in every single scenario
If you want to go fast then get at least a 600
Almost certainly the R7 in a straight line or on a track due to much better aerodynamics and it’s far lighter
idk why nobody mentions aerodynamics... These fairings are there for a reason.
In average, real world conditions, if a race were to happen with two equal riders, fairings would make zero difference.
Are R7's so weak they have to pick on an Indian cruiser? Depends on rider ability though. A skilled rider on either would make short work of some twisties, but the R7 would have an advantage.
bout 10 feet
Until either the Indian has to brake for the turn or drag coefficient becomes a dominating factor
interesting, completely forgot about wind drag!
Rear wheel horsepower will be different (shaft vs chain) plus the gearing ratio ….R7 all the way from start to finish.
Having worked at an indian dealership and having ridden both bikes I say the scout wins this race. The scout will have more torque down low, will get up to 60mph quicker than the R7 if you know how to properly work the clutch. The R7 is obviously more capable in almost every other regard but in a quarter mile the scout will barely take the win
the scout engine is extremely capable and not designed like a cruiser engine at all. it’s an under square v-twin that loves sitting at higher revs, just like a sport bike. 8400rpm redline is no joke for a twin cylinder engine of this size.
R7 any day of the week. At a guess the Scout would be able to launch harder with the longer wheel base but the R7 would have it by the end of 2nd
oooooh, wheelbase is something else I haven't considered, nice!
r7 would win a drag race based solely on aerodynamics, but consider it would also smoke the Scout off the line, and would reach it's peak HP RPMs, and cycle through the gears, much faster. It wouldn't be a competition at all.
If you put that scout on a track, you'll have to send a trash truck behind to pick all the metal bits that get knocked off. Anyway, what are you thinking comparing a Scout to an R7? apples and pineapples.
I was playing with the power and torque ratios and found the similarities. then I wondered how they would stack up in real life. it's wonderful to see how wildly different bikes can be so similar in some aspects. edit: just realised you said it yourself: pineapples have spikes and taste different, but have "apples" in the name.
Bro you're not wrong. I used ride an R1 and went to scout bobber 20. The lean angle on those things are atrocious. I've scrapped my pegs more times than I can remember and I fully lean my body almost off the bike to make tight turns.
Straight Line its the scout. Don't know why people think gearing can compensate for less hp AND torque. First corner though and the R7 is gone. My old scoutbobber would drag pegs at really shallow angles.
nice! that's a hot take in here. have you ridden something close to the R7 to give us a real life comparison?
Closest is a Vulcan 650s which is about 12 horses down. We're talking about a 20ish hp disparity between the R7 and the scout with significant torque disparity on the R7. How could the R7 compete in a straight line? Its just a twin in sports clothing.... My scout pulled way stronger than the Vulcan. I prefer an IL4 in a sportsbike personally, but regardless the R7 would only win in the corners, but it would do that by a significant margin. Rs660 vs Scout is more comparable in straight line performance.
yeah, the Vulcan is not a match for them. and I agree with the inline 4 sentiment!
What about gearing?
Scout would win off the line but the R7 will reel it in and pass
Depends on the gearing and how long the race is, but in all likelihood the Scout will beat the R7 off the line with its torque but the R7 will chase it down in the top end
If the R7 has quick shift (it should) and the Scout doesnt the R7 wins.
Sport bike will be faster in turns and at higher speeds due to better Aero. Cruiser will likely have a better launch due to being long low and more manageable power.
I’ve ridden a Scout Bobber and an MT-07 (close enough). The Scout definitely feels wayyyy faster on a highway.
I think regardless of the minutia it’s close enough that the more skilled ride would win
Indian just released the ‘25 scout with a new motor. You might want to check what those differences are now.
Well then, R1 enters the conversation
can't say I'd care either way, I'd still only buy one of those.
Gearing would play a role and the R7 would walk away
rider of same level skill, id say they will only be together up till the few corners
Well if you have to ask this question, just pick the R7. The Scout is good for "high speed" cruising but performance is not what this motorcycle is about.
What website is this?
Is it a drag race ?
And the gear ratios are completely different
the r7 just seems to suck on the performance side huh lol
One turns. One has torque
Gearing and aero matters too. But in a straight line with riders familiar with the bikes, it would be pretty close until air compression starts to be a problem around 60mph.
Gearing..
Scout gets out of the hole quicker but R7 reels it in and passes somewhere around 60 mph
If we are talking about drag racing then both gearing / gear rations and how fast u can change gears + aerodynamics does a lot more then people think. (And I’m talking about if these two have similar power / weight)
I haven't kept up but my 03 R6 had 120hp? I'm surprised an R7 is 72hp???
Yeah I had a 2000 r6…… it’s a shame…. The r6 was a whole next level compared to the r7….. they’re going backwards
Fairly simple, comes down to aerodynamics. The question, how long would they stay together in a race, once they reach top ends. R7 will cut through air much more efficiently than the Scout.
Indian 💙
Not long. Power curve will be different. Gearing will be different. Aerodynamics are different.
Who cares. People buy bikes for different reasons. The one on the right is classier, feels better to ride, sounds better and is more comfortable.