Raptor 660 vs. Raptor 700r
Dec 31, 2005 | 01:12 AM
#41
Pro Rider
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,158
Likes: 0
Raptor 660 vs. Raptor 700r
Originally posted by: BlazinOrange700
fasterthanyou22, if you actually think that a Raptor can pull those HP numbers with just a pipe/jet, keep dreaming.
I find it funny, you are making things up to convince yourself that a Raptor660 is better than a Raptor700.
Mod for mod or stock for stock, the Raptor 700 is > Raptor 660. Simple as that.
fasterthanyou22, if you actually think that a Raptor can pull those HP numbers with just a pipe/jet, keep dreaming.
I find it funny, you are making things up to convince yourself that a Raptor660 is better than a Raptor700.
Mod for mod or stock for stock, the Raptor 700 is > Raptor 660. Simple as that.
Dec 31, 2005 | 01:17 AM
#42
Elite Pro Rider
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,380
Likes: 1
Raptor 660 vs. Raptor 700r
Originally posted by: BlazinOrange700
fasterthanyou22, if you actually think that a Raptor can pull those HP numbers with just a pipe/jet, keep dreaming.
I find it funny, you are making things up to convince yourself that a Raptor660 is better than a Raptor700.
Mod for mod or stock for stock, the Raptor 700 is > Raptor 660. Simple as that.
fasterthanyou22, if you actually think that a Raptor can pull those HP numbers with just a pipe/jet, keep dreaming.
I find it funny, you are making things up to convince yourself that a Raptor660 is better than a Raptor700.
Mod for mod or stock for stock, the Raptor 700 is > Raptor 660. Simple as that.
And btw, piped and filtered raptors consistantly show hp numbers from 40hp and even approaching 50 with the right setup on corrected and raw dynos.
Dec 31, 2005 | 03:44 AM
#43
Extreme Pro Rider
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,940
Likes: 0
Raptor 660 vs. Raptor 700r
Look at the kind of power the auto industry is making with EFI and motors that are loaded down with emmissions crap. We are seeing far better hp per liter than we did in the muscle car glory days and we are seeing far better 1/4 mile times and getting 3 times the fuel economy.
Give the ATV industry a few years to work EFI out before you pass judgement on it. When they first started running EFI here in the US on cars, early to mid 80's with possibly a few exceptions, the same concerns were discussed, now you wouldn't go back to carburation in the family truckster even if they offered it.
BTW, It would be very tuff for the 5 valve head to have as much intake surface area. It is the outside section of a circle that has the most area. Look at the area of a valve seat that is 1 1/4" in diameter vs a valve seat that is 1" in diameter. The 1 1/4" has right at twice the area a 1" valve does. That means running two valves that are 1/4" diameter larger than 3 valves that are roughly 1" is about a 33% increase in intake potential. I don't know the actual valve sizes, it is the theory that I want everybody to think about. The 660 may have more intake volume potential from the factory but I would bet lunch that the 2 intake valves on the 700R have a larger diameter than the ones on the 660.
Someone look it up and do the math. Prove me wrong. It wouldn't hurt me at all to miss a meal. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]
Oh yeah, for those of you who haven't been to highschool recently, the formula is PiR2 (Radius x Radius)3.14 = Area
Later
Give the ATV industry a few years to work EFI out before you pass judgement on it. When they first started running EFI here in the US on cars, early to mid 80's with possibly a few exceptions, the same concerns were discussed, now you wouldn't go back to carburation in the family truckster even if they offered it.
BTW, It would be very tuff for the 5 valve head to have as much intake surface area. It is the outside section of a circle that has the most area. Look at the area of a valve seat that is 1 1/4" in diameter vs a valve seat that is 1" in diameter. The 1 1/4" has right at twice the area a 1" valve does. That means running two valves that are 1/4" diameter larger than 3 valves that are roughly 1" is about a 33% increase in intake potential. I don't know the actual valve sizes, it is the theory that I want everybody to think about. The 660 may have more intake volume potential from the factory but I would bet lunch that the 2 intake valves on the 700R have a larger diameter than the ones on the 660.
Someone look it up and do the math. Prove me wrong. It wouldn't hurt me at all to miss a meal. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]
Oh yeah, for those of you who haven't been to highschool recently, the formula is PiR2 (Radius x Radius)3.14 = Area
Later
Dec 31, 2005 | 03:58 AM
#44
Extreme Pro Rider
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,940
Likes: 0
Raptor 660 vs. Raptor 700r
A piped and jetted Raptor with no other mods making 50 rwhp? Which pipe? Which dyno? Where is the sheet? I have to see this. That is a 14 hp improvement over stock. I know the 660 is bar none the most choked down stock bike ever but 14 with a pipe and jet kit is hard for me to believe. I say that a dyno sheet put together by an objective race shop would never read above a 9 hp increase from stock with pipe and jet until someone produces evidence to the contrary. The only way I see a 50 rwhp 660 with pipe only is on a dyno that reads at least 40 hp on a completely stock Raptor. I think most dyno at about 34 - 36 stock.
BTW, I don't trust dyno scores from pipe manufacturers or pipe dealers. The little matter of meeting sales goals compromises objectivity in my estimation.
Ok, now I am really going. It is almost midnight! [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-disgusted.gif[/img]
BTW, I don't trust dyno scores from pipe manufacturers or pipe dealers. The little matter of meeting sales goals compromises objectivity in my estimation.
Ok, now I am really going. It is almost midnight! [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-disgusted.gif[/img]
Dec 31, 2005 | 11:19 AM
#45
Pro Rider
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,158
Likes: 0
Raptor 660 vs. Raptor 700r
Originally posted by: DSNUT
BTW, It would be very tuff for the 5 valve head to have as much intake surface area. It is the outside section of a circle that has the most area. Look at the area of a valve seat that is 1 1/4" in diameter vs a valve seat that is 1" in diameter. The 1 1/4" has right at twice the area a 1" valve does. That means running two valves that are 1/4" diameter larger than 3 valves that are roughly 1" is about a 33% increase in intake potential. I don't know the actual valve sizes, it is the theory that I want everybody to think about. The 660 may have more intake volume potential from the factory but I would bet lunch that the 2 intake valves on the 700R have a larger diameter than the ones on the 660.
Someone look it up and do the math. Prove me wrong. It wouldn't hurt me at all to miss a meal. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]
Oh yeah, for those of you who haven't been to highschool recently, the formula is PiR2 (Radius x Radius)3.14 = Area
Later
BTW, It would be very tuff for the 5 valve head to have as much intake surface area. It is the outside section of a circle that has the most area. Look at the area of a valve seat that is 1 1/4" in diameter vs a valve seat that is 1" in diameter. The 1 1/4" has right at twice the area a 1" valve does. That means running two valves that are 1/4" diameter larger than 3 valves that are roughly 1" is about a 33% increase in intake potential. I don't know the actual valve sizes, it is the theory that I want everybody to think about. The 660 may have more intake volume potential from the factory but I would bet lunch that the 2 intake valves on the 700R have a larger diameter than the ones on the 660.
Someone look it up and do the math. Prove me wrong. It wouldn't hurt me at all to miss a meal. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]
Oh yeah, for those of you who haven't been to highschool recently, the formula is PiR2 (Radius x Radius)3.14 = Area
Later
[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif[/img] What??????........Which button on this calculator does that?.........[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]
I bet your DS was a FAST ****.............(please don't breakdown the word "****" in numerial equaisan cause I don't mean it like that)................[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]
Dec 31, 2005 | 11:39 AM
#46
Trailblazer
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Raptor 660 vs. Raptor 700r
No fasterthanyou22, I did not get "roasted" by a 13 year old.
You are a little kid that thinks you know everything, just like all other little kids.
If you truely think that a 660 will outperform a 686, than you are retarded.
Put a pipe on both and see what wins...Raptor 700r!
And no, I have not seen 1 pipe make the Raptor make almost 50 hp.
That is over what, a 12hp increase with a pipe/filter....not happeneing.
Maybe you need to stop dreaming and realize the Raptor 700 is better than the Raptor660.
And no, you don't have to explain anything to me either fasterthanyou22, I know more about this stuff than you do.
You are a little kid that thinks you know everything, just like all other little kids.
If you truely think that a 660 will outperform a 686, than you are retarded.
Put a pipe on both and see what wins...Raptor 700r!
And no, I have not seen 1 pipe make the Raptor make almost 50 hp.
That is over what, a 12hp increase with a pipe/filter....not happeneing.
Maybe you need to stop dreaming and realize the Raptor 700 is better than the Raptor660.
And no, you don't have to explain anything to me either fasterthanyou22, I know more about this stuff than you do.
Dec 31, 2005 | 12:30 PM
#47
Extreme Pro Rider
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,940
Likes: 0
Raptor 660 vs. Raptor 700r
Hey Blazen, noticed you didn't post any facts to support your opinion but good luck with your pi$$ing contest.[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]
Here is a little tidbit I found to be interesting. Yamaha reverted back to 4 valves so they could design a lower profile head. This reduced the overall height of the motor which contributed to the new lower center of gravity.
Later
Here is a little tidbit I found to be interesting. Yamaha reverted back to 4 valves so they could design a lower profile head. This reduced the overall height of the motor which contributed to the new lower center of gravity.
Later
Dec 31, 2005 | 02:07 PM
#48
Trailblazer
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Raptor 660 vs. Raptor 700r
I don't need any evidence. I'm done arguing with all these little kids on here.
But, if you want evidence, go to Trinity's website.
Get a dyno run of both a 660 Raptor and a Raptor 700r with their pipe on it, see which one makes more power...
But, if you want evidence, go to Trinity's website.
Get a dyno run of both a 660 Raptor and a Raptor 700r with their pipe on it, see which one makes more power...
Dec 31, 2005 | 03:37 PM
#49
Pro Rider
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
Raptor 660 vs. Raptor 700r
Hey buddy, I have done my research.Just because i am 13 years old and i know more than you doent mean you have to be ashamed of that...(wait, yea ya do).Here is a link that will prove your factless *** wrong about pipe, jet and filtered 660's.
http://www.ctracing.com/raptor.htm
You just look in disbelief, thinking it is fake.And one more thing, how many people on here think that trinitys dynos are inaccurate?And please, i have seen you guys post about it, dont be afraid to speak out.
http://www.ctracing.com/raptor.htm
You just look in disbelief, thinking it is fake.And one more thing, how many people on here think that trinitys dynos are inaccurate?And please, i have seen you guys post about it, dont be afraid to speak out.
Dec 31, 2005 | 04:14 PM
#50
Elite Pro Rider
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,380
Likes: 1
Raptor 660 vs. Raptor 700r
DSNUT and Blazin,
Do a quick search on a guy named Freez, with airbox mods, exhaust, and tuning the stock carbs he made around 50hp on a respectable dyno. Dyno numbers are always questionable but its been done at least once, even when not using trinity's dyno. While I dont pretend to believe every raptor pipe will make that much power, it provides a good cieling for it. 42-44hp is rather common on dyno readouts from piped bikes with a baseline at or near 33-35hp.
While I dont intend this information to insinuate that a piped 660 will always beat a piped or stock 700, I do intend it to show that the power output is not night and day as one may have you think. A friend of mine just got a new 700 a few weeks ago and another friend has an 02 660 with a mediocre pipe. I dont know when but I plan to get a race between them the next time we're on a ride. I'm just as curious as many of you are, especially the ones that say a stock or piped 700 will waste built 686's Since my stock bore should be, by forum acclaim, slower than a 686 I'm really interested in whether it'll beat me. Personally I think the power is underrated on the 700 by many people who have owned built 660's beforehand, and over rated by some of those used to blasters and warriors.
Do a quick search on a guy named Freez, with airbox mods, exhaust, and tuning the stock carbs he made around 50hp on a respectable dyno. Dyno numbers are always questionable but its been done at least once, even when not using trinity's dyno. While I dont pretend to believe every raptor pipe will make that much power, it provides a good cieling for it. 42-44hp is rather common on dyno readouts from piped bikes with a baseline at or near 33-35hp.
While I dont intend this information to insinuate that a piped 660 will always beat a piped or stock 700, I do intend it to show that the power output is not night and day as one may have you think. A friend of mine just got a new 700 a few weeks ago and another friend has an 02 660 with a mediocre pipe. I dont know when but I plan to get a race between them the next time we're on a ride. I'm just as curious as many of you are, especially the ones that say a stock or piped 700 will waste built 686's Since my stock bore should be, by forum acclaim, slower than a 686 I'm really interested in whether it'll beat me. Personally I think the power is underrated on the 700 by many people who have owned built 660's beforehand, and over rated by some of those used to blasters and warriors.