Standard Specs 1988 Hawk GT

[JR]

[isaac]

Ever since I first saw that 38hp number I've taken issue with it. Is that measured at the rear wheel? What is it at the crank? I'd guess 45 or so.

[isaac]

Bump for open debate on the accuracy of these specs.

I was looking over the gearing numbers, and I know my bike sure as hell doesn't top out in first gear at 49mph. It might be closer to 40mph. My bike will redline in top gear at right on 120mph. That's with a stock rear tire and taller gearing than stock. Nevermind if it were actually stock.

[PaullyBoy]

Ive got a print out fro a 90 hawk 650 that says 58 bhp @ 8500 rpm. you can see it at www.arnold-talmon.com/images/hawkspecs.jpg

[isaac]

Nice link. Those look like a lot better specs. Kinda interesting that it says the stock chain is a 530 and that the top speed is 1mph higher than the mathematical redline. Otherwise those look like really good specs. I'm gonna have to redline my bike in first to see if that gear really does go that high. That's nuts.

[Doc]

I don't know of any stock Hawks that will do more than 110mph with ANY change in sprockets. Am I wrong? JD?

[dagus]

You realize that a stock Hawk speedo is 10% optimistic to 100mph and 15% optimistic above 100mph?

[isaac]

You realize that a stock Hawk speedo is 10% optimistic to 100mph and 15% optimistic above 100mph?

According to two of the local police's radar boxes my bike's speedo is accurate within .5mph at 30mph, so I'm willing to trust it. Change the tire and it might go pretty far off.

[Doc]

at 30mph the speed would not be that far off.

Going faster it will exponentially change and will be off by 10-15%

[dagus]

You realize that a stock Hawk speedo is 10% optimistic to 100mph and 15% optimistic above 100mph?

According to two of the local police's radar boxes my bike's speedo is accurate within .5mph at 30mph, so I'm willing to trust it. Change the tire and it might go pretty far off.

Wait... you trust the police radar?

Seriously, I agree with Doc. A stock Hawk GT engine is not as powerful as you're thinking. I do seem to remember, though, that it's actually 48hp, not 38. Ah, whatever. They're fun.

[isaac]

Wait... you trust the police radar?

Well considering that I tested two different boxes in two different places and they both showed the same speed differential from my bike at 30mph (which was less than a third of a percent), then yes I do.

If a cop nails me for doing 70mph in a 60mph zone, I'm not ganna take it to court with the argument of "wait... you trust police radar?"

A stock Hawk GT engine is not as powerful as you're thinking. I do seem to remember, though, that it's actually 48hp, not 38.

Considering I said I thought it was 45hp, and J.D. Hord dynoed a stock one at 45hp, then according to your number it looks like it's more powerful than I'm thinking. I dunno about Pauly's number, but it'd be nice.

[tkm433]

Ever since I first saw that 38hp number I've taken issue with it. Is that measured at the rear wheel? What is it at the crank? I'd guess 45 or so.

The only number that really matters is the one that meets the road.

Do you enjoy riding your Hawk? If the answer is yes then what does it matter what the numbers tell you? They are just numbers.

[Schiff32]

Is the weight limit of 345 because of the stock tires or something else? I weigh in somewhere around 240, so if i have a rider I'll pretty much be over that...

[frank_91hawk]

um guys....Ive done 110 with nothing but a K&N filter in fourth, let alone fifth gear.....

[zymmer4]

my 1990 Hawk with a 17/44 chain drive will go 128 on the clock..near to 130..a needle width short..it will do a wheelie into 2nd gear..and I have done power wheelies in 1st at will..my vin# is ooo94..it will go 105 in 4th at the least urging..tires is a 150/60/17..some of these Hawks will fly..I get about 43 MPG being easy on it..35MPG when I use it..