Druid wrote:VTR1000KAZ wrote:What I'd like to know is where the hell do half of their figures come from??? As most of us have seen more top speed than the mags say (fair enuff... givin a bit of leeway for the clocks being out)
Perhaps the mags do speed tests using two way average figures and accurate measuring equipment to get their 143 mph, instead of (notoriously innacurate) speedo readings going down hill with the wind behind you? Even GPS figures are only one way momentary maximums.
Speedos are allowed a maximum error of +10%, so an indicated 160 is possibly reading 16mph over.
160-16=144...close enough for me.
Well, magazines using GPS and dataloggers for speed readings. And only simple GPSs can track momentary maximum - you simply turn on ride logging in TomTom Navigator on pocket PC and you can see how you ride went, including stopovers etc.
If I see 240+ kph I see it afterwards, even to check if I was not mistaken. GPS readings of speed must be accurate, at least devices used by magazines (dataloggers) are not more accurate than bicycle computer when it has been tuned in properly (measured lenght of ciscle on which you install magnet and lenght of circle of wheel).
I think that magazines often getting their figures of top speed from dynos (properly measured on dyno should include aero drag coefficient, which I guess they take out of bluea), or perhaps most of testers just quit accelerating when it seems to stop really pulling.
I did see 220+ on my Hornet with both GPS and bicycle computer (BC Sigma 800 - quite accurate), while magazines insist it was 212 (? WTF) - I could not possible have been off mark by about 10 kph, no way.
Mind, it does depend on weight and size of rider ... a lot...and on posture, and on riding gear...
I got my parents to pick me one up while they were in the UK, a few months ago. But all you have to do is jump on their website and order one. I guess the UK guys would know if there is a cheaper place to get them though 
and I only used the hammer twice 