ducatipaso.org

If you are interested in looking at some dyno charts of our engines...

Here is a stock 907IE (blu line, compared to a 916 red/brown line):

source: http://www.visi.com/~moperfserv/Torquething.htm

Then a 907IE with a 944 bore kit (blue and red) compared to a 900SS(green):

source: http://www.visi.com/~moperfserv/907comp.htm

And this should be similar to my 900 engine with Pederzini modules :lick:

source: http://www.visi.com/~moperfserv/ignition.htm

Unfortunately I found nothing about Paso 750 engines, but only this 750 SS/Monster chart:

source: http://www.moto-one.com.au/performance/ ... rcarb.html

Note: all dyno charts are misleading because results depend on dynamemeter, environmental factors, engine conditions, operator and dyno corrections (http://www.moto-one.com.au/performance/ ... ctors.html). But they are nice to look at, with no doubt!

Nice to compare 907IE in normal condition and with 944cc(ST2) bore kits, cause i just ordered 944 sylinders/pistons/ST2 crankshaft, etc.... just in case, if one day update little my 907IE again... :laugh:

If I've read the chart well, the 9ooss has a maximum torque of 74 ft/lbs, while the 944 has "only" 65 ft/lbs! this is quite a difference! moreover if you have a look at 916 torque chart, with a max 62 ft /lbs!
Don't you think that it's interesting?

I also am amazed.
The stock 900SS would have better results than a 944 big bored, liquid cooled unit.

Luca,
where have you found those charts?

Today is a wonderful morning.
I'm going to go away for a little trip :lick: :lick: :lick: .
Ciao

Ducati engines are different, i mean, that other modells are meant to different riding style... Like 916 have plenty of power, but it have been taken out in high rpms,not low, cause that bike is meant to race tracks mostly... Same comparing U can do with ST4(916 engine) and ST4S(996 engine), TOTALLY different engines. ST4 need much more rpms to "function", but ST4S 996 engine is more low/midrange engine, so then its much "easier" to use in normal traffic. If we try say things "very simply": power comes from cc (stroke/bore) and torque is made with cams, surely also valve diameter means alot.... ...cams, cams, cams....

Remembering, that those are some "aussie" sites with plenty of engine details, like cam stuff...

persempre907 wrote:The stock 900SS would have better results than a 944 big bored, liquid cooled unit.

I am not fully convinced about that chart, too.
It's not stated which year is that 900ss, I suppose it's a recent model and this can partially explain the big difference... but we need to investigate a bit more...

Here is a 900SS/monster engine with carb:
Green line = standard stock
Blue line = with Silmotor mufflers fitted
Red line = with Silmotor, cams, jetting and filter


http://www.moto-one.com.au/performance/ ... rcarb.html

You can see a significant improvement, but power is still <78 hp

This is a 900SS IE (only power chart):
Green line = standard stock
Blue line = mufflers and remapped ECU
Red line = mufflers, remapped ECU, cams, filter


http://www.moto-one.com.au/performance/900ssfi.html

You see that stock engine has about +10% hp if compared to a carbed unit, but still not those 90+ hp of the chart with the 944 comparison.

You have to look for a full-tuned 900SS IE with High compression pistons (red line) to achieve that power:


http://www.moto-one.com.au/performance/ ... stons.html

Finally, this chart contains another comparison between a 944 and a carbed 900 SS:

http://www.moto-one.com.au/performance/ ... rb944.html
A standard 900ss with Termignoni (purple) has 74.0 hp, while a 944 has 81.7 hp, that's a more resonable difference.
Note that all absolute values of the chart in my previous post are different:
there: a 944 has 90/92 hp and 900ss has 93 hp
here: a 944 has 81.7 hp and 900 ss has 74 hp
(maybe one measures "engine power" and one the "wheel power"?)

So the conclusion #1: the dyno chart of the comparison between 944 and 900ss in the previous post may be wrong or may report an heavy-tuned 900ss, not surely a stock engine.

And conclusion#2: it's not advisable to believe in rough numbers, when reading dyno charts. Absolute values are dependant on too may factors, so it's better to focus on comparison measured with same dyno settings and conditions!

persempre907 wrote:where have you found those charts?

Behind each chart there's a link to the hosting site, however here are some good archives:
http://www.moto-one.com.au/performance/
http://www.visi.com/~moperfserv/report.htm


Bye,

LC

It should be also interesting to compare these charts with the tuned dual spark (standard engine and 900ss cams!) and desmo3 results... I was told they're very performing engines!