Map of today's GPS tracks:

I'll be more than happy to live with 148.65 HP at the rear wheel :

Yes indeed buffalo won at Dyno The lowly stock Ninja only managed 122. Looks like there's work to be done.

However, the "lowly" Ninja has 300cc less engine displacement, and weighs less too. I haven't looked at specific specs, but I'm guessing if we did a HP to weight comparison, the Ninja would look much better than the K

buffalo You got me thinking so I went back to the spec sheets and did the math

K1300 - 0.11 HP/cc of displacement and 0.26 HP/lb (wet)
N1K - 0.12 HP/cc of displacement and 0.25 HP/lb (wet)

Turned out to be really interesting digging into the numbers a bit, no wonder the acceleration figures are so close until triple digits (where ultimate HP matters more than HP/lb). Acceleration being expressed using F=ma or a=F/m where either increasing Force or decreasing mass derives "faster" acceleration. Velocity is trickier because it's a vector with lots of variables (drag, friction, losses, et), for purposes of fun discussion though it can be boiled down to forces of drag increasing exponentially such that the power needed to move an object increases as the velocity cubed, and drag increases with the square of velocity. For terminal speed we are looking for the lowest drag (and other loss forces such as friction) and highest power.

For all my dorky friends, check out this fun little spreadsheet: 
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApPRT4wdrO...

 

(side note, the rear-wheel HP ratings in the MCN Performance Index were within 0.01 of the dyno run on the Ninja, but it looks like buffalo is down a couple of HP )
It looks like jpcfjr did well for himself, mathematically, with the Speed Trip R. :-) 

SpTR - 0.12 HP/cc of displacement and 0.25 HP/lb (wet)

For comparison... 
The new Aprilla RSV Factory 

RSV - 0.17 HP/cc of displacement and a whopping 0.38 HP/lb (wet) ... no wonder it needs electronic driver aids

Some photos from yesterdays trip to Bobs BMW and the ride afterwards: