So seeing as by 2012 all bikes will have to be Liquid Cooled...

[GI_JO_NATHAN]

  ...Damn!

[The Buddha]

I guess it boils down to necessity, if folks aren't asking for it or the government hasn't mandated it it will not be built.

Not quite ... bikes have ridiculous drag. A bike about the size and shape as the 89-00 GS nearly has as much aero dynamic load as an F150 at 75-80 mph.
Really telling especially if you slap a fairing from the 04 on the 89 making it a good 30 lb heavier, it actually accelerates faster to 75 ...
1 week apart, 2 WFO runs and the bike was a whole different beast.
Cool.
Buddha.

[qwertydude]

Not quite a naked bike has about the same aerodynamic drag coefficient as an f-150 truck. To get an absolute figure, because drag coefficient is just a ratio you need CdA. Which is drag coefficient*frontal area so overall drag is less on a motorcycle even though it's drag coefficent is horrendous. For example a Toyota Sequoia SUV has the same Cd as a BMW Z4 roadster, .35. Impossible you say?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficients

The humongous SUV will never get the highway gas mileage of the Z4 even though they have the same Cd, now the first thing that pops into mind is weight. But that's a misconception because at highway speed most of the power is used to overcome drag weight is almost negligible since mass's resistance to movement is only under acceleration. So even though they have the same drag coefficient their overall drag is vastly different once you take into account frontal area. Motorcycles can have drag coefficients in the .6 range but tiny frontal areas still make for less drag load.

If a motorcycle's true drag were the same as a truck that means a 160 hp literbike would have the same or worse top speed as say my 225 hp Colorado pickup truck. But that's never happening unless both were thrown out of an airplane then they'd both reach exactly the same top speed since they have the same drag coefficients and frontal area won't matter.

[intergalactic]

I wasn't gonna break buddha's jewels over it but the F-150 bit was a not obvious exaggeration.  My Bosch handbook isn't handy, but I think a bike like a GS500E might have a Cd approaching 1.0 -not lots of frontal area, though. The GS500F with someone smaller than I am who can hide behind the fairing a bit should do a lot better. Like Buddha noted.

Not quite a naked bike has about the same aerodynamic drag coefficient as an f-150 truck. To get an absolute figure, because drag coefficient is just a ratio you need CdA. Which is drag coefficient*frontal area so overall drag is less on a motorcycle even though it's drag coefficent is horrendous. For example a Toyota Sequoia SUV has the same Cd as a BMW Z4 roadster, .35. Impossible you say?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficients

The humongous SUV will never get the highway gas mileage of the Z4 even though they have the same Cd, now the first thing that pops into mind is weight. But that's a misconception because at highway speed most of the power is used to overcome drag weight is almost negligible since mass's resistance to movement is only under acceleration. So even though they have the same drag coefficient their overall drag is vastly different once you take into account frontal area. Motorcycles can have drag coefficients in the .6 range but tiny frontal areas still make for less drag load.

If a motorcycle's true drag were the same as a truck that means a 160 hp literbike would have the same or worse top speed as say my 225 hp Colorado pickup truck. But that's never happening unless both were thrown out of an airplane then they'd both reach exactly the same top speed since they have the same drag coefficients and frontal area won't matter.

[qwertydude]

http://www.msgroup.org/forums/mtt/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=955

I was giving the high end range for sportbikes. =.6 I don't know if the GS500 would exactly count as a touring bike which is upwards of .9 but then again there's a difference if you tuck and I even notice a difference when I put on my big Nelson Rig saddlebags.

[intergalactic]

I dunno, I am pretty upright when I ride, but I have a long enough torso that if I were to lay on the tank, I swear my chin would be between the speedo and tach! I am not a giant, but I look *over* cars in traffic. That can't help Cd or area.

So upright in an XL textile jacket with armor?  I am not sure. I remember an upper number of .95 (from memory) and I bet I am close. Although I don't have laced wheels. Maybe my Cd is 0.8 and I have 10 square feet of area? Or 8 square feet? That is car-like drag. And my maybe 70something HP diesel VW golf (HP at redline) will do about 110-115mph... It might be gearing limited by a little bit, though.

http://www.msgroup.org/forums/mtt/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=955

I was giving the high end range for sportbikes. =.6 I don't know if the GS500 would exactly count as a touring bike which is upwards of .9 but then again there's a difference if you tuck and I even notice a difference when I put on my big Nelson Rig saddlebags.