Just looked it up.
10.9 at 125 mph in the quarter and 161 top speed. Pretty good for 20 years back!

What site you finding the specs from Ian? Its blimen hard to find anything on it really. I found 10.4 at similar speeds on the net (when I bought the bike) done by a UK bike mag when it was new.

Runs waaaaaaaaaaaaaay better with AVGas too

Im hoping to get the bike dynotuned soon, to get it fueling better now that the can has gone on, so hopefully then it can pull out 5th gear a bit

Just 'google' the bike's model name and you'll see a few sites, Si.

BTW.
I really would not have geared the bike up, as you have!
I would gear down, if anything, unless it is motorway work you mainly do.
Gearing up a bike numbs the acceleration, quite a bit and, unless you have increased the power significantly, will be down on the 0-100 over stock.

The std bike was timed at between 11.4 and 10.9, from the tests i found.

5th will pull much better if you were to try a tooth at the front DOWN next time!

quote:

Originally posted by Bamford:
BTW.
I really would not have geared the bike up, as you have!
I would gear down, if anything, unless it is motorway work you mainly do.
Gearing up a bike numbs the acceleration, quite a bit and, unless you have increased the power significantly, will be down on the 0-100 over stock.

The std bike was timed at between 11.4 and 10.9, from the tests i found.

I do quite a lot of highway miles, so that's why I went up a tooth.

My bike still posted a 11.0217 1/4 with me riding it, gearing as it is, nothing wrong with that, IMO.

I tried a top speed run how it was before going up a tooth, and it pulled just off the clock in 5th, pretty much exactly the same as what it does now in 4th. All I need now is a bit more power top end!

(Dont want to go down a tooth, because I chew through back tyres quick enough as it is, and I dont want to put more strain on sprockets than necessary etc)

Just be weary Bams, that the main export model was detuned to 100hp for (I THINK) the US market, and most of the specs I found for it, was for that model, not the full fat model I have.

True, but 130 bhp (?) and 210 kgs (?) will never make for a particularly fast bike, by modern standards, Si.
My R1 had 170 bhp and 175 kgs, remember.

A new Suzuki 750 has 150 bhp and 168 kgs!!!

136bhp and 248kgs actually... and you're right, it isnt THAT fast by way of modern standards, but then it isnt a modern bike. Its only two years younger than me, yet regularly blows bikes away that SHOULD be significantly quicker.

New tyres have transformed the bike into something that keeps up with very well ridden 600's and 900's (Hornets) etc round the twisties.

All for the equivalent of under 1500 pound.

Don't get me wrong, you have a bike which cost nothing hardly, with 996 turbo performance, up to 140 mph or so, but 136 bhp and 248 kgs is really old-school now, as you know.
Kryste Si, 248 kgs is bloody heavy, isn't it!
The makers have worked miracles to get modern bikes so light, bearing in mind all the red tape.

The PTW is that of a good 400 cc sports bike!

Treat yourself to a nice used ZZR1400!

Yes, 248kgs is EXTREMELY heavy, but I use that to my advantage. Because I can use that weight to keep the front wheel down a bit, I blew away ZX14R's (one of them a turbo), a Busa turbo etc etc.

Sure its awesome having 200+ hp, but if you cant put it to the tarmac, you might as well not have it.

Im sorry, I dont buy that comparison to a 400 for a second. Certainly not a typical 400 sports bike. On that PTW ratio, if the 400 had 59bhp like all the Japanese 4cyl ones do standard, then it would have to weigh 107kgs. Not gonna happen.

I'd love a ZZR1400, but will probably look at a Busa when I can afford it, tbh. The 1400's are still going for almost new price here!

"Sure its awesome having 200+ hp, but if you cant put it to the tarmac, you might as well not have it."

In a drag race... obviously, once moving, that changes a bit!

I have never been too fast as a driver (100 tops) but I have as a passenger. As a pillion on a ZZR1100 about 12 years ago I knew we were going very fast. My friend told me it was 160ish when we arrived but I can't prove it.

I won't ride myself as I know I would end up killing myself through a little too much enthusiasm. The rider above however died a few years later in a freak accident (going head on with another biker whilst both returning to their respective lanes following overtakes). The estimated closing speed was >200 mph so at least it was quick.

136 bhp and 248 kgs?
Well, my Aprilia RS250 had 61 bhp and weighed 135 kgs, not that far off, PTW ratio-wise!
That was a tiny 249cc engine!


The 400s i am talking about, are the fast (import) CBR400RR and RFV400R Hondas, with 75 bhp for their 140-ish kgs. There are 3 such bikes regularly at Matlcok Bath, a bike haven!

How on Earth did you see off Hyabusas and ZX14s?
They do high-nines as standard!

I agree about getting a Hyabusa. I have just located one for someone at £4,200 and it goes like a rocket.

quote:

Originally posted by Bamford:
136 bhp and 248 kgs?
Well, my Aprilia RS250 had 61 bhp and weighed 135 kgs, not that far off, PTW ratio-wise!
That was a tiny 249cc engine!


The 400s i am talking about, are the fast (import) CBR400RR and RFV400R Hondas, with 75 bhp for their 140-ish kgs. There are 3 such bikes regularly at Matlcok Bath, a bike haven!

How on Earth did you see off Hyabusas and ZX14s?
They do high-nines as standard!

On paper, you're right, thats not too far off, but my workmate has a mint RS250 that I regularly go out riding with. I gave him a bit of a race one day, because he was sure he could keep up with me for a bit. And he did, until I hit 4,000rpm in first gear, and he had to chop 2nd. Then all my torque came (7-9k) then the power, and I was out of there.

Other riders underestimate my bike all the time, and I love it. A very good mate of mine has an extensively worked XJR1200, dynoed at 141hp at the back tyre (his bike weighs 220ish kg) and I walk away from him, at any speed, or from a standstill. Hes been riding for 25 years, and was astounded at my ole tank.

The 400's you mention dont come out of Japan at 75bhp, not even the RVF (which I've also ridden), they're all 59hp, thats Japanese legislation.

Im not sure how I bet them, I have a word document of the quarter mile times here that I can send you if you want?

Busa will be the ticket, maybe end of this year?

Just don't take on the Aprilia RS250 on a tight track. You won't see where it went!

The 3 Honda 400s i know of, all have around 75 bhp, from their tuned motors. They are not stock.

I am still at a genuine loss, as to why 136 bhp and 248 kgs would be particularly fast, that's not a good PTW ratio at all.
I am not saying that it is a bad bike, Si, far from it, i am just saying that something like a new Suzuki 750 would murder you, with it's 150 bhp and shed full of weight less.

In fact, all the new 600s would be faster.
The Honda CBR600RR is 120 bhp/163 kgs!

You have 0.55 bhp per kilo.
The Honda 600 has 0.74 bhp per kilo.
That's just a 600!

My Husqvarna SMR630 supermoto was 67 bhp/115 kgs.
That's 0.58 bhp per kilo from a single-cylinder engine!

quote:

Originally posted by Bamford:
Just don't take on the Aprilia RS250 on a tight track. You won't see where it went!

The 3 Honda 400s i know of, all have around 75 bhp, from their tuned motors. They are not stock.

I am still at a genuine loss, as to why 136 bhp and 248 kgs would be particularly fast, that's not a good PTW ratio at all.
I am not saying that it is a bad bike, Si, far from it, i am just saying that something like a new Suzuki 750 would murder you, with it's 150 bhp and shed full of weight less.

In fact, all the new 600s would be faster.
The Honda CBR600RR is 120 bhp/163 kgs!

You have 0.55 bhp per kilo.
The Honda 600 has 0.74 bhp per kilo.
That's just a 600!

Well, yes, obviously the RS would embarrass me on a tight track. Thats ok, I dont often visit the tracks, and most of ours are relatively quick straights.

Yeah, tuned 400's make 75bhp, thats over 25% above stock. If my bike made 25% more than stock, it'd have 170hp. Better to compare apples with apples.

A new Suzuki GSXR750 would murder me, if it got off the line as cleanly as me, no doubt.

I think the secret with my bike is the large amount of torque that it has. 112nm is only 3nm less than a Super Blackbird (of the year 2000 era), which is actually a heavier bike (by 5 kgs). The 750 would have to keep it on the boil, with 86.3nm... (Please remember thats the difference between 2 bikes over a 20 year span!).

My old Yamaha YZ250 dirtbike was tuned to 78bhp, weighed 92kg, which is a pretty good power to weight ratio, but couldnt put it down, and my 1100 would kill it.


As you'll know probably better than anyone, there is waaaay more to a vehicles performance than specs alone tell...

True, but in all my experience of bikes, torque counts for relatively little, compared to a coupe or saloon, say.
Caterhams and the like, get by with very little torque, because of their ultra-light weight.
With a bike weight is the key to good performance, generally.

The 400 comparison was a fair one, because those bikes have little more than a third the capacity of your bike.

You are either an exceptionally fast rider, Si, or your bike has been tuned by a previous owner, because it is doing things which that model simply can't!

We are talking early Gold Wing weight, remember, with 136 bhp to move it.

I would hazzard a guess that your bike has been tuned at some point.

My ZX14 turbo did what it did, because of it's power (303 bhp), but also due to it's light weight of 215 kgs.