Is more power better?

But a less powererful/cheaper bike also usually means more weight because of old technology.  The YZF600 is a pig.  Most performance-minded riders are always trying to achieve the lightest bike with the most power.

But it also works the other way around: I went from a 305 pound Ninja 250R to a 417 pound SV650, and then to a 444 pound Gixxer 1000.  I still haven't gotten used to the 444 pounds.  I wish I could have less weight on the bike.

If I have the choice between the R6 or the YZF600, OF COURSE I'm going to go to the lighter weight R6.  

The vast majority of people out there will pay more attention to horsepower figures than they will weight numbers; witness the surprisingly good sales of the original CBR600RR (or in an extreme case, the Hayabusa).  Yet their riding skills probably won't allow them to take advantage of any of that extra performance, whether through less mass or more hp, or both.  

I don't have the data, but my gut feeling tells me that most "kids" out there buy sport bikes without ever picking up a mag like Sport Rider or Motorcyclist.  They probably don't know much about horsepower.  I think the CBR600RR sold so well because it looked "trick" before all of the other 600cc.  I don't think most people even knew that it was heavier and slower because they are simply posers.

How about it guys?  Do you all think that the majority of the riders out there even know what they are buying?

I think it's the sad reality...  

That's my point: they won't really know much about horsepower, but they sure as hell won't know anything about weight figures, either. If the "riders out there don't know what they're buying", then they surely don't know how much the YZF weighs, right? They buy the R6 because it's the latest and greatest, not because the YZF weighs more than the R6. I can guarantee you that there are more people who know that the Hayabusa cranks out the most horsepower and has the highest top speed than the fact that it outweighs the current literbikes by almost 50 lbs.

Like I said before, the sad fact is that a lot of people buy the bike that they delude themselves into thinking they need, rather than the bike that would suit the actual riding that they do. But that goes for anything in society, really....  

Quote:

---

I read an interesting article involving the Yamaha R6 and usable power.  A group of 20 riders were assembled to ride two R6’s.  One was stock and the other de-tuned for a more powerful midrange.  One R6 was de-tuned to get as close to the specs on the FZR600.  The goal was to improve the midrange although top speed would have to be sacrificed.  


Apparently 18 of the 20 riders preferred the de-tuned R6 and thought it was felt faster, pulling harder in the midrange.

---

Quote:

---

Spending most of my time on the street I think a detuned bike would better serve my use.  

---

I have never ridden a V-twin.  Would a V-twin offer a better midrange push than the inline 4?  Is there any other characteristic about the V-twin that would not make it a good choice?  

Than a contemporary 1000cc inline four? No. Torque from an 1000cc four like the GSX-R1000 or ZX-10R is equal to if not superior to a v-twin.

Better is subjective. V-twins do feel different in how they put power to pavement. For most, they do engender a sense of being more tractable than an inline-four but it's one of those things that you either like, don't like or don't care one way or another because they all have 2 wheels.

Latest issue of Sportrider has the 999R and GSX-R1000 test comparison- it may provide answers to your questions.  

Quote:

---

I have never ridden a V-twin.  Would a V-twin offer a better midrange push than the inline 4?  Is there any other characteristic about the V-twin that would not make it a good choice?

---

Maybe we better define midrange. Midrange on a bike that redlines at 12krpm is 6k. On a bike that redlines at 7k rpm, it's 3.5 or so.

A twin will give you more real world squirt. For ex, the Buell puts out 85ft/lbs of torque. It's probably putting out close to this at 3k rpm. That's a lot of grunt if you twist the throttle then.  On a modern liter bike, twisting the throttle at 5k rpm will not give anything earth shattering.
The liter bike puts out around 75-80ft/lbs at about 8k rpm.

But if you twist the throttle on a Gixxer 1k at 8k rpm, you better be hanging on as you'll enter hyper space in a jiffy.  

So for tooling around town or even the highway, unless you're always keeping rpm's at 8k or above, the big twin will trounce you because it's putting out more power than you are.  But downshift, and he's gone.


http://pages.videotron.com/mcrides  

Mcrides, I think you will be surprised if you overlay a Buell torque chart with a GSX-R1000 or ZX-10R chart.

AT  

Quote:

---

Mcrides, I think you will be surprised if you overlay a Buell torque chart with a GSX-R1000 or ZX-10R chart.

---

I was. The difference was even more than I thought.
And it supports my own experience. I've ridden the CBR1000 RR, The Gixxer k5, the ZX 10R 05, and the Buell.

Here are some approx numbers ie taken from charts:
Torque
_________________2k  3k  4k   5k  6k  7k  8k  9k  10k
Yamaha R1________-   38  41   55  62  56  68  67   70
ZX 10R___________-   50  56   61  65  72  74  73   74
GSX R1000________-   48  58   64  64  70  75  74   72
Buell Firebolt______55  66  65   70  74  72
XB12R


But again, when you hit 8k rpm on the 4 cyl liter bikes, you're gone.

Montreal, Canada
http://pages.videotron.com/mcrides  

Quote:

---

So for tooling around town or even the highway, unless you're always keeping rpm's at 8k or above, the big twin will trounce you because it's putting out more power than you are.  

---

Uh, that's a negative, Ghostrider...
Determining bikes' real world performance from dyno charts is like picking your Sat nite date blindfolded. From perusing my old copies of Sport Rider, I see the all the current literbikes absolutely pounding on the Buell XB12R in 60-80mph top-gear roll-ons (which, incidentally, with their far taller gearing , puts the fours in the 3000-3500 rpm range at 60mph). With the Buell making such impressive torque at low rpms, it should be "trouncing" you, right? Even the "lowly" CBR takes less than 3 secs to accelerate to 80 mph; the GSX-R K5 less than 2.5 seconds. The Buell? One full second longer, which in time/distance terms is like saying the GSX-R rider will be comfortably passing the motorhome while the Buell rider will be sweating bullets to make the gap. And 80-100 mph (where the fours are hovering around the 5000 rpm mark-- not 8000 rpm)? Both the ZX-10R and GSX-R accomplish it in around 2.5 seconds, while the R1 and CBR are still under 3 secs. The Buell takes a sundial-rivaling 4.5 seconds.

Sorry, don't mean to offend any Buell riders. They're fun bikes to ride. Just stating facts.  

Sun-dial rivaling?

 

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

So for tooling around town or even the highway, unless you're always keeping rpm's at 8k or above, the big twin will trounce you because it's putting out more power than you are.  

---

Uh, that's a negative, Ghostrider...
Determining bikes' real world performance from dyno charts is like picking your Sat nite date blindfolded.

---

 
Maybe not.

Quote:

---

From perusing my old copies of Sport Rider, I see the all the current literbikes absolutely pounding on the Buell XB12R in 60-80mph top-gear roll-ons

---

They will. But let's keep apples with apples.
When you do 0-60 or 1/4 mile times, it has nothing to do with real world riding. On timed acceleration runs, a twin has no chance. The multis are putting out roughly 50-60 more rwhp. But timed accel runs are not real world. Most average riders can't duplicate those times. But most riders can twist the grip of a high torque motor and get that thrust without all the clutch slipping.

But if you're both tooling along at city speeds and you both just rollon, he'll leave you fumbling with your gear selector.  

And looking at the torque curve does tell the story.

Again, that's my experience from riding the bikes, not reading mags who do time acceleration runs.

Quote:

---

Just stating facts.

---

I know. Facts can be a funny thing sometimes.  


Montreal, Canada
CBR 929
http://pages.videotron.com/mcrides  

Oh this is going to get good....

AT  

What?