|
huplescat posted:Even the dealer agreed that he'd be unlikely to outgrow the 1000 any time soon. Do you mean in riding ability or physical proportions? Because only one of those options is even remotely possible, but I don't think it's the one you mean.
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2009 09:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 17:06 |
|
|
If you feel a 600 is too slow, you're probably better off with a v-twin instead of an I4. Because you're not touching the limits of the 600 and you sure as hell won't touch the limits of the 1K. The slowness is the peaky powerband, you want something with low end punch. If it needs to look like a sportbike, no problem. Tons of options.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2009 14:22
|
|
|
Ola posted:If you feel a 600 is too slow, you're probably better off with a v-twin instead of an I4. Because you're not touching the limits of the 600 and you sure as hell won't touch the limits of the 1K. The slowness is the peaky powerband, you want something with low end punch. If it needs to look like a sportbike, no problem. Tons of options. Low end punch is not something Superbikes are lacking. A warning though: lots of low end punch + the long gearing of a superbike = without intending to you can find yourself going quite fast before you feel yourself going fast.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2009 15:19
|
|
|
huplescat posted:I'm working on my brother to upgrade to a 1000 instead of a 600. He's been riding a Ducati Monster 600 for the last year and is looking at a Honda CBR600RR. What's he going to do if he rides for 20 years? he's going to have to get a CBR5000 or something! 
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2009 16:00
|
|
|
2ndclasscitizen posted:Low end punch is not something Superbikes are lacking. Yes it is. That's inherent to their design. First, if so required for anyone reading this post, a primer on torque vs horsepower. http://www.howstuffworks.com/question622.htm My simple version is something like: Torque is what the piston does to the crank (force), horsepower is what the engine does to the bike (work). High torque at low rpm equals less HP compared to the same torque at higher RPM because of math. In a racing application, high RPM is a better way of delivering horsepower than high torque. You get more bang for your engineering buck when you consider weight, displacement restrictions etc. On the track, you are always in the powerband and spinning that fucker good. In traffic, you're often just off idle. So what makes an engine feel good on the street is when you suddenly decide to give it the beans it shoots off right away. Or you're coming out of a sharp corner at fairly low speeds and roll on the throttle. That's not to say that Rossi's ride isn't a loving lightning bolt off low revs, but that engine doesn't come with the same warranty or price tag as the street version does. My 750 I4 from 1986 has a compromised engine compared to the racers of the era. It develops peak torque at 8 500, red line is 10 000. The engineers have cut off some of the breathing potential at high revs to make a driveable zone at the bottom of the powerband so it's not a complete dog. By the limitations of carburetors and the simple ignition system, something has to give. So while 3 000 to 4 500 revs has some streetable punch (or a flathanded slap more like), torque actually drops (a real dip downward in the dyno curve) as the igntion goes to advance and the engine goes into spin-fast mode. Once the revs get near 7 000 it begins to breathe properly and the iconic "oh THERE'S the powerband" tug on the handlebars kicks in. It's similar to the Ducati 848 curve in this dyno shootout with lower numbers of course. Check out these randomly googled dyno charts. First a CBR600RR. The top lines is torque, I'll focus on the stock (blue) readings. This is apparently a 2007 which compared to my 1986 is a space age motor with all its fuel injection and computer ignition wizardry. Stock it's got 110 hp, which is an amazing 183 hp pr liter.  Compare this with an SV 650:  It has a tiny edge in displacement, but stock (again blue, but the bottom lines are torque in this pic) it's only got 70 hp. But compare the torque curves. Both have similar max torque values, CBR's 43 vs the SVs 45, but the CBR peaks at 11 K while the SV only at 7 K. As mentioned above, 43 ft lbs at 11 K is more horsepower than 45 at 7 K, about 90 vs 60 in this case. But their curves cross at about 70 hp / 41 ft lbs at 9000 rpm. Below 9000 then, the SV has more power than the CBR. Of course, the CBR gets to keep spinning to over 14000 to develop more total power, but on the street you are usually below 9000. Ola fucked around with this message at 16:50 on Nov 11, 2009 |
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2009 16:43
|
|
|
I've been a car guy for a long time but just bought my first bike this weekend.. 1983 Yamaha XT 550 Enduro Found it on craigslist, guy wanted $500 and I got it for $400. Runs good but was missing some pieces (already picked up front headlight, signals, gauges, airbox cover, rear fender and light, ignition set up, inner rear fender, clutch lever, etc) Began tearing the bike down yesterday, going to clean everything up and paint it in satin black with some anodized orange accents. Anyone here have/had an XT 550?    
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2009 16:49
|
|
|
Ola posted:
He's referring to Superbikes, which are I-4's of roughly 1000cc's. Your example was of a 600cc I-4, which is a Supersport. 1000cc I-4's are absolute torque monsters, even with liquid cooling and fancy injection.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2009 18:00
|
|
|
huplescat posted:I'm working on my brother to upgrade to a 1000 instead of a 600. He's been riding a Ducati Monster 600 for the last year and is looking at a Honda CBR600RR. I wouldn't recommend jumping straight to a literbike for a monster 600...the monster is a relatively tame 600 Vtwin and the CBR1000 is an insane I4. It'd be a huge jump. Your 750 doesn't even compare to a modern motorcycle, and would have it's rear end kicked from here to sunday by a 600cc supersport. If he's going for an upgrade and wants a more streetable ride, he should be looking at liter twins or I4 750s. The jump straight to a literbike is just asking for trouble, and it will slow down his progression as a rider.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2009 18:20
|
|
|
MrKatharsis posted:
Fair enough, but my point is when people think they've "outgrown" a 600 I4 it's not because they've gotten used to the 110 hp at 11000. It's because they gotten used to the 60 hp at 8000 or maybe the 70 hp at 12000 and 3/4 throttle.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2009 18:58
|
|
|
Ola posted:Fair enough, but my point is when people think they've "outgrown" a 600 I4 it's not because they've gotten used to the 110 hp at 11000. It's because they gotten used to the 60 hp at 8000 or maybe the 70 hp at 12000 and 3/4 throttle. No, it's because at a certain point, at 90 mph on the freeway, you become a chrysalis, and pupate into someone who wants to see what it's like to lose traction on a 2 wheeled vehicle. But that's only if you eat enough milkweed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2009 19:21
|
|
|
Ola posted:Yes it is. That's inherent to their design. That's all well and good, but utterly irrelevant when I crack the throttle at 3500rpm and it just fucks off with consumate ease.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2009 20:15
|
|
|
Ola posted:Fair enough, but my point is when people think they've "outgrown" a 600 I4 it's not because they've gotten used to the 110 hp at 11000. It's because they gotten used to the 60 hp at 8000 or maybe the 70 hp at 12000 and 3/4 throttle. It's easy to "outgrow" a stock geared street 600 because they're geared so loving tall. Combine that with most people being utterly unwilling to really rev out an engine, and they don't understand that in order to get a 600 really working on the street, you're looking at at least -1/+2 gearing, probably more. A 600 that's geared like that is closer to the experience you'll get at the throttle with a literbike, but with 600s there's a lot of waiting for poo poo to happen when you're below 40mph.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2009 20:46
|
|
|
2ndclasscitizen posted:That's all well and good, but utterly irrelevant when I crack the throttle at 3500rpm and it just fucks off with consumate ease. Sure, but compare that to say, a Super Duke, which will pull up the wheel at 1/4 throttle from the same rpm. A Superbike does have plenty of low down grunt, but it's still designed for high power at the top end.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2009 20:49
|
|
|
Z3n posted:It's easy to "outgrow" a stock geared street 600 because they're geared so loving tall. Combine that with most people being utterly unwilling to really rev out an engine, and they don't understand that in order to get a 600 really working on the street, you're looking at at least -1/+2 gearing, probably more. A 600 that's geared like that is closer to the experience you'll get at the throttle with a literbike, but with 600s there's a lot of waiting for poo poo to happen when you're below 40mph. You sound like me in the Buell thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2009 21:51
|
|
|
VTNewb posted:You sound like me in the Buell thread. What goes around comes around, right? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2009 22:39
|
|
|
2006 KLR 650 
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 04:24
|
|
|
Anyone who thinks an I4 600 doesn't have enough power for the street even off-idle is a lovely rider. It's trivial to blast out in front of traffic from a stop with minimal clutching slipping even with the clutch fully engaged in 1st at 2000rpm. I do it everyday.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 06:36
|
|
|
aventari posted:Anyone who thinks an I4 600 doesn't have enough power for the street even off-idle is a lovely rider. It's trivial to blast out in front of traffic from a stop with minimal clutching slipping even with the clutch fully engaged in 1st at 2000rpm. I do it everyday. Speaking of which, my I-4 600:  I sure got screwed by the guy who sold it to me, but it's out of the shop, I've finally gotten to ride it plenty and it is a delight.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 07:05
|
|
|
Zool posted:Do you mean in riding ability or physical proportions? Because only one of those options is even remotely possible, but I don't think it's the one you mean. I think it's fairly obvious I meant riding ability. Z3n posted:I wouldn't recommend jumping straight to a literbike for a monster 600...the monster is a relatively tame 600 Vtwin and the CBR1000 is an insane I4. It'd be a huge jump. Your 750 doesn't even compare to a modern motorcycle, and would have it's rear end kicked from here to sunday by a 600cc supersport. If he's going for an upgrade and wants a more streetable ride, he should be looking at liter twins or I4 750s. The jump straight to a literbike is just asking for trouble, and it will slow down his progression as a rider. Ok thanks  I know mine isn't anything like light, crazy powerful modern bikes, but I guess I'm thinking of it in terms of the power you get low down. A 1000cc would have more torque than a 600cc right? He's not a fan of revving a lot and isn't interested in taking a bike to the track. I dunno, seems some people here want to poo poo over what I said so whatever. I'm not going to dig myself in any further. I'll pass the info on anyway, the more he has the better choice can be made. He's pretty set on a 2005 or newer CBRxxxRR though which limits his options engine wise. I don't think a RR is really his style, but he just wants to own one for a bit to see how he likes it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 11:30
|
|
|
huplescat posted:I dunno, seems some people here want to poo poo over what I said so whatever. I'm not going to dig myself in any further. huplescat posted:I think it's fairly obvious I meant riding ability. huplescat posted:He's not a fan of revving a lot and isn't interested in taking a bike to the track. I'm sorry, but that there is comedy gold. Best of luck to the both of you regardless
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 12:51
|
|
|
 Click here for the full 1600x1071 image. Better in every way than the ZZR250, need to relearn a bit of throttle control though :/ Can't wait to get past the run-in period.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 13:12
|
|
|
huplescat posted:He's not a fan of revving a lot and isn't interested in taking a bike to the track.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 13:40
|
|
|
aventari posted:Anyone who thinks an I4 600 doesn't have enough power for the street even off-idle is a lovely rider. Hence why so many new riders "outgrow" their 600 after 5 months.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 14:26
|
|
|
huplescat posted:I think it's fairly obvious I meant riding ability. Perhaps it's because you said something we find shitworthy? Hint: You don't "outgrow" motorcycles unless you mean he may one day become obscenely fat and blow out the suspension.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 17:57
|
|
|
huplescat posted:I think it's fairly obvious I meant riding ability. Well, it's because what you said is fairly absurd. Most people really don't understand just how powerful and uncomfortable a modern bike is. 600RRs have a decent spread of power when it comes to a 600, but most 600 supersports are poo poo for the street. The 1000RR makes great power but it's not the sort of bike I'd put a relatively new rider who I cared about on. It'll power wheelie at 5k in first gear and still has 7000 more RPM to go. It's a loving absurd monster. If your brother absolutely has to have a CBR, then that's what he has to have. But the idea of "outgrowing" a 600 is BS. You may upgrade because you want more streetable power, or a more comfortable riding position, but trust me when I say...if you feel you've outgrown the power of a 600 on the street, you either need to learn to rev the bike or you're not long for this world. Have you ever ridden any one of these bikes? We can yammer on about hp and torque graphs and blah blah blah, but the real experience is swinging a leg over one and running it through the gears. I've ridden my fair share of bikes, and honestly, the new 1000RR was both astounding and terrifying. I was doing 140+ down public roads the bike didn't even feel like it had started moving yet. There's nothing quite like the bike lifting the front at around 110mph as you shift into 3rd gear. When I got off the bike, I was struck by the absurdity of someone waltzing in off the street and being able to buy one...it's a bike that is very, very easy to go fast on, and without excellent judgment paired with a decent amount of skill will result in a very, very dead rider, very very quickly. It's also worth noting that the 600RR makes more HP than your VFR and underweighs it by 100ish pounds.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2009 18:14
|
|
|
Rev. Dr. Moses P. Lester posted:sounds like a _____sport bike is not what he really needs then. a twin of some kind would be fine. but i'm sure like most people who want a cbr1000rr, he wants a cbr1000rr because it's a "cbr1000rr". not a lot of arguing you can do with that. Yes I know and no, he won't be talked out of it. He said he wants to own one to see what it's like and then will change to something less sporty. I'm not getting what I wanted to say across, I have no idea of how to express it to be honest and making GBS threads on me for it ain't all that nice. Just sayin. Z3n thanks for not being a dick. I've been on an R6 and am aware of the amount of power it had, it was crazy fast and a lot of fun. Most of the fun kicked in after 7k though. What my bro wants is something that kicks in a bit sooner and doesn't have to be revved hard to be fun. Hence my evidently flawed reasoning.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 09:57
|
|
|
I didn't mean to poo poo on you man. My spergpost about torque curves was just that, people who think they've outgrown 600s are likely to have more fun on a bike with more bottom end even if it had less horsepower. And they would be a lot safer, pay less insurance and less money for the bike outright compared to a shiny-knives-holy-gently caress literbike.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 14:37
|
|
|
I went from a 600 sport to a 07 gsxr 1000 and its retarded. If your brother is under 25 i would talk him out of it if you care about him. A 600ss is a scary bike which you will hurt yourself on if your not careful. A 1000ss is a bike that if your brother is brave at all he will either kill himself or lose his license. Im a pussy and old so i tend to keep myself out of trouble. I also crashed a bike in riders training so im a little scared of putting the bike at its limit. I low sided at about 40km/h, no damage really but it was enough to know what falling off a bike feels like. It happens so quick, boom your on the ground sliding. In terms of which bikes are faster, i have a crf450 dirt bike that when i ride then get on the gsxr, the gsxr seems slow. The 450 will stay on its rear wheel the whole time but its quick and not that fast. The gsxr will do 180km/h and feel like your doing 60. Very, very dangerous if your brave. Its way too much bike for me. edit: a gsxr 600 and 1000 are the same physical size according to wikipedia Delux fucked around with this message at 16:12 on Nov 13, 2009 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 16:02
|
|
|
From the sound of it one day I'll buy a CBR1000RR and put myself into low earth orbit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 16:05
|
|
|
huplescat posted:I'm not getting what I wanted to say across, I have no idea of how to express it to be honest and making GBS threads on me for it ain't all that nice. Just sayin. Perhaps you honestly didn't know, but if you hang out in CA long enough you'll find that kind of post and reasoning gets you a shitstorm pretty much guaranteed. It's nothing personal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 16:25
|
|
|
blugu64 posted:From the sound of it one day I'll buy a CBR1000RR and put myself into low earth orbit. Doctor Zero posted:It's nothing personal. Live, Learn, Become A Cool(er) Internet Nerd Like Us. Speaking of living, learning, and putting actual content in a post...a picture of where I fell the gently caress down - still not 100% sure why beyond "I did something stupid that the bike didn't like" (like "not turning around and going back the other way" or something) 
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 18:04
|
|
|
huplescat posted:Yes I know and no, he won't be talked out of it. He said he wants to own one to see what it's like and then will change to something less sporty. Well, the reasoning is actually sound. A literbike is vastly superior on the street to a 600. The problem is that a modern literbike is basically equivalent to buying a full on racebike. You can take a bone stock CBR1000RR, roll it off the showroom floor and onto the grid and a good rider will put it at drat near the top of the podium. It's like saying your civic doesn't have enough power so you buy an F1 car. There's moderate steps in between that should be taken. Your brother's on a good path, moving from a good beginner bike to a good, fun second bike. If he rides the 600 for a year and wants something bigger, there's nothing wrong with that. Big bikes are a lot of fun. The most important thing is that he stays safe and has a good time. None of us will ever outgrow a SS 600 in terms of rider skill, so we should be instead focusing on what we can ride safely and what puts a smile on your face. My opinion is that your brother is not prepared for a literbike. I'd strongly encourage a 600 if he wants one, as it'll give him a good taste of what supersports are like, and from there he can decide if he wants to go bigger supersport, standard, sport touring or whatever. If we waited until we could exploit a bike at it's limits until we upgraded we'd all be riding around on CBR 125s. There are some amazing bikes out there, and you don't need to run them out to the limit to appreciate how the tech trickles down to us mere mortals. Fast bikes are fun, and that's why most of us ride. Who cares if I can't exploit a CBR1000RR to it's limit, dragging pegs around a track and lighting it slideways on corner exit, they're just flat out fun to ride.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 18:12
|
|
|
Doctor Zero posted:Perhaps you honestly didn't know, but if you hang out in CA long enough you'll find that kind of post and reasoning gets you a shitstorm pretty much guaranteed. It's nothing personal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 18:51
|
|
|
So! *claps* Let's see... *rubs hands* Captain Kirk: quote:William Shatner discovered the perils of riding a motorcycle without any protective gear, when he crashed on a highway in California. http://www.starpulse.com/news/index.php/2008/04/14/william_shatner_recalls_motorcycle_crash  Jean Luc Picard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnaFMBjVv_8 No apparent motorcycle fan, but hates people talking on cell phones in cars, has taken part in heavy petting in a Jaguar but probably owns at least two Priuses (that is conjecture on my part). He gets extra points from me for the Henrik Ibsen trivia. So who is CA's captain?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 19:22
|
|
|
I'd really like to give a 600SS a shot on the street. "Only" 30-40whp at like 5k? That's about what my bike puts down at redline and it moves just fine. I got to ride a brand spanking new R1 ('09 maybe?) and jesus that thing was ridiculous fast and torquey. I only went WOT once and it was on the highway in 4th or 5th, I didn't come anywhere close to redline but holy hell it went from about 60-115 way way way too fast.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2009 22:28
|
|
|
Ola posted:So who is CA's captain? R. Lee Ermey has played 4 different roles as captains of varying types, and I've seen him shoot a gun from his moving Harley, offroad. THAT is my captain.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2009 04:17
|
|
|
Jabs posted:Speaking of living, learning, and putting actual content in a post...a picture of where I fell the gently caress down - still not 100% sure why beyond "I did something stupid that the bike didn't like" (like "not turning around and going back the other way" or something) poo poo like that happens man. How did the bike fair? E: maybe it's just the last 4 years of driving a lovely 4-banger car around, but does low end really help on the street? I've really only ever driven in central Illinois, with low traffic density. Do you really need anymore getup and go than 100hp/ton? Maybe driving in LA is more intense (and I drive so defensively) than in a rural area, or Chicago where you don't really go more than 10 mph. (never driven there myself, just been along for the ride) It just seems odd to me that anybody needs more than an ex250 ever because holy gently caress that thing moves compared to anything else I've controlled. Methusulah fucked around with this message at 10:03 on Nov 14, 2009 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2009 09:52
|
|
|
Methusulah posted:Do you really need anymore getup and go than 100hp/ton? I don't really think it is about 'need'... It is nice to be able to blast out of a hairy situation though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2009 10:50
|
|
|
Methusulah posted:It just seems odd to me that anybody needs more than an ex250 ever because holy gently caress that thing moves compared to anything else I've controlled. Like has been said, it's not a need thing, but I've often wished for a little more passing power at 70mph. I'll probably move on (not up) to a midsized twin in a year or two.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2009 16:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 17:06 |
|
|
Methusulah posted:poo poo like that happens man. How did the bike fair?  The front wheel was turned to the right when it contacted the curb, and it pulled/popped the LH fork tube out of the top of the triple clamp. At first, I thought that I was going to have to call a tow truck to get the bike less than a mile back home. Wrestling with it some, we managed to get it back into the top clamp "enough" (a little more than 1/2 way) - which was enough for me to ride/duckwalk it back home via various parking lots and apartment complex driveways (that route, in reverse, going through the dark-gray apartments, not along 120th. Also cutting through the grass to the parking lot by China2000, for those what care.) Haven't been back out on it since - we've had crummy weather, or have been packing for a move next week. A permanent fix looks super simple, since the end of the upper triple clamp is attached with 2x 6 or 8mm hex bolts. Unbolt/loosen the endcap, slide the tube back up where it belongs, tighten. No other damage that I've been able to find. My only wish is that I could point to a reasonably clear cut cause, instead of a lot of little things that *might* have contributed. I'm a little sketchy about getting back on, now that I have this impression that you might be flung off it without warning for the tiniest of stupid poo poo. I mean, now I look at something like this and wonder what the magic is that keeps the drat thing upright, when I went down in *way*, *way* less water...but I should repost this in the crash thread, and get my answer there, huh? =) I think I'll do that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2009 18:02
|
|