'03 Best of the Best Feedback
21 - 40 of 130 Posts
oh yeah, walk away with a grin cuz you can't see it while sitting on it. next time you ride one, notice the smiles from all the people around you. they are laughing at the oogliness of the bike.
having said that, I'll take fast over ugly any day of the week.
having said that, I'll take fast over ugly any day of the week.
Joined
·
2,752 Posts
Longride, Buzglyd, and seruzawa are you listening to 5150boy
Great point. Longride, Buzglyd, and seruzawa have constantly put down 600s saying they have no power under 9000 rpm. I have a 20001 ZX6R and I have plenty of low end grunt. I agree with you Liter bikes are overkill and your 636 is great deal I hope you have as much fun as I have had on my ZX6R.
Great point. Longride, Buzglyd, and seruzawa have constantly put down 600s saying they have no power under 9000 rpm. I have a 20001 ZX6R and I have plenty of low end grunt. I agree with you Liter bikes are overkill and your 636 is great deal I hope you have as much fun as I have had on my ZX6R.
Joined
·
2 Posts
I think we're all forgetting the sv in this argument. How does IT compare?
Joined
·
1,538 Posts
Re: Longride, Buzglyd, and seruzawa are you listening to 5150boy
KPaul, you're so wrong, as usual. Regardless of how high you moderate your own posts, you'll always be a "Dipstick" to me. If you.... Oh wait..... NO you're NOT sucking me in again.
KPaul, you're so wrong, as usual. Regardless of how high you moderate your own posts, you'll always be a "Dipstick" to me. If you.... Oh wait..... NO you're NOT sucking me in again.
Joined
·
11 Posts
2/3 of the field does not have the fastest machine.
Joined
·
2,752 Posts
Re: Longride, Buzglyd, and seruzawa are you listening to 5150boy
Hey you got me started on this moderate thing. Just another tool to suck the twin heads in.
Great article dude thanks for backing up my intuition about 600s with empirical evidence. Life is good when you are riding the pinnacle in price/performance for motorcycles (600s). Opps I better shift now my rpms have dropped below 9000.
Hey you got me started on this moderate thing. Just another tool to suck the twin heads in.
Great article dude thanks for backing up my intuition about 600s with empirical evidence. Life is good when you are riding the pinnacle in price/performance for motorcycles (600s). Opps I better shift now my rpms have dropped below 9000.
Joined
·
23 Posts
Yeah right. Thats why the race Kwak puts out 130 hp, while the stock bike is what.... like 20 or 30 horses down on that? Sure... just "debur" the heads, and jet and pipe, and presto, 30 horses. Honest. no really.
Gotta love those "magic" 600's (or 636's as the case may be).
Great bikes, amazing bikes, but if you think you are riding what they are racing you are dreaming.
Gotta love those "magic" 600's (or 636's as the case may be).
Great bikes, amazing bikes, but if you think you are riding what they are racing you are dreaming.
Joined
·
23 Posts
Johnny.... you missed a great opportunity.
The new AMA rules seem to be designed to go out of their way to make sure the Japanese spec inline fours will be unbeatable.
From a physics standpoint the new rules make absolutely no sense, unless maybe you are thinking along the lines of Japanese Payola. An inline four will always have an advantage over a twin in power versus displacement. Just like a two stroke will always have an advantage over a four stroke in power versus displacement.
If you showed up on a 600cc two stroke and were ready to spank the 600cc four strokes, you would rightfully be escorted off the field by security before the race began. A two stroke typically makes nearly twice the power of a four stroke, it has a significant physics advantage. But now all of a sudden the physics advantage (ability to pump air, maximum terminal piston velocity, ratio of valve to chamber, distance of flame front propagation) of an inline four over a twin is somehow non existent according to the AMA?
They further make no sane distinction about valve configuration. Desmo's are (AFAIK) "penalized" because they have gear driven valves... fair enough, that gives them an advantage over OHC. But a pushrod engine gets no corresponding adjustment relative to the OHC's. Nor does an aircooled engine get any adjustment relative to a liquid cooled unit.
This is a shame, as I would love to see the Buell XB's and the SV650's, get a crack at the 600 inline fours, which is obviuosly the class where they belong (emphasizes a balance of speed and handling, not just raw power, warp top speeds, and boatlike handling). But that ain't gonna happen at the AMA (which perhaps should rename themselves the "inline four overhead cam water cooled spec racing association").
And now in the larger classes, the door is shut on the Ducattis, Aprillas, Triumph Triples, Buells, Dukes, RC51's, SV1000's, etc before the season even starts. No rational person would field a serious effort to win on a twin versus inline fours with the current rule set. This is only going to further marginalize and dull a "premire" American racing series.
Wish you would have spoken more directly to the issue rather then just dancing around the corners of it like you did in the article, if I wanted to see the "stealth criticisim" I would have waited for the Cycle world article. Is MO getting soft?
And while I am resigned to the general ignorant squid sportbike poser to thinking "more HP per CC must mean its a better bike" I expect professionals such as yourselves to have a wiser "lots of factors determine the strengths of a particular engine, and HP / CC is not a particularly relevant one" approach to the problem.
Who cares what the displacement of a bike is, what matters is the weight and size of the engine, the profile of the power versus RPM, maintainability of the engine over time, etc. If anyone thinks my pushrod aircooled VTwin is pathetic because it would require about twice the displacement of your 600 inline four OHC watercooler to make the same power, what does that make your precious 600 relative to a 500cc two stroke that could spank you six ways to sunday?
Don't get me wrong, the inline four OHC watercooled is a killer race configuration (second only to a V four desmo). But it would not be that hard to do the math to come up with equitable racing between significantly different (but reasonable) engine configurations, and I think mixing up more types of bikes would make the racing far more interesting.
The new AMA rules seem to be designed to go out of their way to make sure the Japanese spec inline fours will be unbeatable.
From a physics standpoint the new rules make absolutely no sense, unless maybe you are thinking along the lines of Japanese Payola. An inline four will always have an advantage over a twin in power versus displacement. Just like a two stroke will always have an advantage over a four stroke in power versus displacement.
If you showed up on a 600cc two stroke and were ready to spank the 600cc four strokes, you would rightfully be escorted off the field by security before the race began. A two stroke typically makes nearly twice the power of a four stroke, it has a significant physics advantage. But now all of a sudden the physics advantage (ability to pump air, maximum terminal piston velocity, ratio of valve to chamber, distance of flame front propagation) of an inline four over a twin is somehow non existent according to the AMA?
They further make no sane distinction about valve configuration. Desmo's are (AFAIK) "penalized" because they have gear driven valves... fair enough, that gives them an advantage over OHC. But a pushrod engine gets no corresponding adjustment relative to the OHC's. Nor does an aircooled engine get any adjustment relative to a liquid cooled unit.
This is a shame, as I would love to see the Buell XB's and the SV650's, get a crack at the 600 inline fours, which is obviuosly the class where they belong (emphasizes a balance of speed and handling, not just raw power, warp top speeds, and boatlike handling). But that ain't gonna happen at the AMA (which perhaps should rename themselves the "inline four overhead cam water cooled spec racing association").
And now in the larger classes, the door is shut on the Ducattis, Aprillas, Triumph Triples, Buells, Dukes, RC51's, SV1000's, etc before the season even starts. No rational person would field a serious effort to win on a twin versus inline fours with the current rule set. This is only going to further marginalize and dull a "premire" American racing series.
Wish you would have spoken more directly to the issue rather then just dancing around the corners of it like you did in the article, if I wanted to see the "stealth criticisim" I would have waited for the Cycle world article. Is MO getting soft?
And while I am resigned to the general ignorant squid sportbike poser to thinking "more HP per CC must mean its a better bike" I expect professionals such as yourselves to have a wiser "lots of factors determine the strengths of a particular engine, and HP / CC is not a particularly relevant one" approach to the problem.
Who cares what the displacement of a bike is, what matters is the weight and size of the engine, the profile of the power versus RPM, maintainability of the engine over time, etc. If anyone thinks my pushrod aircooled VTwin is pathetic because it would require about twice the displacement of your 600 inline four OHC watercooler to make the same power, what does that make your precious 600 relative to a 500cc two stroke that could spank you six ways to sunday?
Don't get me wrong, the inline four OHC watercooled is a killer race configuration (second only to a V four desmo). But it would not be that hard to do the math to come up with equitable racing between significantly different (but reasonable) engine configurations, and I think mixing up more types of bikes would make the racing far more interesting.
Very interesting comparison between the GSXR and the Kawi 636. Lap times are very close and probably because the torque (stroke = 59mm) of the GSXR is countered by the high RPM of the 636 (stroke = ~42mm), which would be spinning a lot faster. The weights are also close - no? The 636 must be about 20 to 30 pounds lighter? Anyway there's a huge difference in stroke and long stroke usually feels better on the street - right JB? BTW - how are the Japs getting 15,000RPM redlines with 42mm strokes. Are they really pushing the technology envelope or is that not a real redline?
Re: Johnny.... you missed a great opportunity.
In what is perhaps the best, most thought out post I've seen on MO in a long time, you've managed to sum up everything I've always thought about the AMA and other cycle racing santioning body rules. The fact of the matter is, there are scientific formulas out there that are pretty accurate in predicting the potential power output of just about any engine configuration you can think of (there's even a computer program for it). Now I didn't pay much attention in that class (Energy Conversion II, sorry Dr. Gaggioli), but I know there's somebody out there who could figure this out scientifically, so that we end up with an appropriate level of competition between all of the engine configurations you've described above, and then some.
In what is perhaps the best, most thought out post I've seen on MO in a long time, you've managed to sum up everything I've always thought about the AMA and other cycle racing santioning body rules. The fact of the matter is, there are scientific formulas out there that are pretty accurate in predicting the potential power output of just about any engine configuration you can think of (there's even a computer program for it). Now I didn't pay much attention in that class (Energy Conversion II, sorry Dr. Gaggioli), but I know there's somebody out there who could figure this out scientifically, so that we end up with an appropriate level of competition between all of the engine configurations you've described above, and then some.
Bah .. let them hate, so long as they fear.
Look .. beauty in the eye of the beholder and all .. but this is how I see it....
I not a fan of harley/customs/cruisers ... I think chopper style bikes are fugly. But, my first thoughts on looking at one are admiration for the people(s) that built it and their creativity. Turning their idea into reality.
I think people driving around in lowered imports with Plymouth Superbird style wings on the back are pretty lame, none the less it's Hot Rodding continuing through another generation.
With the gixxer ... it's being excited about the progression of sportbikes. I thought the same thing when the R1 came out and raised the bar, over the CBR900RR.
Then again, I suppose everyone has different priorities.
Look .. beauty in the eye of the beholder and all .. but this is how I see it....
I not a fan of harley/customs/cruisers ... I think chopper style bikes are fugly. But, my first thoughts on looking at one are admiration for the people(s) that built it and their creativity. Turning their idea into reality.
I think people driving around in lowered imports with Plymouth Superbird style wings on the back are pretty lame, none the less it's Hot Rodding continuing through another generation.
With the gixxer ... it's being excited about the progression of sportbikes. I thought the same thing when the R1 came out and raised the bar, over the CBR900RR.
Then again, I suppose everyone has different priorities.
Joined
·
2,752 Posts
AMA Superbike rules will prove to be better over WSB.
Point by Point:
[*] The rules don't give an advantage to inline 4s they just eliminate the 250cc advantage of V-Twins. If racing Twins can't handle equal displacement rules fine they can go the way of the Aircooled pushrod engine i.e. to cruisers
[*] I think the AMA rules will create a rebirth of the Superbike series. There will be closer racing with every manufacturer involved including Yamaha
[*] You seem to think that the Firebolt can hang with the 600s. I think you are wrong but hey lets see it .
[*] No one makes 2 stroke road bikes for the mass market and 500cc MotoGP was becoming stagnat when it was a 2 stroke deal.
[*]You think that displacement dominated rules will only lead to one configuration. MotoGP has proven otherwise
[*] Putting restrictor plates and adding handicaps to the inline 4s is only good for Ducati and even they have abondoned the V-Twin in MotoGP [*]
Point by Point:
[*] The rules don't give an advantage to inline 4s they just eliminate the 250cc advantage of V-Twins. If racing Twins can't handle equal displacement rules fine they can go the way of the Aircooled pushrod engine i.e. to cruisers
[*] I think the AMA rules will create a rebirth of the Superbike series. There will be closer racing with every manufacturer involved including Yamaha
[*] You seem to think that the Firebolt can hang with the 600s. I think you are wrong but hey lets see it .
[*] No one makes 2 stroke road bikes for the mass market and 500cc MotoGP was becoming stagnat when it was a 2 stroke deal.
[*]You think that displacement dominated rules will only lead to one configuration. MotoGP has proven otherwise
[*] Putting restrictor plates and adding handicaps to the inline 4s is only good for Ducati and even they have abondoned the V-Twin in MotoGP [*]
21 - 40 of 130 Posts
Join the discussion
