If it was just an unintentional miscommunication between marketing and engineering, how did the tach get involved? As I recall, the excrement hit the fan when it was found that the Yamaha tach was indicating 17,500, while actual revs measured independently was 16,200. Is that not correct, testers?
Who gives rats behind! If all the techno junkies spent as much time riding their motorcycles as they do wining about some insignificant technical misinterpretations, they could be out there actually enjoying real life. At the end of the day probably 30% of R6 riders are capable of hanging on at 12000rpm let alone having the potential to take them out to 17500rpm.
MO has held for a couple of years now the editorial direction of waiting a bit, when it seems prudent, so as to obtain a longer and more complete test, and, when necessary, to enable themselves to dispell rumors, even those rumors arising from other magazines' tests. This has been especially true of high-hype new models.
But when the MO Files report, you can take their assertions to the bank. Yes, it sometimes takes a bit longer, but you usually get a review of the model in question, along with a "review of the reviews" if you will.
In this instance, how many dead-tree mags went to the Barnes 'N' Noble before RPM-gate broke? If that's an important issue for you, and if you use magazine review to help inform your buying decision, then congratulations, you mayhave already won a screwing of the pooch. MO's stance on article timing, and gues editors, and some other things, is part of what makes them better.
Well, that, and the half-dozen sections of the site that aren't ever updated. Kidding! Guys, don't ban me! I'll get that other guy to "show you round the next bend" when you're lonely, just don't ban me!
With this branching of the tree, I'm reminded of what Jesse "The Ego" Ventura's character did during the chopper scene in "Predator" - established the fact that those surrounding him were all Raging Homosexuals, then offered to increase their Libido......
"MO has held for a couple of years now the editorial direction of waiting a bit"
Yes, this appears to be the case now, but on their top ten reasons to purchase a subscription, they list being able to beat the newsrack as one of their best selling points. As of late, this has not proven to be true. Ironic that MO is advertising something and not delivering, just like something about a Yamaha redline.
Through the month of January, I felt like I was paying this site for links to news stories on other sites. Hopefully Sean is gonna step it up and not have to re-write his R6 article a few times before going to press rather than making us wait another two months.
Once again, the obsession with wannabe hyper-performance spec's, having nothing to do with real world motorcycling. Short of track day's, which 99% of us will never be able to access or afford on a regular basis, where can U wring out 17.5K at whatever ludicrous speed that would translate to, and not be either on your way to the lockup or the hospital?
Agreed. And furthermore, the scandalous discrepancy is between 16,200 and 17,500 rpm. 1,300 rpm, at the extreme top end...on a 600. That's gotta be a difference of, what?, 3 or 4 whole, entire horsepower.
Let's pick a random gear, say third gear. Can anyone figure up what the theorhetical speed of the bike is at 16,200 rpm? and at 17,500? How much "performance" are we really talking about here?
Speed isn't a matter of rpm, it's a matter of power. A 600 that produced peak power at 16200rpm, assuming typical modern compression ratio, would make about 105hp. A 150hp bike with just a typical sportbike/roadracer fairing and the rider in full tuck will reach about 150mph. Of course we don't know that the R6 produces peak power at 16200rpm, only that it will rev that high before the rev-limiter kicks in - but it's probably close.