The lies They tell us

[idleidolidyll]

Here's something interesting.

I'm sure most people realise that the figures quoted for horsepower and weight by many manufacturers are stretching reality to its breaking point.
I mean, what use is a dry weight figure when the bike is drained of water, oil, fork and shock oil, brake fluid etc? You can't start that bike up, it would seize in a minute and you certainly can't ride it.

Well in the latest issue of Rapid Bike there's an article on the new CBR600. In the article the weight issue is discussed and the dry weight number quoted by Honda for the 07 CBR is just 155kg. HOWEVER, Honda has now come clean and is quoting a ready to ride kerb weight of 184kg! That means to get the 'dry weight' figure, they drained almost 30kg of fluid from the bike! 30kg!!
Some Euro marques only quote ready to ride weights, notably BMW and KTM.

In comparison to the new CBR600's 184kg, my new KTM 950 Supermoto weighs 191kg ready to ride, a figure confirmed to within a few percent by magazine tests. I always knew the Japanese, Italian, Brit numbers were bogus but I didn't think they were quite THAT bogus!
If this formula is correct, an R1 Yamaha and Suzuki GSXR really weigh more like 200kg ready to ride! NOT their quoted weights of 165-170kg.

Of course there's another number most factories lie about too: horsepower.
Again, the Japanese factories test their motors with all ancillary equipment removed (alternator etc) and measure at the crank not the back wheel where we use that power. A Yammy R1 quoted as having about 180BHP therefore may only have 150 at the back wheel (still a lot but not what we are lead to believe).
Again, KTM and a tiny few others differ from the practice of fudging figures. KTM quotes horsepower at the back wheel on a run in motor. My bike is rated at 95bhp at the back wheel (some magazines have tested rear wheel power and come up with almost the same number on fresh motors) which is probably pretty much the same as that new CBR600 which is rated at 118bhp at the crank. Of course the 950SM is built for torque and has way more than the CBR making it much easier to use on the road.
I think KTM and BMW may suffer sometimes for their honesty. The KTM SuperDuke for instance only claims 118bhp while its opposition say Aprilia for the Tuono claim 130bhp+. I recall a Tuono on the Dyno at AMPS getting 114bhp at the rear wheel which is not a surprise given that both the Tuono and the Superduke are fuel injected 1000cc Vee Twin motors.

Life would be a lot simpler if all the manufacturers used the same method to quote weights and bhp; I'd suggest the reality based methods used by KTM are what we need to hear, not the outrageous numbers we'll never feel beneath our bums.

[jahrasti]

That is a good article you wrote. As long as they are allowed to quote dry weight etc then unfortunately what ever sells bikes will be used.

[Motu]

It's relative....if everyone measures the same way.In the big car HP figure race in the 1960's there were some obvious spurious claims.Now you will find figures for cars much more realistic as they test with water pumps and altenator etc fitted.Same with compression ratios - all Japanese 2 strokes have ''adjusted'' compression figures,the Euros real compression - so long as you know what you are looking it's OK.

I weighed my Yamaha DT230 with all fluids and a litre of fuel,and the bike was less than 2kg more than listed - pretty damn close I reckon.

[Bob]

As long as it isn't a lie, then yup, they can use it as long as it is made clear - I don't know about NZ mags, but UK mags are pretty good at saying "It makes 180bhp at the crank, so realistically about 150 at the rear wheel".

Of course, the most recent stretching of the truth - that got a company in trouble - was Yamaha and their "The R6 revs to 17,500 revs". As it is panto season... OH NO IT DIDN'T! Real life showed it redlined at 16K - but the rev counter displayed an over-revving of 17.50. This wouldn't have been too bad, aside from no-one pointing this out to Yamaha USA, who used this as an advertising feature. And, if I recall my news item correctly, had to offer refunds and compensation to people that bought the bike.

Oops. Serves them right though.

[Bob]

Just found my original news piece:

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=25590&highlight=yamaha+r6

Remembered it pretty much right! Really dumb move on their part though.

[WINJA]

Ktm and bmw Dont Suffer From Their Honesty , I Think One Suffers From A Perceived Lack Of Parts Back Up And Both Suffer From Price Tag To Performance Ratio , Personally Both Those Marques Would Be On My Keeper List , I Got A Gsxr1000 At The Mo But I Cant See It Being The Bike I Want To Keep For The Rest Of My Life

[Nutter34]

Ktm and bmw Dont Suffer From Their Honesty , I Think One Suffers From A Perceived Lack Of Parts Back Up And Both Suffer From Price Tag To Performance Ratio , Personally Both Those Marques Would Be On My Keeper List , I Got A Gsxr1000 At The Mo But I Cant See It Being The Bike I Want To Keep For The Rest Of My Life

Who are you and what did you do with the proper Winja? You're making way too much sense lately!

[Clivoris]

What really pisses me off is that since getting my bike I still haven't been able to wheely it through deserted factories or been chased by gorgeous Italian women. Knew I should have saved up for an 06.
What happened to the days when we could trust advertisers?

[crack]

Well done:

In an ideal world, one with free trade and all that, it would be good for all those competing in the same industry to operate to an "approved" industry standard, "BUT" thats in an "Ideal World". (Then we would have Cartels)

This argument about advertised motorcycle statistics has been around since as long as I can remember.

I do agree with you that the Europeans have a "tendency" to advertise more honestly.

:love: :love: :love: :rockon: :scooter:

[Bonez]

Good write up. Personnally I folk believe whats in marketing prurbs they're fair game. Not every motorcycle has the same HP as the next one on the production line. So expecting the KTM on the shop floor to have the same HP as in the marketing plurbs is kidding yourself. It could be less it could be more ("almost the same" as you've pointed out). Sounds good around the rally fire with a few Woodstock down though.

Take the things for a ride, if you like it and can afford it get it.

Oh, and Winja should just buy a Honda.

[WINJA]

Good write up. Personnally I folk believe whats in marketing prurbs they're fair game. Not every motorcycle has the same HP as the next one on the production line. So expecting the KTM on the shop floor to have the same HP as in the marketing plurbs is kidding yourself. It could be less it could be more ("almost the same" as you've pointed out). Sounds good around the rally fire with a few Woodstock down though.

Take the things for a ride, if you like it and can afford it get it.

Oh, and Winja should just buy a Honda.

IVE HAD 2 BLADES , NEVER AGAIN

[terbang]

Some excellent questions posed there. Its called marketing and marketing is not really about telling the whole truth. I look at it this way, the floor cleaner I just got is advertising that it has new improved extra ammonia in it. I've been listening to them say that for damn neat 30 years and If they were telling the truth then I suspect that the product would have so much grease cutting formula in it that it would probably burn a hole in my floor by now. But it doesn't, its still much the same as it was 30 years ago. Marketing people dont actually tell lies but they don't really tell us the truth either. Its all smoke and mirrors stuff to me. How many times have you heard a car salesman tell you, unless he was trying to steer you towards something more expensive, that it was a bad model and that you wouldn't like it.
My whole life has been associated with something realistic and tactile (driving planes) you can't kid yerself or you and lots of others die. So the machinations of the advertising world leave me a bit cold.

[FilthyLuka]

they drained almost 30kg of fluid from the bike! 30kg!!


okay... err... ballpark figures here... lets say.. 2 and a half litres of oil... thats 2.5 kgs, err (i dont know actuall figures) a 16 litre fuel tank, thats another 16kgs, so far were at 18, front and rear brake fluid... 1 kg maybe? 1.5? nah, wont use 1.5 litres of brake fluid, so lets say one litre just to make calculations easy...

were now at 19.5 kgs... hmm... where to find the other 10...

Denis

[The_Dover]

fork oil, coolant.

[imdying]

Doesn't really matter. Compariing weight is for train spotters, and spotty youths that can't yet afford to buy them only talk about it. The Japanese quoted weights are relevant to the other Japanese manufacturers, and given that they can only drain so much out, that's a good a relative comparison as any. Ready to ride figures aren't that wonderful either, nobody rides with a full tank for that long.

Reality methods are as equally irrelevant as the stripped back method. Neither is important when you're riding.

[Bonez]

IVE HAD 2 BLADES , NEVER AGAINBlunt ones?

[idleidolidyll]

okay... err... ballpark figures here... lets say.. 2 and a half litres of oil... thats 2.5 kgs, err (i dont know actuall figures) a 16 litre fuel tank, thats another 16kgs, so far were at 18, front and rear brake fluid... 1 kg maybe? 1.5? nah, wont use 1.5 litres of brake fluid, so lets say one litre just to make calculations easy...

were now at 19.5 kgs... hmm... where to find the other 10...

Denis

Sorry mate, it doesn't work even that well.
"Ready to ride does not mean a full tank of gas. It may just mean 1 litre of gas and all the other fluids present (which is, I'm led to believe, how the more honest Euros do it)
That liquid shortfall looks pretty strange now huh!

[The_Dover]

maybe the japs use imperial kilograms?

[idleidolidyll]

Doesn't really matter. Compariing weight is for train spotters, and spotty youths that can't yet afford to buy them only talk about it. The Japanese quoted weights are relevant to the other Japanese manufacturers, and given that they can only drain so much out, that's a good a relative comparison as any. Ready to ride figures aren't that wonderful either, nobody rides with a full tank for that long.

Reality methods are as equally irrelevant as the stripped back method. Neither is important when you're riding.

I disagree, at least in part.
Light weight bikes handle better and have better pwr to weight (obviously) if everything else is equal.
After many many bikes ridden and raced, I much prefer a light weight bike to a porky one. My old XJR1300SP with almost 130bhp at the back wheel (after some mods), was able to keep many supposedly more sporty bikes at bay (I'd say rider skill but then you'd all dump on me for bragging). However, I still prefer less outright power and less weight.
I sold my 640 Supermoto only because the Mrs wouldn't sit on the back seat.
After many test rides (thanks Haldanes, Mt Eden M/C, AMPS), the only one we both could live with was the big supermoto and even then I've ordered tyhe 'comfort seat'.

In my book, weight is more important than HP, my old 640SM was tweaked but still only made 54bhp. However, as many will attest, it was a real weapon around the Coromandel, out to Raglan etc.
Top speed is not my thing, best average speed through faster corner speed pushes my buttons.

[Ixion]

It is my understanding (but I have no evidence for it and cannot remember where I read it) that the "dry weights" are actually the shipping weights for the bikes - before crating up.

If so they would include no fluids at all (engine oil, coolant, gearbox, fork oil, brake fluid, engine coolant) also no battery, no toolkit,no number plate, basically missing all the bits that are put on when the dealer assembles the bike.

On road weight SHOULD be with a full tank of fuel, that was how the old British mags weighed them.

[idleidolidyll]

maybe the japs use imperial kilograms?

ha! ha! like the yank 'gallon' you mean?
you've heard the yanks skiting about how cheap their gas is by the gallon? Well at 3.8 litres (I think) to 4.5 for the imperial gallon, it's already got a head start.

[idleidolidyll]

It is my understanding (but I have no evidence for it and cannot remember where I read it) that the "dry weights" are actually the shipping weights for the bikes - before crating up.

If so they would include no fluids at all (engine oil, coolant, gearbox, fork oil, brake fluid, engine coolant) also no battery, no toolkit,no number plate, basically missing all the bits that are put on when the dealer assembles the bike.

On road weight SHOULD be with a full tank of fuel, that was how the old British mags weighed them.

The problem with that is that tank sizes differ. A Ducati Hailwood replica for example, only holds 8 litres while my KTM 640 with its big tank, held 18 litres. And how about the KTM Adventure with its 32 litre tank?!

I reckon ready to ride with a fixed amount of fuel in the tank: 1 litre or 5 litres, it makes no difference, is the way to go.

[Ixion]

True. But by the same token, different bikes hold varying amounts of engine oil ( from just over a litre to maybe 6 litres). Ditto gearbox oil, coolant (air cooled = none!) and so on.

My expectation would be that ready to ride weight was weight as ready to hit the road.

[onearmedbandit]

Now you reminded me of something I read in a british bike mag, claiumed that some factory weights are just the sum of all the parts required. Not actually weighed as such, more measured.

[idleidolidyll]

yeah but you can't go anywhere really with less than the correct amount of engine oil, coolant, or fork oil etc.

As for HP, my preference when comparing bikes is RWHP (rear wheel horse power).
I prefer this because there are many ways to lose HP between the crank and the contact patch (real world). Ancillary equip rotating weight (alternator etc), chain weight and drag (race chain vs O'ring, vs X ring, vs 520, vs 530 vs belt drive, wheel rotating mass, caliper mass.
In the end, the amount of power and torque that gets to the road is more important than bragging rights at the crank.
The most powerful I ever saw at AMPS was an old GSXR1100 with a big turbo. Viscious power band but it did make almost 200BHP at the rear wheel. (I know the boys have tested a few bikes higher, drag bikes mainly)

[Kickaha]

A Ducati Hailwood replica for example, only holds 8 litres

I think you'll find it's more like 24 litres :yes:

[imdying]

I disagree, at least in part.
Light weight bikes handle better and have better pwr to weight (obviously) if everything else is equal.
After many many bikes ridden and raced, I much prefer a light weight bike to a porky one. My old XJR1300SP with almost 130bhp at the back wheel (after some mods), was able to keep many supposedly more sporty bikes at bay (I'd say rider skill but then you'd all dump on me for bragging). However, I still prefer less outright power and less weight.
I sold my 640 Supermoto only because the Mrs wouldn't sit on the back seat.
After many test rides (thanks Haldanes, Mt Eden M/C, AMPS), the only one we both could live with was the big supermoto and even then I've ordered tyhe 'comfort seat'.

In my book, weight is more important than HP, my old 640SM was tweaked but still only made 54bhp. However, as many will attest, it was a real weapon around the Coromandel, out to Raglan etc.
Top speed is not my thing, best average speed through faster corner speed pushes my buttons.Whoopy doo.... doesn't matter what weight they tell me it is... that's not going to affect how the bike handles... it's still the weight it is. So long as the way they measure the CBR600/R6/GSXR600 is relatively close, that's good enough for me.

Sure we all prefer lighter bikes, but the actual figure itself is elementary.

[idleidolidyll]

I think you'll find it's more like 24 litres :yes:

The 'new' 900ss Hailwood Replica with round tube single sided swingarm that was sold over the internet doesn't have the fuel capacity that the old replica did.
It actually holds 12.5 litres (I was working from faulty memory last night).
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=282&art_id=iol1019925805819D235&set_id=4

[idleidolidyll]

Whoopy doo.... doesn't matter what weight they tell me it is... that's not going to affect how the bike handles... it's still the weight it is. So long as the way they measure the CBR600/R6/GSXR600 is relatively close, that's good enough for me.

Sure we all prefer lighter bikes, but the actual figure itself is elementary.

if that's what you think, fine.

when i'm reading magazines and want to make a list of bikes to test ride before buying, i prefer the figures quoted to be realistic and produced using the same methodology.
if you're looking for a 600-750cc bike, the differences between the japanese and the nerw 675 Triumph, or the 750 Brutale might be quite big but mis-stated due to different test methods.

I'd rather not waste my time riding something that was never up to what I expected in the first place.

It all boils down to what you read magazines for: comparitive bike data and tests or bragging rights that don't translate into the real world.
After 34 years riding and racing on road and off road bikes, i would prefer a level playing field.

[imdying]

Even if you new to the gram what each bike weighed, that wouldn't affect either their handling, or the pleasure they delivered. If you haven't figured that out in 34 years you're in trouble ;) :whocares:

[idleidolidyll]

Even if you new to the gram what each bike weighed, that wouldn't affect either their handling, or the pleasure they delivered. If you haven't figured that out in 34 years you're in trouble ;) :whocares:

you've missed my point but never mind, each to their own.

give me a level playing field any day

[HenryDorsetCase]

my understanding of dry weight is that it is derived by adding up the weight of all the components of the bike, not from getting a ready to ride bike and draining the fluids out. Also its from the blueprint parts, not from a factory one (which might have a weight tolerance built in).....

Putting it in perspective a bit, a SOHC Honda 750 4 is about 215 kg dry (if I remember) and my 900 Hornet is under 200kg with a full tank of gas ready to ride.... the 750 has 67 Hp and the Hornet about a hundred. Power to weight ratio, thats the key.

[HenryDorsetCase]

It is my understanding (but I have no evidence for it and cannot remember where I read it) that the "dry weights" are actually the shipping weights for the bikes - before crating up.




I think we may have read the same article: I think a Kevin Cameron piece in a Cycle World within the last couple of years.

[MikeyG]

There is a similar thing with measuring horsepower. I forget which way round it is but the EU and US standards have different atmospheric pressures and temperatures for measuring at so depending on which standard it is measured to it can be different. Only changes by a few hp but if you are buying off stats and not from what feels best on a test ride then that probably is important to you

[F5 Dave]

But if they all lie - do they lie consistently?

No. So the published weights are not any use.

My usual bleat is I wanted to upgrade my YZF a few years back, the GSXR750 at 166kg was the pony to have.

Wet weight 207.5kg. Oh! Suzuki seem to be winning the weight war by lying the hardest.

For the record my old school (hate that expression) superbike now weighs 202kg with a full tank on certified scale, ~ R1 weight. Took a bit of work but feels lighter & more fun to ride. I could strip another 4kg with some more time & another 4 with a bit of money (still no carbon or Ti), much more very easily if it wasn’t a roadbike.

Still in the old days we had leaded fuel, maybe that was why bikes were so heavy?:mellow:

But my bucket weighs 60kg no gas but ready to go, :done:

[Forest]

The 'new' 900ss Hailwood Replica with round tube single sided swingarm that was sold over the internet doesn't have the fuel capacity that the old replica did.
It actually holds 12.5 litres (I was working from faulty memory last night).
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=282&art_id=iol1019925805819D235&set_id=4

That article is wrong. It seems unbelieveable, but the stock MH900e tank is only 8.5 litres (around 2.2 US gallons). This limits the practical range to around 120km between fuel stops.

Such a pretty bike - but so very impractical.

[centaurus]

Of course there's another number most factories lie about too: horsepower.
beneath our bums.

I read once an article about different types of power. The guy said there are three ways of measuring the power:
1. at the crank with only the devices needed for the engine to run attached - that called brake horse power (as opposite to horse power for the other two).
2. at the crank with all the devices attached - the guy was saying that usually that's the power you see in the specs
3. the "actual" power - the power measured at the wheel.

If the manufacturer says BHP (brake horse power), it means that is the first one. Unfortunately they usually use the term horse power (HP), and the number measured at the crank, and try to make it blurry enough so the buyer would think it's the number from the wheel measurement :D

[Motu]

BHP and HP are the same thing,it's just that the ''B'' is dropped.The original dyno's were called a brake dyno,because that's what they were - an external contracting brake band hooked up to a spring scale....hence the name ''Brake'' Horsepower.There was no measurement for horsepower - the torque reading from the spring scale was converted to horsepower by a formula developed possibly by James Watt or his cronies.Modern engine output is now measured in Watts as part of SI ,the International System of Units..I'm sure one of those pedantic engineers will pop up with the appropriate formula within 2 posts.

Now days they can calculate the output of an engine (using whatever system you like) by taking a sound recording of a F1 car acceletating out of a corner and feeding it into a computer....such is the level of industrial espionage today.

[idleidolidyll]

That article is wrong. It seems unbelieveable, but the stock MH900e tank is only 8.5 litres (around 2.2 US gallons). This limits the practical range to around 120km between fuel stops.

Such a pretty bike - but so very impractical.

That's what I thought originally (about 8 litres).

How crazy is that!
I suppose many of them will only be ridden to Ponsonby Rd for a latte though.
If I owned one I'd be looking to put extra fuel tanks somewhere.

[idleidolidyll]

[[my 900 Hornet is under 200kg with a full tank of gas ready to ride]]

I'd very much doubt that

[idleidolidyll]

Power to weight ratio, thats the key.

only if you travel in straight lines.
if you ride around corners, suspension and weight are far more important

[F5 Dave]

Corners? Pah! Who needs em? :dodge:

Besides you can talk, with a Supermoto there are no corners, just some sideways shenanigans in between the point & the squirt.:Punk:

[avgas]

My bike it 10,000kW PMPO!!!!!!

[F5 Dave]

My bike it 10,000kW PMPO!!!!!!

10 sidewalk hopscotch bravo max 14.175 squared!!!!!!:yes:

[idleidolidyll]

Corners? Pah! Who needs em? :dodge:

Besides you can talk, with a Supermoto there are no corners, just some sideways shenanigans in between the point & the squirt.:Punk:

Not quite.
With a supermoto there ARE corners but not one 'right' line: all lines are available and ya just take whatever line the road bikes didn't take then go over or under them with a big gin under your helmet.
potholes? :whocares: 210-300mm suspension laughs at them
roundabouts? :whocares: these are supermoto jump ramps
dirt or gravel? :whocares: those just to help get the back out quicker

road bikes? :tugger: what use are they on NZ's goat tracks?

[imdying]

Dammit. Now I want an SM!

[idleidolidyll]

Dammit. Now I want an SM!
go to AMPS and ask them for a Thursday night test ride :woohoo:
My old 640 is there

[F5 Dave]

Yeah I've not got enough for a changeover yet after getting a new house a week ago, have been eyeing a 2nd hand Super Duke. Maybe I should ride both, but only late next year.

The only other thing is would it bite my GasGas sharing the same garage?

[idleidolidyll]

Yeah I've not got enough for a changeover yet after getting a new house a week ago, have been eyeing a 2nd hand Super Duke. Maybe I should ride both, but only late next year.

what's that got to do with a test ride? no obligation to buy. anyway, at maybe $8k with a tonne of extra bits, my old 2003SM is a steal

The only other thing is would it bite my GasGas sharing the same garage?

nah, KTM's don't bite (but it might cock a leg and pee all over it)

[F5 Dave]

nah wouldn't consider a single. Did you ride the SDuke & decide on the SM? No point riding until can afford, too much temptation.

Only KTMs have ridden are the 200s. Liked it & would have bought one. . . If I hadn't ridden the GG.

[idleidolidyll]

nah wouldn't consider a single. Did you ride the SDuke & decide on the SM? No point riding until can afford, too much temptation.

Only KTMs have ridden are the 200s. Liked it & would have bought one. . . If I hadn't ridden the GG.

I always ride lots of different bikes when i'm in the hunt (and even when I'm not).

When i bought the 640SM i rode buells, ducatis, honda's etc: the 640 was the most fun of all so i bought it.

wifey has her own bike but in the end we like to ride together on the same bike. not practical on the 640 so i rode a few more: Guzzi, Aprilia, Triumph, KTM's, MV Augusta etc

Nothing made me smile like the 950SM and was any use at all with a passenger so i bought it.

BTW: what is it with manufacturers and pillions? are all our girlfriends/boyfriends supposed to be 4'6" tall and 30kg?
Hell, my wife's only 5'1" and even she found the seat to footpeg distance tiny on every bike we rode except the guzzi and ktm

[idleidolidyll]

nah wouldn't consider a single. Did you ride the SDuke & decide on the SM? No point riding until can afford, too much temptation.



I rode the Superduke about a year ago and rode the Supemoto at the same time. Hated the Superduke and loved the Moto. The Superduke had terrible fuel injection and was hard to control (I understand KTM has listened to many who thought the same and made big changes in the latest model)

In the end the moto made me grin more than all the others and wifey would happily sit on the back seat

[boomer]

I rode the Superduke about a year ago and rode the Supemoto at the same time. Hated the Superduke and loved the Moto. The Superduke had terrible fuel injection and was hard to control (I understand KTM has listened to many who thought the same and made big changes in the latest model)

In the end the moto made me grin more than all the others and wifey would happily sit on the back seat

Your wifey aint too fussy where she sits mate :whistle:

[onearmedbandit]

BTW: what is it with manufacturers and pillions? are all our girlfriends/boyfriends supposed to be 4'6" tall and 30kg?
Hell, my wife's only 5'1" and even she found the seat to footpeg distance tiny on every bike we rode except the guzzi and ktm

I'd rather my bike suit me all the time, and be a pain in the arse the once in a blue moon that I carry a passenger.

[F5 Dave]

Yeah I have an RF for when the wiff wants to pillion (the SP has no pillion seat anyway). But I had to extend the footrests forward & down. But the other thig was her leathers, we replaced a square out of the back of the knee with stretchy kevlar stuff. Mucho help.

Hmmm so ain't bad for pillions? Maybe I should ride one & swap the two roadbikes for one. . .

The RSV I was keen on some while back had very jerky injection, made it hard to be smooth, decided maybe I'm a '4' rider, but keen to try again.

[The_Dover]

most women would moan if you pillioned them in an armchair, it's in their nature.

make them walk.

[F5 Dave]

nah she's totally cool with the addition of the no.1 rider comfort addition.

Heated vest.

Means she doesn't get cold & hence I enjoy not having to hear about how it's supposedly so cold.

[idleidolidyll]

Hmmm so ain't bad for pillions? Maybe I should ride one & swap the two roadbikes for one. . .



That's pretty much what I've done and the same rationale.
Sold the XJR1300SP a little while ago. Great 2 up bike but a real whale to punt at speed.
The whale was for 2 up and the moto was for hoonin. Now the big moto does both.

Buy me a beer and ask for a ride, you might catch me at a weak moment

[idleidolidyll]

I'd rather my bike suit me all the time, and be a pain in the arse the once in a blue moon that I carry a passenger.

each to their own i guess.

i kinda like the feeling of a warn fuzzy pressed up against me................

[The_Dover]

what about the whale? what will she do for a beer?

[onearmedbandit]

each to their own i guess.

i kinda like the feeling of a warn fuzzy pressed up against me................


I get that in the sack when I want it. When I'm out on the road attacking the hills I like to be in control of just myself and the bike.

[F5 Dave]

[plans trip to Auckland]

or maybe I should see if Stu has a demo I can ride.

Ahh, other things to worry about till after Christmas, but cheers for the ideas, may well check it out once things are settled (like setting up me garage & finishing a race bike for end of year).

Hmm, if I sold both road bikes maybe I could get that DT230 for an adventure bike. . .

[idleidolidyll]

what about the whale? what will she do for a beer?

don't ask me, i'm a grandad remember. i've just had my nap.
besides, my peckers for pissing through these days

[Swoop]

what about the whale? what will she do for a beer?

Greenpeace frown on people who get whales drunk.
Their blowholes get filled with saliva, and they are gone for hours when they need to take a piss.

[onearmedbandit]

Back to the original topic. I for one don't buy a bike because it's 2hp better than its counterparts, or 3kg lighter, like I'd notice the difference. And that would be the same for 99% of the riders here, they wouldn't notice the difference. Sure different power deliveries will be obvious, but that ain't got fuk all to do with max. hp. At the end of the day I buy a bike I like to ride, not because it's got more power or less weight then it's competition.

How often do you spend at 100% throttle anyway? How often would 2kg's weight difference make a huge difference around the track on an open day or the trip over the hill?

My point is that I don't make my buying decisions based solely on numbers. Sure, they are of interest, but there is a lot more that comes into it as well. Read any bike rag and that'll give you an idea on whether bike x is considerably heavier or under powered compared to bike y. So they can tell me lies, I'll do my own research.

[F5 Dave]

Everyone keeps asking about the seat. I say it's designed for just what is intended: a nice, 40-mile ride, the last 27 of which is spent in a high-speed chase…

:Police: :scooter::innocent:

[idleidolidyll]

Back to the original topic. I for one don't buy a bike because it's 2hp better than its counterparts, or 3kg lighter, like I'd notice the difference. And that would be the same for 99% of the riders here, they wouldn't notice the difference. Sure different power deliveries will be obvious, but that ain't got fuk all to do with max. hp. At the end of the day I buy a bike I like to ride, not because it's got more power or less weight then it's competition.

How often do you spend at 100% throttle anyway? How often would 2kg's weight difference make a huge difference around the track on an open day or the trip over the hill?

My point is that I don't make my buying decisions based solely on numbers. Sure, they are of interest, but there is a lot more that comes into it as well. Read any bike rag and that'll give you an idea on whether bike x is considerably heavier or under powered compared to bike y.

but mate, we're not talkin 2 or 3 hp difference or a couple of kilos. We're talking 30 kilos and 20 hp.
as for the bike rags, they gush over claimed weights and hp too, well most of em do.
they play to their advertisers just like the media does.
it's about dollars, sales dollars and advertising dollars.
you're right though, there is more to it than hp and kilos and i've told you a few more reasons why i bought the 950SM; the grin factor and the pillion capability.
the triumph 675 has a loverly motor and it'd smoke all the jap 600's in the real world with equal riders. however, the riding position is for midgets and the pillion capacity is a joke. after 20 seconds the missus was coplaining.

[idleidolidyll]

:Police: :scooter::innocent:

yep, i've got the optional 'comfort seat' on order and had one on the 640 too

[idleidolidyll]

:Police: :scooter::innocent:
[[
Originally Posted by Lifted from 'CYCLEWORLD' 950 SM test http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/images/bgold/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?p=848987#post848987)
Everyone keeps asking about the seat. I say it's designed for just what is intended: a nice, 40-mile ride, the last 27 of which is spent in a high-speed chase…]]

rode to rotovegas and back with the missus on the back this weekend gone.
the 'comfort seat' will please the missus as she did kinda complain a bit. The legroom's fine and so is space but that seat's gotta go. buggered if i know why ktm doesn't just fit the soft one std. oh well $250 aint too bad.

[onearmedbandit]

but mate, we're not talkin 2 or 3 hp difference or a couple of kilos. We're talking 30 kilos and 20 hp.
as for the bike rags, they gush over claimed weights and hp too, well most of em do.
they play to their advertisers just like the media does.
it's about dollars, sales dollars and advertising dollars.
you're right though, there is more to it than hp and kilos and i've told you a few more reasons why i bought the 950SM; the grin factor and the pillion capability.
the triumph 675 has a loverly motor and it'd smoke all the jap 600's in the real world with equal riders. however, the riding position is for midgets and the pillion capacity is a joke. after 20 seconds the missus was coplaining.

But the real world difference between them is probably fuck all, despite what the advertising says. And while the mags gush over power and weight figures, I've found them to be pretty honest in the actual reviews. What I'm trying to say is despite the lies etc, I'll do my own research before buying a bike if it mattered that much to me.

So yes I agree with you, the methods they use to tell us power and weight figures are dodgy, and not standardised even then. But if it mattered to me that much I'd do the research myself.

[idleidolidyll]

But the real world difference between them is probably fuck all, despite what the advertising says. And while the mags gush over power and weight figures, I've found them to be pretty honest in the actual reviews. What I'm trying to say is despite the lies etc, I'll do my own research before buying a bike if it mattered that much to me.

So yes I agree with you, the methods they use to tell us power and weight figures are dodgy, and not standardised even then. But if it mattered to me that much I'd do the research myself.

nah, the real world difference between the triumph and the japper 600's is BIG. that motor is WAYYYY torquier than any of them and so easy to use on the road.
On a jappa you'd be changing gear all the time but on the 675 ya just twist the wrist.
don't trust me though, ride one.
yes, i do my own research too but i start with what i've read and make a shortlist of bikes to ride.
trouble is, the bullshit they write just wastes my time. it's marketing masturbation and no use to any rider

[F5 Dave]

funny you should mention the 675, on my list of must try as well & is cheap enough I could keep the RF.


Bit concerned re the SM, the comfort seat is taller? I'm 5'9 so I don't want to be riding a ladder.

My GasGas seat can be hard going, could never make a roadbike.

[idleidolidyll]

funny you should mention the 675, on my list of must try as well & is cheap enough I could keep the RF.


Bit concerned re the SM, the comfort seat is taller? I'm 5'9 so I don't want to be riding a ladder.

My GasGas seat can be hard going, could never make a roadbike.

Oh dear, you're in trouble then.
I'm 6 ft and I can't flatfoot on both sides.

[Bend-it]

The RF is an awesome bike!! I can't figure out why it's so cheap!! I got mine, 38ooomiles, 1996, for $5k! 2 more 1997 and about 20 - 30+thou kms for about $7k... reliable, built on a detuned gsxr1100 bottom end, comfy for pillions, 135hp, 100Nm... hard to go wrong, really...

[idleidolidyll]

The RF is an awesome bike!! I can't figure out why it's so cheap!! I got mine, 38ooomiles, 1996, for $5k! 2 more 1997 and about 20 - 30+thou kms for about $7k... reliable, built on a detuned gsxr1100 bottom end, comfy for pillions, 135hp, 100Nm... hard to go wrong, really...

ummm, cause they're ugly?

don't pay me no never mind though, i'm riding a chookie on the road and it aint no MV Augusta or Britten in the looks dept

[onearmedbandit]

nah, the real world difference between the triumph and the japper 600's is BIG. that motor is WAYYYY torquier than any of them and so easy to use on the road.
On a jappa you'd be changing gear all the time but on the 675 ya just twist the wrist.
don't trust me though, ride one.
yes, i do my own research too but i start with what i've read and make a shortlist of bikes to ride.
trouble is, the bullshit they write just wastes my time. it's marketing masturbation and no use to any rider

Yeah I realise it's a way torquier motor, should be as it's 75cc larger. 600's don't do much for me anyway, prefer the torque of my thou.

[idleidolidyll]

Yeah I realise it's a way torquier motor, should be as it's 75cc larger. 600's don't do much for me anyway, prefer the torque of my thou.

it's not just the 75cc, it's also the three cyl thing. There's a world between the 675 and any of the jappas; even the kwaka 635.
i was impressed and if they'd made it in the Speed Triple style (but with lower rear pegs) I would probably have bought it.

[onearmedbandit]

Yeah, didn't mention the 3 cylinder thing but you're right.

One more thing I should mention. I'm so fucking glad I'm a short arse!! Means I fit the bikes I like, with only one arm on the controls I can do 1200km in one day on a supersports bike and not get a sore wrist or back, or tightness in my legs. Fuckin eh!

[idleidolidyll]

Yeah, didn't mention the 3 cylinder thing but you're right.

One more thing I should mention. I'm so fucking glad I'm a short arse!! Means I fit the bikes I like, with only one arm on the controls I can do 1200km in one day on a supersports bike and not get a sore wrist or back, or tightness in my legs. Fuckin eh!


ha!ha! damn you short guys! you get all the fun toys

at least i don't get arse pain; haven't felt it since i broke me back

[onearmedbandit]

Maurice could rectify that. Ask Dover.

[F5 Dave]

Heard the 675 was cramped.
Yeah & I got a nose bleed just looking at the 950 Adventure, assumed the SM would be shorter, ahh, I'll go ave a nosey one day.

I'm sort of mid sized, always thought bikes were made with me in mind. Getting into Dirt bikes made me revise that idea.

Too tall for the Trumpy, too short for the Katoom, maybe it's give up & buy a BMW :zzzz: :zzzz: :zzzz:

[idleidolidyll]

Heard the 675 was cramped.
Yeah & I got a nose bleed just looking at the 950 Adventure, assumed the SM would be shorter, ahh, I'll go ave a nosey one day.

I'm sort of mid sized, always thought bikes were made with me in mind. Getting into Dirt bikes made me revise that idea.

Too tall for the Trumpy, too short for the Katoom, maybe it's give up & buy a BMW :zzzz: :zzzz: :zzzz:

that's pretty drastic!
just go to an op shop and buy some 70's platform shoes

[idleidolidyll]

Maurice could rectify that. Ask Dover.

I'm sure he could but if I wanted to find an ass burglar I'd go to a gay site.........or have I erred and stumbled on one by mistake?

I thought this was a motorbike site? Why are so many of ya so fragile when others chat about bike stuff?

really, I live bikes but if ya wanna be the latest chapter of gay pride, that's fine too; i'll find some motorcyclists to chat with

[onearmedbandit]

WTF? Is was a joke mate, a bit of a running one. Relax a little, it's only the internet.

[Ixion]

I'm sure he could but if I wanted to find an ass burglar I'd go to a gay site.........or have I erred and stumbled on one by mistake?

I thought this was a motorbike site? Why are so many of ya so fragile when others chat about bike stuff?

really, I live bikes but if ya wanna be the latest chapter of gay pride, that's fine too; i'll find some motorcyclists to chat with

Clear the way! Clear the way! Emergency BOTTYNZ Rapid Response Team coming through.

No donkey stealers here.

Remember , you can always rely on BOTTYNZ, the original and still the best grammar nazis. Accept no imitations, ask for BOTTY by name. We give green stamps.

[idleidolidyll]

WTF?? Is was a joke mate, a bit of a running one. Relax a little, it's only the internet.

whatever, i always give more than i get

[idleidolidyll]

"No donkey stealers here".

Not a lot of intelligent motorcyclists either judging from todays posts

[onearmedbandit]

whatever, i always give more than i get

Noice, I like it.

[onearmedbandit]

Not a lot of intelligent motorcyclists either judging from todays posts

But this one is even better!

[The_Dover]

whatever, i always give more than i get

so you're more of a pitcher than a catcher huh?

it's nice to return the favour once in a while though don't you think?

[idleidolidyll]

so you're more of a pitcher than a catcher huh?

it's nice to return the favour once in a while though don't you think?


ahh tis perhaps your youth and elevated testosterone levels that lead you away from talk of motorcycles and into shallow discussions of gay encounters.

no son, i'm a grandad and fully resigned to the fact that my john thomas is for pissing through not for sexual gratification

[madandy]

Kawasaki claim 215Kg's for their ZX14R right?

Autocar Magazine test a bike or three every month and weighed one...it came in wet at 256Kg.Interestingly they state that's 54Kg heavier than their tested wet weight (202Kg) for a ZX10R wich Kwaka claim weighs only 174Kg!

That's just from a quick peek in last months Autocar magazine...

so yeah, try finding that weight from a tank of gas, some oils(all of which are lighter than water so 1L is less than 1kg;) and coolant...

I get the point that it'd be nice to see all the claimed figures tested with the same standards and also the point that those numbers & how they're measured mean little to someone looking for a bike that suits them and at the end of the day a riders skill is going to be the single biggest factor in that bike's performance in the real world.

Please learn how to multi quote so you dont have to make post after post individualy replying to peoples' comments...it makes the thread long & pointless.

With your tit for tat playground like cock length contest [trying to impress your opinions on one another] of off topic nonsense you guys made the last few pages a waste of time:done:

Andy

[avgas]

road bikes? :tugger: what use are they on NZ's goat tracks?

Dem's fightn words ;) You obviously never saw me on my old RG or GB? You think driftn on the road with road tyres is cool.....try road tyres round an orchard :)
Couldnt afford a decent trail bike at the time.
Can now - but i love the fazer to much on the road

[Lou Girardin]

I don't think any manufacturer quotes wheel hp figures. The power ratings are taken on an engine dyno when the engine is developed. Wheel hp is far too variable and open to litigation.
The whole hp power thing is over-rated anyway, I had a bike 33 hp down on what it should have and didn't get left behind in the twisty's. Torque is what fires you out of bends.
Most road riders rarely use all the power.

[Edbear]

I don't think any manufacturer quotes wheel hp figures. The power ratings are taken on an engine dyno when the engine is developed. Wheel hp is far too variable and open to litigation.
The whole hp power thing is over-rated anyway, I had a bike 33 hp down on what it should have and didn't get left behind in the twisty's. Torque is what fires you out of bends.
Most road riders rarely use all the power.



I hear ya man! When it comes to power, mine's full of it...!:yes: And light, too!:rockon: