RE: Mr Fireblade: PH2 Meets
Sunday 23rd October 2016
"If we decided to make a bike with 300hp, we could. If we wanted to make one with 200hp we could. But, to be honest, you couldn't use a 300hp bike and people can't use all of 200hp!"
Honda says it's 90 per cent new - have a look!When PH2 put the question of power to Masatoshi Sato, Project Leader of Honda's new CBR1000RR Fireblade SP and SP2, his answer was pleasantly to the point and honest. With a clamed power figure of 'just' 189hp, the new 'blade isn't hitting the magical 200hp number rivals like the new Suzuki GSX-R1000R and Kawasaki ZX-10RR or even the current Yamaha YZF-R1M are boasting. And in a world dominated by headline grabbing numbers Honda's high-180s claim is a little disappointing. However Sato thinks we may be missing the real headline figure in the 'blade's spec sheet...
And with its clothes on"Over 90 per cent of this 'blade is new; if you touch any part of the bike it will be a new part," confirms Sato. "While we lost some weight through changes to the titanium silencer, titanium fuel tank and battery, virtually every single part of the bike has been redesigned. Frame, swing arm, fasteners, nuts, bolts, even the drive chain is now lighter, we went through the whole machine."
"The new Fireblade will be far more fun"And Masatoshi Sato speaks from experience. Despite (probably modestly) admitting he isn't the fastest rider in the world, he has extensively ridden the new 'blade SP and promises the electronics don't detract from the experience. In fact, he says the new ride-by-wire throttle (taken from the RCV road bike) has actually enhanced the 'blade's traditionally turbine-smooth motor, while the weight reduction has restored some raw Fireblade spirit lacking in some generations of the bike. Which all sounds very promising. But alongside the 'blade's quoted power figures, there is another elephant in the room. Namely, while we all love the SP an SP2 models, where is the basic model Fireblade?
Mr Fireblade: PH2 Meets
PH2 meets Masatoshi Sato, Project Leader of Honda's new CBR1000RR Fireblade SP and SP2
Honda says it's 90 per cent new - have a look!
"What do you feel first on a bike? The first time you lean it over, its agility. A 15kg weight reduction over the old model makes a bike that is far more fun than a bike with 300hp. The new Fireblade SP will be far more fun thanks to this than if we had just been fixated on a power number in order to simply match rivals."
Interestingly this dramatic weight loss has been achieved through a total redesign, not that you'd necessarily realise from looking at the pictures. While the bike's engine, frame and wheels look identical in their construction to the older model's, this isn't the case. Not by a long shot.
And with its clothes on
And as part of this redesign, Sato also broke from Honda tradition with the introduction of cutting edge electronic assistance. What brought this change in philosophy?
"On the race track our results weren't where we wanted them to be and so we knew we needed a radical evolution to bring the 'blade up to the next stage of performance," he admits. "A large part of taking the Fireblade to the next stage meant making it a lot lighter, but also an equally important part was to bring the electronics in. When we thought about how to make the bike even more enjoyable to ride, and allow riders to get even more both from themselves and the bike, we thought the time was right to bring in electronics in such a way they support the rider without interfering too much in the riding experience."
"The new Fireblade will be far more fun"
"Please give us one month, then you will know..." he says with a smile. So that will be the Milan Motorcycle Show in early November then. We will wait with intrigue to see how many of the SP's refinements are carried over into the stock model, or if Honda has put all its eggs in the SP basket...
 |
 |
Discussion
they all claim 200bhp, but none of then make it, and none of them bar the 2016 zx10r is euro 4.... a 14kg loss and 13bhp gain with all the E4 gubbins is really really good. Early figures show a total of 20bhp up with nothing but a link pipe, can and fuelling mods, and a further 4kg of weight saving once you junk it all.... thats serious weaponry.
I wonder if the power stats on this are the first step of rationalisation of litre bike power. Whilst I don't doubt that 200bhp is loads of fun on the road, the Fireblade philosophy was light weight and good handling first. It was that formula that revolutionised the sports bike market in the first place. Of course, one could argue that the Fireblade became so accessible and friendly that it became decidedly middle of the road.
I can't wait to read some proper reviews on this in time. I wonder if this will herald the tipping point to move Suzuki into the age of rider aids. One days, sports bike riders will know nothing of front brakes that you can lock, or back wheels you can spin up...
I can't wait to read some proper reviews on this in time. I wonder if this will herald the tipping point to move Suzuki into the age of rider aids. One days, sports bike riders will know nothing of front brakes that you can lock, or back wheels you can spin up...
Loyly said:
I wonder if the power stats on this are the first step of rationalisation of litre bike power. Whilst I don't doubt that 200bhp is loads of fun on the road, the Fireblade philosophy was light weight and good handling first. It was that formula that revolutionised the sports bike market in the first place. Of course, one could argue that the Fireblade became so accessible and friendly that it became decidedly middle of the road.
I can't wait to read some proper reviews on this in time. I wonder if this will herald the tipping point to move Suzuki into the age of rider aids. One days, sports bike riders will know nothing of front brakes that you can lock, or back wheels you can spin up...
The new GSXR1000 will have a now-usual full suite of eletronics with an IMU, and cornering ABS on the 1000R model:I can't wait to read some proper reviews on this in time. I wonder if this will herald the tipping point to move Suzuki into the age of rider aids. One days, sports bike riders will know nothing of front brakes that you can lock, or back wheels you can spin up...
http://www.asphaltandrubber.com/bikes/2017-suzuki-...
http://www.asphaltandrubber.com/bikes/2017-suzuki-...
Having been racing 200bhp bikes I can say that they are awful at slow speed in the paddock, OK I also admit, the mapping probably contributes a fair bit and a road bike's "200hp"(at the crank, lets remember, and not the rear wheel), is probably a lot more manageable.
Anyway, when choosing my road bike, I was thinking that I certainly didn't want 200hp so I looked for something retro cool. Initially hoping for a ZX7 I settled on a 2003 ZX9. It had had some dyno work and was running 135bhp.....pretty small fry but all importantly AT THE WHEEL!
I can firmly say I would not want any more power. It power wheelies in 2nd and is a licence loosing hoot. Luckily I ride sensible and only go nuts on track officer.....hmmm.
I can't understand why many manufacturers are dropping 600's. Well it's probably the market demand for chasing power, when torque is much more important for fun and feel of acceleration, and most probably don't use half of it on the road anyway.
A modern 600 like the R6 will whoop my 9, having similar power output and a chunk of weight saving. Mr Fireblade sure knows his stuff when he isn't getting sucked in to a power chase.
We have an open race too where 600's can battle 1000's and often the 600's will be victorious at many tracks.
My next bike will probably be the new R6, although I still haven't forgiven them for my R6 from the year 2000 whose '5EB' engines have a clear design fault of cracking barrels where they link to adjoining cylinders.
Should I duck and cover while I'm put in my place by some yobs?
Anyway, when choosing my road bike, I was thinking that I certainly didn't want 200hp so I looked for something retro cool. Initially hoping for a ZX7 I settled on a 2003 ZX9. It had had some dyno work and was running 135bhp.....pretty small fry but all importantly AT THE WHEEL!
I can firmly say I would not want any more power. It power wheelies in 2nd and is a licence loosing hoot. Luckily I ride sensible and only go nuts on track officer.....hmmm.
I can't understand why many manufacturers are dropping 600's. Well it's probably the market demand for chasing power, when torque is much more important for fun and feel of acceleration, and most probably don't use half of it on the road anyway.
A modern 600 like the R6 will whoop my 9, having similar power output and a chunk of weight saving. Mr Fireblade sure knows his stuff when he isn't getting sucked in to a power chase.
We have an open race too where 600's can battle 1000's and often the 600's will be victorious at many tracks.
My next bike will probably be the new R6, although I still haven't forgiven them for my R6 from the year 2000 whose '5EB' engines have a clear design fault of cracking barrels where they link to adjoining cylinders.
Should I duck and cover while I'm put in my place by some yobs?
Edited by Benjo42 on Thursday 20th October 08:54
Edited by Benjo42 on Thursday 20th October 08:54
Good post Benjo..
To be honest I was one of the disappointed parties. Its lazy for Honda to tell us we can't use 200bhp when people are riding 200bhp bikes.
Yes no one is winding these things up on road to their limit and of course this is correct. However we want to see Honda bringing a bike to market, which is competitive with the likes of Kawasaki, Yamaha, BMW, Aprillia and Ducati.
So you have 190bhp on the new blade and why is that Honda? Whats the torque output? Have you given us a stonking midrange torque curve to place the power where we really want and need it for road and track riding?
Why could we have a Race map with peeky 200bhp and a Road or sport map with the 190bhp with the torque emanating early in a flat plane?
Not sure I am buying Honda's story.
To be honest I was one of the disappointed parties. Its lazy for Honda to tell us we can't use 200bhp when people are riding 200bhp bikes.
Yes no one is winding these things up on road to their limit and of course this is correct. However we want to see Honda bringing a bike to market, which is competitive with the likes of Kawasaki, Yamaha, BMW, Aprillia and Ducati.
So you have 190bhp on the new blade and why is that Honda? Whats the torque output? Have you given us a stonking midrange torque curve to place the power where we really want and need it for road and track riding?
Why could we have a Race map with peeky 200bhp and a Road or sport map with the 190bhp with the torque emanating early in a flat plane?
Not sure I am buying Honda's story.
From a 5 year owner of a 11 plate blade I am also in the disappointed area. 90% of the bike has changed. but for me not enough from the looks of it. the change from the 07 to 08 model was big enough that I wanted that model. But I'm glad/nor dissapointed I did not wait another 6 months for the info on the new blade.
Renn Sport said:
Why could we have a Race map with peeky 200bhp and a Road or sport map with the 190bhp with the torque emanating early in a flat plane?
Not sure I am buying Honda's story.
Do some research on engine optimisation and you'll begin to realise the idiocy of the question. Sorry. Not sure I am buying Honda's story.
To think that you can change the fundamental characteristics and delivery of an engine that revs to 14k at the flick of a switch is fanciful thinking.
While you're looking, check out the torque values of the current crop of litre bikes regardless of enfgine configuration. Now look at where in the rpm range that figure is delivered.
Now compare peak bhp at at what rpm and reference to the peak torque.
When you do all this, you'll have you answer
Sod that Steve, I'm supposed to be working, just tell us the answer! 
Also whilst you're at it, can you explain what the map button changes do on most bikes? Does it simply reduce the rev limit so that the power is reduced, or is it more complex and for example, change the timing or anything?
Guys, if you think this blade development is dull, read the write up on the GSXR (linked in this article) that was boosted to 200bhp, "to keep up with the competition", and not set them apart at all. Total snore-fest
PS thanks Renn, how is Stimpy?
Also whilst you're at it, can you explain what the map button changes do on most bikes? Does it simply reduce the rev limit so that the power is reduced, or is it more complex and for example, change the timing or anything?
Guys, if you think this blade development is dull, read the write up on the GSXR (linked in this article) that was boosted to 200bhp, "to keep up with the competition", and not set them apart at all. Total snore-fest
PS thanks Renn, how is Stimpy?
Steve Bass said:
Renn Sport said:
Why could we have a Race map with peeky 200bhp and a Road or sport map with the 190bhp with the torque emanating early in a flat plane?
Not sure I am buying Honda's story.
Do some research on engine optimisation and you'll begin to realise the idiocy of the question. Sorry. Not sure I am buying Honda's story.
To think that you can change the fundamental characteristics and delivery of an engine that revs to 14k at the flick of a switch is fanciful thinking.
While you're looking, check out the torque values of the current crop of litre bikes regardless of enfgine configuration. Now look at where in the rpm range that figure is delivered.
Now compare peak bhp at at what rpm and reference to the peak torque.
When you do all this, you'll have you answer
t.Seeing as you have had the time to do all this 'research' why don't you give me all the bhp and torque figures for all superbikes and we can overlay them.
Thing is you don't have the current 'official' torque figure from Honda as it hasn't been released right? So rather a rather moot point.
Edited by Renn Sport on Thursday 20th October 14:42
MattOz said:
Hugo a Gogo said:
Tadao Baba is and always will be Mr Fireblade
Was about to post the same thing. Met him once at Silverstone. Humble and welcoming. Top man. Like Mr 999 would be Terblanche
Mr 916 would always be Tamburini
Although unlike those models the Fireblade has been continually updated and the name not limited to an indicative displacement.
Renn Sport said:
The question is not idiocy rather you just being a slightly smug git. I was being flippant but Honda have disappointed and the bullcrap about 189bhp being enough for us is horsest.
Seeing as you have had the time to do all this 'research' why don't you give me all the bhp and torque figures for all superbikes and we can overlay them.
Thing is you don't have the current 'official' torque figure from Honda as it hasn't been released right? So rather a rather moot point.
Smug?... maybe better informed t.Seeing as you have had the time to do all this 'research' why don't you give me all the bhp and torque figures for all superbikes and we can overlay them.
Thing is you don't have the current 'official' torque figure from Honda as it hasn't been released right? So rather a rather moot point.
Edited by Renn Sport on Thursday 20th October 14:42
Ok, so lets walk you through this.....
Engines make torque. They convert chemical energy into linear motion via combustion. This linear motion is converted to rotational motion by the crank to give us a reciprocating output.
Now if engines make torque, or a twisting foce at the crank, whats bhp? Well, simply put its nonsense. Its a fabricated figure to give a comparison against, you guessed it, the effective work of a horse. In the 1700's
As a number it's derived from torque, (the true output of the engine) and rpm. So simply put, the higher you rev, the more bhp you make. The formula being RPM X Torque / 5252 its clear that rpm rises increase bhp.
So if an engine makes torque, what effects this?
An engine has fixed parameters, like bore, stroke, compression ratio, included valve angle, valve area, valve timing (in non vtec engines) , intake runner length, exhaust length and volume and so on. The list is long.
Now you have variable parameters like throttle angle, injection pulse width, ignition timing, intake runner length variable systems and so on.
Now any system has an optimal operating condition. So an engine with a set bore and stroke, valve timing and lift etc will have a point in its rpm range where it's producing the maximum torque it can. Either side of this rpm number it loses efficiency and therefore output.
Now if we go back to the basis that bhp is a function of rpm, then more rpm is better. But more rpm requires specific conditions of valve timing and overlap, which being fixed can't alter through the rev range. So an intake runner that creates a small hemholz resonance and effectively supercharges the intake at 13000rpm and supports the engines airflow demands at that rpm number will have poor flow dynamics at 9000 for example and cause a loss at the non optimized points.
All pretty simple so far......
Now as to the torque outputs of modern litre bikes, would you be amazed by learning that every single one produces between 113nm and 115nm. Incredible hey...
Well not really. They all make the same specific output because they are all optimised at 1000cc. What changes is the point in the rev range at which the max torque is delivered.
So we now realise we have engines that are making the 200bhp not because of some magic but by revving higher. And better efficiency. Less losses through reciprocating mass, friction and pumping losses.
But whist the bhp figures have gone up, why have torque numbers not?? Because we go back to the top... optimisation occurs at a single point. Yes, bhp rises with rpm but torque drops away.
So you ask why Honda can't give a peaky 200bhp or a torque laden 190 at the push of a switch?
Because unless that switch can change cam profiles, compression ratios, valve timing and overlap, bore and stroke, inlet length and diameter as well as exhaust length and diameter, it ain't going to happen.
Yes, with the modern ride by wire electronics things like throttle mapping, ignition timing, engine braking can all be manipulated but these don't alter the engine characteristics. They mute or stifle it.
No surprise that the"naked" versions of superbikes, the Tuonos, CB1000R or MT 10, S100R all use the super bike engine but with different cams and set up. Result? Far less peaky delivery with broader torque but less outright power. But why should this surprise us? The motor has been configured for a different point of optimisation. You can't have your cake and eat it so to speak.
These points of optimisation result in the particular characteristics we recognise in certain manufacturers bikes. Broad smooth power, or screaming top end, punchy midrange? All derivatives of the engine configuration.
The previous Blade was optimised for broad power but couldn't support high power because it went out of its efficiency zone. Result? 114nm
BMW S1000RR makes 200 ponies but at 13800. Torque? ? 113nm. Amazing hey? Same torque yet more power..
Different engine configurations in modern litre superbikes result in different torque characteristics but always the same headline torque number.
Now as a comparison, look at 2010 era litre bikes. All made 180ish bhp but typically more torque, around 117nm. And the bhp typically peaked at 12000rpm. So while these motors made less power, they made more torque. Yet now we see typical bhp levels of 200bhp at 13500rpm and 113nm. So the ability to support high rpm breathing has improved and resultant bhp numbers increased but torque has reduced as conditions required to support such a high rpm level reduce the peak output at the optimum point due to concessions having to be made in the engine set up . Nothing for nothing. ?..
So how's this for a prediction... What's the betting on the new Blade making 114 to 116nm of torque. ?..
And whilst it may be a nominal 10 bhp down, it'll probably make more torque for more of the rev range than the competition. Which means it'll be just as fast and probably better on the road....
So before you start worrying about the Honda failing to match the pub bragg rights minimum bar of 200 ponies, take a little bit of time to understand what and why to understand the facts....
Hope that's not too smug for you.....
Edited by Steve Bass on Thursday 20th October 15:49
Edited by Steve Bass on Thursday 20th October 16:02
Steve Bass said:
And whilst it may be a nominal 10 bhp down, it'll probably make more torque for more of the rev range than the competition. Which means it'll be just as fast and probably better on the road.
This is where I'm hoping Suzuki will have their ace. The variable valve timing they have brought over from MotoGP could make all the difference on the road and without MotoGP rules could be developed further.trickywoo said:
Steve Bass said:
And whilst it may be a nominal 10 bhp down, it'll probably make more torque for more of the rev range than the competition. Which means it'll be just as fast and probably better on the road.
This is where I'm hoping Suzuki will have their ace. The variable valve timing they have brought over from MotoGP could make all the difference on the road and without MotoGP rules could be developed further.Given Ducati have gone this route with the multistrada, vvt could be the next 'big thing' in litre bike development.
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff