I might want a sporty bike…
Discussion
Hungrymc said:
Lambo FirstBlood said:
I’ve got a Speed Triple 1200RR.
I’ve raised the bars and done lots of other small mods.
I absolutely love it. As a road sports bike (as opposed to a race replica) I think it’s perfect.
I know the looks are marmite but I love them and the fact that lots of people, don’t makes me like it even more.
Not sure where you’re based but as it’s on your shortlist, you’re welcome to pop over and take a look.
I think they’re stunning looking bikes. I’ve been a little put off by some of the reviews and how they have described the comfort. But I’ve sat on a few including one with raised bars and that made it feel ok (very leant forward on the standard bars). I’m going to have another look at these, and thank you for the offer.I’ve raised the bars and done lots of other small mods.
I absolutely love it. As a road sports bike (as opposed to a race replica) I think it’s perfect.
I know the looks are marmite but I love them and the fact that lots of people, don’t makes me like it even more.
Not sure where you’re based but as it’s on your shortlist, you’re welcome to pop over and take a look.
When compared to a Fireblade, it’s not.
I was OK with the bars in the original position although it was at the very extreme end of what I could live with me long term. The ABM bar riser kit is beautifully made and is a complete game changer in terms of comfort.
Electronic Suspension is a revelation too and of course the looks. I’m biased but I love it!
black-k1 said:
black-k1 said:
As the 'Busa and the K1300S have been mentioned then I'd also suggest you look at the H2 SX. Like the 'Busa. it's a bit too heavy to be a true sports bike but is closer to a sports bike than the K1300S.
The advantage that both the K1300S and the H2SX have is the integral hard luggage. You can ride to the Alps in a day, spend a week scratching on the passes, then ride home in a day, all while carrying a cleans set of clothes for every day.
I'll just add to the H2SX - Almost 220bhp and 110lbft (post remap) with over 200bhp for over 30% of the rev range. All with "real world" 45mpg and 180 miles between fill ups. The advantage that both the K1300S and the H2SX have is the integral hard luggage. You can ride to the Alps in a day, spend a week scratching on the passes, then ride home in a day, all while carrying a cleans set of clothes for every day.
Biker's Nemesis said:
260 Kilo - 220bhp = 846.15 bhp per tonne is pretty impressive, I rode one last year that was mapped, they are great in 3rd gear on a twisty road, power everywhere.
You’re leaving out the mass of the rider, which really matters on bikes.640bhp / tonne is still good, of course.
Ken_Code said:
Biker's Nemesis said:
260 Kilo - 220bhp = 846.15 bhp per tonne is pretty impressive, I rode one last year that was mapped, they are great in 3rd gear on a twisty road, power everywhere.
You’re leaving out the mass of the rider, which really matters on bikes.640bhp / tonne is still good, of course.
My Pug 205 is pretty much bang on 600per tonne with me in it.
I find the H2 and most modern Kawasakis quite odd looking with a bulbous overhang front end. The odd thing is that I think Kawasaki back catalogue has some of the best looking bikes ever.
Caddyshack said:
We don’t really count that on cars though very often but it’s a very good point.
My Pug 205 is pretty much bang on 600per tonne with me in it.
I find the H2 and most modern Kawasakis quite odd looking with a bulbous overhang front end. The odd thing is that I think Kawasaki back catalogue has some of the best looking bikes ever.
It does matter in cars, but far less.My Pug 205 is pretty much bang on 600per tonne with me in it.
I find the H2 and most modern Kawasakis quite odd looking with a bulbous overhang front end. The odd thing is that I think Kawasaki back catalogue has some of the best looking bikes ever.
The whole concept of BHP / tonne in bikes is a bit silly, it’s good for boasting in the McDonalds car park, but little else. Given how light bikes are and how high their C.O.G. Is relative to the wheelbase it just doesn’t matter very much once you are over 100bhp.
Power minus drag to mass is perhaps a better number if someone wants to do willy-waving.
Zarco said:
Caddyshack said:
We don’t really count that on cars though very often but it’s a very good point.
My Pug 205 is pretty much bang on 600per tonne with me in it.
WTF have you got under bonnet of your 205?My Pug 205 is pretty much bang on 600per tonne with me in it.
Ken_Code said:
Caddyshack said:
We don’t really count that on cars though very often but it’s a very good point.
My Pug 205 is pretty much bang on 600per tonne with me in it.
I find the H2 and most modern Kawasakis quite odd looking with a bulbous overhang front end. The odd thing is that I think Kawasaki back catalogue has some of the best looking bikes ever.
It does matter in cars, but far less.My Pug 205 is pretty much bang on 600per tonne with me in it.
I find the H2 and most modern Kawasakis quite odd looking with a bulbous overhang front end. The odd thing is that I think Kawasaki back catalogue has some of the best looking bikes ever.
The whole concept of BHP / tonne in bikes is a bit silly, it’s good for boasting in the McDonalds car park, but little else. Given how light bikes are and how high their C.O.G. Is relative to the wheelbase it just doesn’t matter very much once you are over 100bhp.
Power minus drag to mass is perhaps a better number if someone wants to do willy-waving.
On my Ducati V2s I can use all of the throttle most of the time, it just grunts and goes but does run out of puff over 10,000 ish rpms. On the 600 I do struggle to hang on to it over 13,000 rpm in the lower gears but that may be my lack of experience.
I still miss my 2007 zx6r - much lighter than larger bikes, fantastic handling and brakes, revs to 16k, brilliant gearbox that was like a little switch. Very enjoyable on track and road. Fast but not really enough to get you locked up, just great fun. Later bikes get electronics etc
Edit to add that I also liked my Hayabusa but it only came alive at higher speeds. Great if you’re doing big distances in Europe.
Edit to add that I also liked my Hayabusa but it only came alive at higher speeds. Great if you’re doing big distances in Europe.
Edited by SteveKTMer on Saturday 20th April 19:49
Caddyshack said:
Interesting. Why do you say it doesn’t matter once over 100bhp? Do you mean it’s hard to use it all?
On my Ducati V2s I can use all of the throttle most of the time, it just grunts and goes but does run out of puff over 10,000 ish rpms. On the 600 I do struggle to hang on to it over 13,000 rpm in the lower gears but that may be my lack of experience.
At low speed acceleration is limited by the wheelbase / COG issue, and by the time that’s no longer a problem drag to thrust has become significant.On my Ducati V2s I can use all of the throttle most of the time, it just grunts and goes but does run out of puff over 10,000 ish rpms. On the 600 I do struggle to hang on to it over 13,000 rpm in the lower gears but that may be my lack of experience.
For any “conventional” bike geometry acceleration up to 100mph isn’t really improved very much by going from 100bhp to 1,000bhp.
Skeptisk said:
Out of curiosity, anyone on here got a V4R? If I were splashing out on a senselessly stupidly expensive bike…I would be looking at a V4R.
My mate has just sold a street fighter V4S which is a lower tuned version of that engine (ish) he is a quick rider but said it was way over the top on the road and probably did not get to use the last 50hp very often.I have seen him wheelie off crests at 135mph without provocation even with the wings and counter rotating crank.
The V4 R is an epic engine though and I would love to have a go just to see how scary and mind bending it is.
Ken_Code said:
It does matter in cars, but far less.
The whole concept of BHP / tonne in bikes is a bit silly, it’s good for boasting in the McDonalds car park, but little else. Given how light bikes are and how high their C.O.G. Is relative to the wheelbase it just doesn’t matter very much once you are over 100bhp.
Power minus drag to mass is perhaps a better number if someone wants to do willy-waving.
Power is power, a sports bike with similar power but lighter than an H2 will have a higher bhp/tonne.The whole concept of BHP / tonne in bikes is a bit silly, it’s good for boasting in the McDonalds car park, but little else. Given how light bikes are and how high their C.O.G. Is relative to the wheelbase it just doesn’t matter very much once you are over 100bhp.
Power minus drag to mass is perhaps a better number if someone wants to do willy-waving.
Power minus drag is pretty useless on a motorcycle on a windy back road, a broad spread of power is the key.
Anyway, this is the internet, I don't have a H2 neither do I go to pubs so I don't see your point about it being boasting.
A lot of words in your post that said nothing.
Ken_Code said:
Biker's Nemesis said:
260 Kilo - 220bhp = 846.15 bhp per tonne is pretty impressive, I rode one last year that was mapped, they are great in 3rd gear on a twisty road, power everywhere.
You’re leaving out the mass of the rider, which really matters on bikes.640bhp / tonne is still good, of course.
Biker's Nemesis said:
Power is power, a sports bike with similar power but lighter than an H2 will have a higher bhp/tonne.
Power minus drag is pretty useless on a motorcycle on a windy back road, a broad spread of power is the key.
Anyway, this is the internet, I don't have a H2 neither do I go to pubs so I don't see your point about it being boasting.
A lot of words in your post that said nothing.
No, they explained why your post made no sense.Power minus drag is pretty useless on a motorcycle on a windy back road, a broad spread of power is the key.
Anyway, this is the internet, I don't have a H2 neither do I go to pubs so I don't see your point about it being boasting.
A lot of words in your post that said nothing.
If you want to talk about pierr
Caddyshack said:
Zarco said:
Caddyshack said:
We don’t really count that on cars though very often but it’s a very good point.
My Pug 205 is pretty much bang on 600per tonne with me in it.
WTF have you got under bonnet of your 205?My Pug 205 is pretty much bang on 600per tonne with me in it.
Ken_Code said:
Caddyshack said:
Interesting. Why do you say it doesn’t matter once over 100bhp? Do you mean it’s hard to use it all?
On my Ducati V2s I can use all of the throttle most of the time, it just grunts and goes but does run out of puff over 10,000 ish rpms. On the 600 I do struggle to hang on to it over 13,000 rpm in the lower gears but that may be my lack of experience.
At low speed acceleration is limited by the wheelbase / COG issue, and by the time that’s no longer a problem drag to thrust has become significant.On my Ducati V2s I can use all of the throttle most of the time, it just grunts and goes but does run out of puff over 10,000 ish rpms. On the 600 I do struggle to hang on to it over 13,000 rpm in the lower gears but that may be my lack of experience.
For any “conventional” bike geometry acceleration up to 100mph isn’t really improved very much by going from 100bhp to 1,000bhp.
Caddyshack said:
I think I understand, so the bike will either wheelie or spin the wheel with much more power than that being used low down?
Wheelie, in general, rather than spin the rear as it doesn’t take much acceleration to transfer 100% of the bike’s weight to the rear wheel, after which applying any more power makes the front lift.Superbikes don’t really accelerate any better up to 100mph nowadays than they did ten to twenty years ago.
The way to allow them to deploy more power is generally to lengthen the wheelbase and / or lower the centre of gravity.
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff