Hayabusa Gen 1 v Gen 2. VFM biking.

[Grindle]

I have a Gen 2 currently, which is stock except for an Akrapovic system and a K and N air filter in a modified air box (previous owner did the job, copying an American Hayabusa tuner's design). Anyway suffice to say it goes 'rather well', especially for south of 5 grand, the price of a new 250 single! Circa 200 bhp is ample!
But having spent time reading the Suzuki info, i didn't realise just how many changes there are from the first 'busa. Not just the 42 cc extra, more power and torque, but lighter pistons, lighter but stronger rods, titanium lightweight valves and lighter single valve springs over heavier dual, etc etc. This bike would surely be £16,000 today?
I would say a Gen 2 'busa is one of THE very best buys in biking today. With people paying £18K for litre bikes now and £12K for 600s, the £5,000 a good Gen 2 will get you is a gift from above. People ask me about the sheer size of it compared to a 'blade or R1 but these bikes have got so small they only really belong on a circuit, i'd not want to do many miles in a day on one. I am only 73 kgs and find the big Suzuki a walk in the park to ride. I put 480 miles on it in a day last week and it's even good on fuel.
Great bike for nothing money. Yes i KNOW some people find them unattractive but their competition, the ZZR1400 and BMW K1300 are less attractive!

[black-k1]

Superb bikes with a stonking engine and, excellent VFM if speed or BHP are anywhere on you list of top 5 requirements from a bike.

That said ...

Grindle said:

Yes i KNOW some people find them unattractive but their competition, the ZZR1400 and BMW K1300 are less attractive!

I have to completely disagree with your statement here. The 'Busa (Gen1 & Gen2) is pig uggly and despite it's huge performance VFM, is a step too far for many potential purchasers.

[Prof Prolapse]

I didn't realise the 1340cc had so many revisions to the engine....

They're quite evangelised by their owners as well so that much be a sign of something positive.

Aside from being fk ugly (subjective) and often questionably ridden by blokes in camo trousers (objective), they do look great value. Especially when you start comparing with far more fragile offerings from the same time period, or with modern 200bhp touring bikes, which are twice the price.

Yeah, good point well made I think.

[Grindle]

black-k1 said:

Superb bikes with a stonking engine and, excellent VFM if speed or BHP are anywhere on you list of top 5 requirements from a bike.

That said ...

Grindle said:

Yes i KNOW some people find them unattractive but their competition, the ZZR1400 and BMW K1300 are less attractive!

I have to completely disagree with your statement here. The 'Busa (Gen1 & Gen2) is pig uggly and despite it's huge performance VFM, is a step too far for many potential purchasers.

You think the ZZR1400 is better looking and that awful K1300? Blimey mate i hope your choice in women is better judged! :-)

[Grindle]

Prof Prolapse said:

I didn't realise the 1340cc had so many revisions to the engine....

They're quite evangelised by their owners as well so that much be a sign of something positive.
Aside from being fk ugly (subjective) and often questionably ridden by blokes in camo trousers (objective), they do look great value. Especially when you start comparing with far more fragile offerings from the same time period, or with modern 200bhp touring bikes, which are twice the price.
Yeah, good point well made I think.

Thanks. £5,000 got me a bike with almost 200 bhp, almost 200 mph, i got 48 mpg on the last decent run out, it looks great, purposeful and mean, (you can pick apart the looks of most bikes if you want to) and is reliable as clockwork with a bulletproof engine.
The one-third more cubic capacity for the same peak bhp as the current litre bikes means far more power and torque where 99% of us ride 95% of the time, the low and mid range. It's stonkingly quick changing up at just 7,000 rpm, yet it will got to 11,000 rpm with the lightweight engine internals Suzuki fitted as standard. Will be worth a lot one day if kept nice or restored, judging by some of the total rubbish i used to own now fetching a fortune.
ON the looks, i have had many people say they hate the look of my Caterham, it's fine by me. The KTM 690 divides opinion on looks too. I think it's a great looker but there ya go. Every HD is ugly to many people but i really like some of the Wisconsin iron. A tuned 1925cc (117ci) Fat Bob is on my itch list for some day ahead.

Edited by Grindle on Tuesday 19th November 08:33

[black-k1]

Grindle said:

black-k1 said:

Superb bikes with a stonking engine and, excellent VFM if speed or BHP are anywhere on you list of top 5 requirements from a bike.

That said ...

Grindle said:

Yes i KNOW some people find them unattractive but their competition, the ZZR1400 and BMW K1300 are less attractive!

I have to completely disagree with your statement here. The 'Busa (Gen1 & Gen2) is pig uggly and despite it's huge performance VFM, is a step too far for many potential purchasers.

You think the ZZR1400 is better looking and that awful K1300? Blimey mate i hope your choice in women is better judged! :-)

I agree that the ZZR1400 is better (should that be less bad?) looking than the K1300S. The K1300S looks, at best, mediocre and boring, where the ZZR looks are a little more purposeful. That said, even the ZZR is far from being a stunner but neither the ZZR or the K1300S are pig ugly in the way that the 'Busa is.

My choice in women though ... stunning!!!

[Prof Prolapse]

Grindle said:

Thanks. £5,000 got me a bike with almost 200 bhp, almost 200 mph, i got 48 mpg on the last decent run out, it looks great, purposeful and mean, (you can pick apart the looks of most bikes if you want to) and is reliable as clockwork with a bulletproof engine.
The one-third more cubic capacity for the same peak bhp as the current litre bikes means far more power and torque where 99% of us ride 95% of the time, the low and mid range. It's stonkingly quick changing up at just 7,000 rpm, yet it will got to 11,000 rpm with the lightweight engine internals Suzuki fitted as standard. Will be worth a lot one day if kept nice or restored, judging by some of the total rubbish i used to own now fetching a fortune.
ON the looks, i have had many people say they hate the look of my Caterham, it's fine by me. The KTM 690 divides opinion on looks too. I think it's a great looker but there ya go. Every HD is ugly to many people but i really like some of the Wisconsin iron. A tuned 1925cc (117ci) Fat Bob is on my itch list for some day ahead.

Yeah they're great things. An old friend of mine has raced them on the drag strip for, Christ, it must be a decade now. They're simple and very strong things which as a used buy makes tremendous sense.

Suzuki do know how to make an engine.

I'm getting old and find I'm more open minded about bike choices these days.

[PTF]

Gen 2 busa is one of the bikes on my future list. They seem to fit me really well whenever i sit on one.

But at £2k my blackbird was a steal - 2001 model, digital speedo, fuel injected. And the build quality is a step above pretty much every bike i've owned.

Had a K1300S before that and it had way more power than the blackbird and felt angrier, but the electric suspension and weird front end made it all feel very detached. Plus the finish on some components was a bit iffy after riding in the rain. Plus the thought of anything going wrong scared me!