How much have bikes progressed since the 90s?
Discussion
My perception is that bikes - I suppose more specifically sportsbikes - hit a peak in the 90s - think first R1 - and haven’t moved on appreciably since then. They have got more powerful but for use on the road they aren’t any quicker. I expect an original R1 with refreshed suspension and steering damper would still be bonkers quick today as it was when first launched. On track in the right hands it might not keep up with an S1000RR but on your average A and B road more than enough.
I think the main difference is the electronics, which help tame the power. That might make modern bikes a bit safer (ironically given the extra power).
Not that I’m complaining about modern bikes. Just that they are only incrementally better than 90s bikes and that unless you are a good rider and on a race track you can’t really exploit the differences.
I think the main difference is the electronics, which help tame the power. That might make modern bikes a bit safer (ironically given the extra power).
Not that I’m complaining about modern bikes. Just that they are only incrementally better than 90s bikes and that unless you are a good rider and on a race track you can’t really exploit the differences.
I was watching a TT F1 race from 1991 yesterday and the 750’s were still quick around Cadwell,the fastest lap was 1.31,now wiki lists it as 1.26.
Bikes are quite a bit quicker now but in comparison look s
t to a ZXR,RC 30 or OWO1.Back in the day bikes were not a sponsors wet dream covered in trendy paint and st stickers.
Bikes are quite a bit quicker now but in comparison look s
t to a ZXR,RC 30 or OWO1.Back in the day bikes were not a sponsors wet dream covered in trendy paint and st stickers.You could say similar about cars, excepting dieselgate the main differences are in the electronics and safety equipment. We're at peak ICE, would need a change of materials or fuel to significantly alter that.
Tyres have changed a bit though, dual compound technologies have allowed greater grip with decent wear rates. Putting modern tyres on a 90's sportsbike has got to be the biggest performance upgrade you can make.
Tyres have changed a bit though, dual compound technologies have allowed greater grip with decent wear rates. Putting modern tyres on a 90's sportsbike has got to be the biggest performance upgrade you can make.
Common Tread in the us did an interesting video on this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0O8Q0x38mI&t=...
Comparing the latest Panigale with a K5 GSXR1000. They concluded the same, bikes haven't necessarily come on much since. There was previously a thread which had quite an in depth discussion on it.
I think it's like cars, with a professional rider not much quicker, but the tech means a novice goes much quicker than they would have done before.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0O8Q0x38mI&t=...
Comparing the latest Panigale with a K5 GSXR1000. They concluded the same, bikes haven't necessarily come on much since. There was previously a thread which had quite an in depth discussion on it.
I think it's like cars, with a professional rider not much quicker, but the tech means a novice goes much quicker than they would have done before.
In my experience bikes have moved on alot more than you'd think. Sports bikes are a million miles better in terms of handling. Of course they're much more powerful, but easier to control. It's the handling and usability that's so much better.
In the 90s it could be difficult to manage and deliver 130-150 bhp and 'moments' could be frequent. Now, an reasonable person can manage 200 bhp (with experience and good judgement) with fewer issues due to abs, wheelie control, slide control etc. It doesn't change the fun, it's just a bit more predictable.
You can always turn the systems off too. So i'd say no, today is the current peak for bikes, but it'll be better tomorrow.
In the 90s it could be difficult to manage and deliver 130-150 bhp and 'moments' could be frequent. Now, an reasonable person can manage 200 bhp (with experience and good judgement) with fewer issues due to abs, wheelie control, slide control etc. It doesn't change the fun, it's just a bit more predictable.
You can always turn the systems off too. So i'd say no, today is the current peak for bikes, but it'll be better tomorrow.
Max5476 said:
Common Tread in the us did an interesting video on this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0O8Q0x38mI&t=...
Comparing the latest Panigale with a K5 GSXR1000. They concluded the same, bikes haven't necessarily come on much since. There was previously a thread which had quite an in depth discussion on it.
I think it's like cars, with a professional rider not much quicker, but the tech means a novice goes much quicker than they would have done before.
That is a really interesting video.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0O8Q0x38mI&t=...
Comparing the latest Panigale with a K5 GSXR1000. They concluded the same, bikes haven't necessarily come on much since. There was previously a thread which had quite an in depth discussion on it.
I think it's like cars, with a professional rider not much quicker, but the tech means a novice goes much quicker than they would have done before.
The main differences I see comparing to the early superbikes;
size - 1L bikes are like early 750s in weight/size
tyres - the tyres we have available on road bikes todays are so much better, something called "sport touring" these days seems like a sports tyre of the 90s...at least in my experience
electronics inc suspension - allow novice riders to experience more of the performance without incidents and easy to setup the bike
More power has obviously given more acceleration and top speed in some cases
Bikes of all types in general have improved, not just sports bikes. Its not a case of you need a sportsbike to make good progress and have fun on the road, when you can buy tourers, cruisers, adventure bikes etc all with 100-160bhp and the improvements mentioned. You have to go out of your way to find something under powered that handles badly when most mainstream bikes have capabilities that exceed the average riders ability to use them on the road.
size - 1L bikes are like early 750s in weight/size
tyres - the tyres we have available on road bikes todays are so much better, something called "sport touring" these days seems like a sports tyre of the 90s...at least in my experience
electronics inc suspension - allow novice riders to experience more of the performance without incidents and easy to setup the bike
More power has obviously given more acceleration and top speed in some cases
Bikes of all types in general have improved, not just sports bikes. Its not a case of you need a sportsbike to make good progress and have fun on the road, when you can buy tourers, cruisers, adventure bikes etc all with 100-160bhp and the improvements mentioned. You have to go out of your way to find something under powered that handles badly when most mainstream bikes have capabilities that exceed the average riders ability to use them on the road.
Esceptico said:
My perception is that bikes - I suppose more specifically sportsbikes - hit a peak in the 90s - think first R1 - and haven’t moved on appreciably since then. They have got more powerful but for use on the road they aren’t any quicker. I expect an original R1 with refreshed suspension and steering damper would still be bonkers quick today as it was when first launched. On track in the right hands it might not keep up with an S1000RR but on your average A and B road more than enough.
I think the main difference is the electronics, which help tame the power. That might make modern bikes a bit safer (ironically given the extra power).
Not that I’m complaining about modern bikes. Just that they are only incrementally better than 90s bikes and that unless you are a good rider and on a race track you can’t really exploit the differences.
I sometimes wonder if you're sitting in NZ smoking your socks I think the main difference is the electronics, which help tame the power. That might make modern bikes a bit safer (ironically given the extra power).
Not that I’m complaining about modern bikes. Just that they are only incrementally better than 90s bikes and that unless you are a good rider and on a race track you can’t really exploit the differences.
The first R1 had 150 bhp, the latest 200. That's a 33% increase for the same capacity.
Chassis, braking and electronics have moved on immeasurably. Irrespective of how fast Joe Schmo can ride on his on the road, the avaliable performance is like night and day. And that's before you account for the quantum improvement in tyres.
With respect, and perhaps because you haven't been riding long, you're talking kak
Steve Bass said:
I sometimes wonder if you're sitting in NZ smoking your socks
The first R1 had 150 bhp, the latest 200. That's a 33% increase for the same capacity.
Chassis, braking and electronics have moved on immeasurably. Irrespective of how fast Joe Schmo can ride on his on the road, the avaliable performance is like night and day. And that's before you account for the quantum improvement in tyres.
With respect, and perhaps because you haven't been riding long, you're talking kak
I don’t know what the roads are like in South Africa but in the U.K. or NZ I’m struggling to see how you can use even 150 bhp all the time without getting into trouble. So having an extra 33% doesn’t really matter. The first R1 had 150 bhp, the latest 200. That's a 33% increase for the same capacity.
Chassis, braking and electronics have moved on immeasurably. Irrespective of how fast Joe Schmo can ride on his on the road, the avaliable performance is like night and day. And that's before you account for the quantum improvement in tyres.
With respect, and perhaps because you haven't been riding long, you're talking kak
Although power is up, has torque also increased 33%?
Yes tyres have improved but then none of the 90s bikes will be on 90s rubber either.
Perhaps you would like to watch the comparison of the 15 year old GSXR 1000 vs the 2020 V4 and comment as that seems to contradict your assessment of how new bikes are a quantum step forward.
Steve Bass said:
I sometimes wonder if you're sitting in NZ smoking your socks
The first R1 had 150 bhp, the latest 200. That's a 33% increase for the same capacity.
Chassis, braking and electronics have moved on immeasurably. Irrespective of how fast Joe Schmo can ride on his on the road, the avaliable performance is like night and day. And that's before you account for the quantum improvement in tyres.
With respect, and perhaps because you haven't been riding long, you're talking kak
And the electronics as well - the multi-axis IMU has brought huge improvements.The first R1 had 150 bhp, the latest 200. That's a 33% increase for the same capacity.
Chassis, braking and electronics have moved on immeasurably. Irrespective of how fast Joe Schmo can ride on his on the road, the avaliable performance is like night and day. And that's before you account for the quantum improvement in tyres.
With respect, and perhaps because you haven't been riding long, you're talking kak
If you're taking about all bikes and not just sports bikes then I see a massive improvement.
My 2002 1150GS was 245kg and 85bhp 45mpg(approx form memory) my KTM 790adv is 95bhp, 200kg 60 mpg which seems like a big leap to me.
The market has changed too in the 90s sports bikes where top of the sales charts(or at least a lot higher than they are now) I imagine if they still sold as well the tech and improvements would be higher still.
My 2002 1150GS was 245kg and 85bhp 45mpg(approx form memory) my KTM 790adv is 95bhp, 200kg 60 mpg which seems like a big leap to me.
The market has changed too in the 90s sports bikes where top of the sales charts(or at least a lot higher than they are now) I imagine if they still sold as well the tech and improvements would be higher still.
Esceptico said:
I don’t know what the roads are like in South Africa but in the U.K. or NZ I’m struggling to see how you can use even 150 bhp all the time without getting into trouble. So having an extra 33% doesn’t really matter.
Although power is up, has torque also increased 33%?
Yes tyres have improved but then none of the 90s bikes will be on 90s rubber either.
Perhaps you would like to watch the comparison of the 15 year old GSXR 1000 vs the 2020 V4 and comment as that seems to contradict your assessment of how new bikes are a quantum step forward.
You can’t use specific road conditions to determine the supposed limitations of a bikes performance. Although power is up, has torque also increased 33%?
Yes tyres have improved but then none of the 90s bikes will be on 90s rubber either.
Perhaps you would like to watch the comparison of the 15 year old GSXR 1000 vs the 2020 V4 and comment as that seems to contradict your assessment of how new bikes are a quantum step forward.
On a good road, the oldie won't see which way the newer bike went. Same on any like for like conditions. New superbikes are in another league compared to late 90's machinery.
I’ve had a 1998 R1 in 2010 and have a 2016 R1M(not brand new but they’ve not changed that much)now, I get where the OP is coming from in that you’re not going to be miles quicker on the road as you can’t use the full power of either bike very often but personally I disagree a bit, the newer bike is miles better in terms of handling,suspension and braking, not to mention the electronics, it’s much easier to ride fast than the old bike!.
Esceptico said:
Perhaps you would like to watch the comparison of the 15 year old GSXR 1000 vs the 2020 V4 and comment as that seems to contradict your assessment of how new bikes are a quantum step forward.
I had a 2006 GSX-R1000, and a 2013 S1000RR. The BMW was miles faster/better than the Suzuki. Anyone that say's otherwise is talking out of their backside.Another thing that has changed immensely is how bikes are perceived...
When I bought my first 125 back in '89 a bloke I worked with had just bought a GPZ1000RX which was Kawasaki's top dog litre bike at the time, it had a claimed 125bhp which worked out to about 105 at the rear wheel and if Google is to be believed weighed in wet @267kg!!
The 675 Street Triple is often suggested as a sensible first bike, also about 100bhp at the wheel but a mere 182kg wet...
When I bought my first 125 back in '89 a bloke I worked with had just bought a GPZ1000RX which was Kawasaki's top dog litre bike at the time, it had a claimed 125bhp which worked out to about 105 at the rear wheel and if Google is to be believed weighed in wet @267kg!!
The 675 Street Triple is often suggested as a sensible first bike, also about 100bhp at the wheel but a mere 182kg wet...
blade7 said:
Esceptico said:
Perhaps you would like to watch the comparison of the 15 year old GSXR 1000 vs the 2020 V4 and comment as that seems to contradict your assessment of how new bikes are a quantum step forward.
I had a 2006 GSX-R1000, and a 2013 S1000RR. The BMW was miles faster/better than the Suzuki. Anyone that say's otherwise is talking out of their backside.But numbers don't lie, modern bikes are MUCH faster than late 90' machines.
As for torque increasing, yes, it has slightly which is remarkable considering the displacement hasn't changed and engines nowadays are significantly over-square to achieve the required rpm to make the increased bhp.
Again, what YOU can wring out of your bike on your local roads is nothing to do with the relative performance of the bikes. 90 is 90 on whatever you're on. ......but to try to say bike performance hasn't improved significantly in the intervening 20 years is ridiculous. Even the differences between a new S1KRR and a 2012 vintage Fireblade or R1 is staggering.
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff