Putty Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Making its way to garages...I thought i'd like it better in actual pics. The sumbitch is ugly. The previous raven model looks waaay better, imo. Worst looking R1 yet to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Putty Posted February 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Not as bad...Yamaha and those big ass front turn signals. Why! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moto-Brian Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 I gotta say I agree...I tried. I really did. I want to love this bike because I think it is going to be the best open class machine. However, looks do mean something and even though I look at things in race trim, I STILL cannot get to love this bike even after race prepped...The GSXR 1000 is just too good looking to me. The ZX10 is better looking, but really looks a little older only after a year. The Honda aesthetically looks the best to me - especially in white...But, looks aside, I think the R1 is going to be the best weapon. Followed close by the GSXR...If I were to buy a racebike? Man, tough choice. I need more test results and info... R1 right now...A street bike for me? Probably the GSXR... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Putty Posted February 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 I was told the GSXR is ugly in person, too. I want to see it. I was not a fan of the 08 10r. The CBR is the only '08 i'd get. In '09, it could be the gsxr if I had to buy. The R1 IS NOT a big bang, so the thought of it killing all the others may not happen. The styling is does nothing for me. I can't see one thing I like about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brennan Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 fail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moto-Brian Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 I was told the GSXR is ugly in person, too. I want to see it. I was not a fan of the 08 10r. The CBR is the only '08 i'd get. In '09, it could be the gsxr if I had to buy. The R1 IS NOT a big bang, so the thought of it killing all the others may not happen. The styling is does nothing for me. I can't see one thing I like about it.It never was stated as being a big bang motor. A lot of ill informed people were and are saying that it is, but not true at all. I think, however, it is going to be the top dog this year and the only competition is going to come from the GSXR and Honda after.In person, the new GSXR looks smaller than the 600/750. Beautiful, but to many, it looks too similar in design. You need to really scope it out and see all the details. Again, I really liked the ZX10 for 2008. The Noda a close second - performance and style. This year, I have to rank style to the GSXR and Honda with performance going to R1 and Suzuki...We'll see soon enough as Daytona is coming and the bike mags have had them all and tested... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linc5.0 Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 not a fan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldie Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 IMO I think Yamaha ruined the classic design of the R1. I think it was an AMAZING design as it was. The tail section looks TERRIBLE! It looks like the exhaust pipes are on their period, retaining water, and bloated all to hell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 I think I like it. Looks like an angry raccoon from Asia.I need to ride the GSXR 1k and the R1 to see which one I'd rather have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbrjess0815 Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 I dont like it.. deff ugly... The tail looks scary! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natedogg624 Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 has nobody heard the sound of this beast? tail pipes can be changed... maybe to an akra...http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?article=35140i like it, lot of cool tech behind it. better get used to the back side of it cuz thats all you'll be seeing at the track HA! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfman Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 It never was stated as being a big bang motor. A lot of ill informed people were and are saying that it is, but not true at all. I think, however, it is going to be the top dog this year and the only competition is going to come from the GSXR and Honda after.Can you give the specifics of the difference between the crossplane and big bang? I've read a little but haven't put it all together. Can the crossplane be made into a big bang with a change in valve and ignition timing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fusion Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Just waiting on all of the reviews to hit before I decide myself. Yeah the new R1 is ugly but it's staying on my list for now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 It never was stated as being a big bang motor. A lot of ill informed people were and are saying that it is, but not true at all. They call it a big bang there: http://www.sae.org/mags/AEI/5586As an engineer, theoretician, and avid racing enthusiast, Furusawa analyzed Yamaha’s race-winning YZR-M1 transverse inline four-cylinder engine and employed a 90° crankshaft and adopted irregular—or odd—interval firing. “Uneven- or irregular-interval firing has been employed in racing engines—the so-called ‘Big Bang,’ with more than one cylinder firing simultaneously,” Furusawa explained. “Then there is the ‘Long Bang,’ with crank phases out of sync. Uneven-interval firing race engines have been known to improve lap times versus even-interval firing ones. How and why they work has not been clearly defined,” he said.Granted, they're talking about the M1 and not the R1, but I was under the impression the bottom end in both were almost identical. What am I missing?And @ Wolfman - the Yamaha site videos do a pretty good job of explaining a lot of this tech: http://www.yamaha-motor.com/sport/msite/micro_v1.aspxLook under the "Innovation & Tech" tab and the "Video" tab. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moto-Brian Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Layman terms:Big Bang fired #1 and #3 at the same time. #2 and #4 at the same time...R1 is a stepped type process. Almost like #1, #3, #2, #4. If you looked at a cross cut, it would look like steps to a house...Not sure the exact order, but they are close and almost the same, but not. The Big Bang motors were really used in the 500 GP era...The R1 style firing order allows the bike to be more civil under load and out of corners... Big Bang basically prevented or toned down the rear stepping out under load on those fire breathing 500cc two strokes... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moto-Brian Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 They call it a big bang there: http://www.sae.org/mags/AEI/5586Granted, they're talking about the M1 and not the R1, but I was under the impression the bottom end in both were almost identical. What am I missing?And @ Wolfman - the Yamaha site videos do a pretty good job of explaining a lot of this tech: http://www.yamaha-motor.com/sport/msite/micro_v1.aspxLook under the "Innovation & Tech" tab and the "Video" tab.They never refer to the M1 or R1 as Big Bang motors... They say they were used in racing - as in what I described, but they call the new idea "Long Bang" which is new to me, but I guess it makes sense to call it that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 What I really don't understand is why this is such a novel concept now and that wasn't employed on street bikes YEARS ago?Car engines have been doing this since the 60s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NinjaNick Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 I agree. The lines on the R1 were much sharper and beautiful in the years past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweezel Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 What I really don't understand is why this is such a novel concept now and that wasn't employed on street bikes YEARS ago?Car engines have been doing this since the 60s.Have been doing what? I can't think of a single car that fires 2 cylinders at once. V8's are 90* appart because 720/8=90, that gives a smooth firing order and a less rough idle. There were some v6's that were odd fire like the first 4.3's they kept the 90* V and the common pin crank from the 350 and that's just how it worked out when they pulled two cylinders, but eventually they changed it to a split pin crank to get the even fire back. Some old buick V6's were odd fire too, but for different reasons. Mainly lack of understanding and not power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 (edited) That's what I was referring to... the old odd-fire vs. even-fire Buick 231 mills.And like Lizard pointed out, these aren't "Big Bang" engines in the traditional sense, they're "long bang", and according to the Yamaha mini-site, all they did was adjust the crankpin locations to make the crank more balanced (cancel out the sinusoidal effect of the rotational inertia of the crank) ala even fire Buicks.Maybe I'm getting lost in the semantics of all of it, but what I'm taking from all the stuff I read about cars vs. bikes and the employed firing orders/technologies is that the Yamaha uneven-fire engine is basically employing technology to make it more balanced like a Buick even-fire engine. I need some clarification. Edited February 3, 2009 by JRMMiii Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kawi kid Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 im still up in the air about it......... so Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfman Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Layman terms:Big Bang fired #1 and #3 at the same time. #2 and #4 at the same time...R1 is a stepped type process. Almost like #1, #3, #2, #4. If you looked at a cross cut, it would look like steps to a house...Not sure the exact order, but they are close and almost the same, but not. The Big Bang motors were really used in the 500 GP era...The R1 style firing order allows the bike to be more civil under load and out of corners... Big Bang basically prevented or toned down the rear stepping out under load on those fire breathing 500cc two strokes...Ok, I guess more of my question was related to what the actual firing order in degrees (ref. 720 deg.) would be for a big bang on an inline 4. I wasn't sure whether two pistons would be firing at once or if they would fire 90 apart. So instead of 0, 180, 360, 540 or 0, 0, 360, 360 it would be 0, 90, 360, 450 Does this make any sense? haha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e-flores Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Yeah the thing is ugly... But performace is supposed to be a step ahead of everyone else, and the thing sounds straight up wicked! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Putty Posted February 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 (edited) Yeah the thing is ugly... But performace is supposed to be a step ahead of everyone else, and the thing sounds straight up wicked!Not gonna happen. The GSXR is going to be top dog! Since 2001 suzuki has not updated the 1000 and been behind.So instead of 0, 180, 360, 540 or 0, 0, 360, 360 it would be 0, 90, 360, 450 Does this make any sense? hahaYamaha is calling it “Crossplane Technology” and it puts each connecting rod 90º from the next, meaning the cylinders fire at 270°- 180°- 90°- 180°. This spreads out the power pulses to the rear tire, allowing it to regain traction in between each pulse. The result is more usable traction under large throttle openings, meaning riders will be able to accelerate out of corner earlier and harder. Edited February 2, 2009 by Putty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e-flores Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 We will see... I have been keeping up with all the testing times and such in wsbk and really Suzuki is in the same place they were last year... I hope they get up in contention. I would love to see another manufacturer duke it out with Honda, yamaha, and ducati. No offense but I have heard the "this is going to be Suzuki's/Kawasaki's year" before but hey, if the wsbk guys can pull off what the yoshi guys have done in the AMA there could be a chance of them butting heads with everyone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.