Moto-Brian Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Not gonna happen. The GSXR is going to be top dog! Since 2001 suzuki has not updated the 1000 and been behindUh, have you ever ridden any of the 05/06s and 07/08s? I'd say Suzuki has done more than update. The 07/08 is head and shoulders above the 05/06. Let alone the 01...I think the 09 GSXR is going to be great, as well, but that R1 is looking pretty tough to beat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moto-Brian 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. You cannot evaluate WSBK as a platform to which bike is best. Look at AMA and tell me why Ducati and Yamaha cannot get it right. Why did Honda win WSBK and over here they suck tit.Same goes for Clug racing. At the WERA National Level, Yamaha and Suzuki are the choice. Suzuki fills more grid spots than any other sportbike period...Take what the Euro mags say is good. Take and add the racing arena and how they do. Take into account what you like best. Bingo - your answer... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natedogg624 Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 its an "irregular firing order" allows for a "long time" between firing so the rear can hook up and allow to settle in that "long time."http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?article=35140sure it may not be the prettiest bike on the grid at first, but it has grown on me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shittygsxr Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Uh, have you ever ridden any of the 05/06s and 07/08s? I'd say Suzuki has done more than update. The 07/08 is head and shoulders above the 05/06. Let alone the 01...I think the 09 GSXR is going to be great, as well, but that R1 is looking pretty tough to beat.I think you misread putty's post, what he was saying is that anytime suzuki updated their bike they were always on top Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kawi kid 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!exactly what everone said about the zx-10 last year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Putty Posted February 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 (edited) Uh, have you ever ridden any of the 05/06s and 07/08s? I'd say Suzuki has done more than update. The 07/08 is head and shoulders above the 05/06. Let alone the 01...You read my post wrong, dude. FTR, I had an '05 and I HAVE an '07 pretty muchAlso, the 07/08 may be more advanced with clutch, ABC switching, etc, but as far as power goes, the 05/06 was > Edited February 2, 2009 by Putty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moto-Brian Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 You read my post wrong, dude. FTR, I had an '05 and I HAVE an '07 pretty muchAlso, the 07/08 may be more advanced with clutch, ABC switching, etc, but as far as power goes, the 05/06 was >Huh? The power is greater on the 07/08s. Maybe not stock in terms of that stupid dual exhaust, but in results once tuned, the 07 is better...Again, you stated that the GSXR hasn't been updated since 01. I'm just wondering when you hit your head and thought that was truth?The difference between the 05/06 and 07/08 go beyond some bolt on items you listed. Chasis is better on the 07, handling is better on the 07, power is better on the 07, etc. That's an advancement not even worth mentioning when you refer to the 04s and earlier... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moto-Brian Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 I think you misread putty's post, what he was saying is that anytime suzuki updated their bike they were always on topI read it right - he says the 09 is updated and will be top dog. I tend to agree. However, he stated they haven't updated since 2001 for the most part and I was wondering WTF he was thinking... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Putty Posted February 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 (edited) I read it right - he says the 09 is updated and will be top dog. I tend to agree. However, he stated they haven't updated since 2001 for the most part and I was wondering WTF he was thinking...**Sigh** I said..Since 2001, the updates done to the 1000 has always made it king again. 01...better than R1, ZX-9...stayed on top until 04, 10r released. 05, update (suz), ahead of 10r. 06 new 10r, closed the gap. '07, update(suz), back atop the 10. 08, new 10r, cbr, etc. Now 09, update(suz), so I expect the gsxr-1000 to be back on top! So since 01, there hasn't been an update that's left the 1000 behind the others, as I said. Read it again.Oh, I know i missed 03/04 updates(suz), but dont care about those.Huh? The power is greater on the 07/08s. Nah, my 05 had more low end. A very noticeable difference.The difference between the 05/06 and 07/08 go beyond some bolt on items you listed. Chasis is better on the 07, handling is better on the 07, power is better on the 07, etc. I wont argue the 07/08 isn't better, but after spending plenty of time on both, not that much of a noticeable difference. I like the 07 better, ya. Edited February 2, 2009 by Putty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moto-Brian Posted February 2, 2009 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 **Sigh** I said..Since 2001, the updates done to the 1000 has always made it king again. 01...better than R1, ZX-9...stayed on top until 04, 10r released. 05, update (suz), ahead of 10r. 06 new 10r, closed the gap. '07, update(suz), back atop the 10. 08, new 10r, cbr, etc. Now 09, update(suz), so I expect the gsxr-1000 to be back on top! So since 01, there hasn't been an update that's left the 1000 behind the others, as I said. Read it again.Oh, I know i missed 03/04 updates(suz), but dont care about those.Nah, my 05 had more low end. A very noticeable difference.I wont argue the 07/08 isn't better, but after spending plenty of time on both, not that much of a noticeable difference. I like the 07 better, ya.Gotcha on the 01 comment... My bad.As far as power goes, I can provide a bunch of dyno sheets to show the 07 has more power... As far as differences, on the street probably no, but any place where you can ride them hard? BIG difference. Night and day, really... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweezel Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 That's what I was referring to... the old odd-fire vs. even-fire Buick 231 mills.And like Lizard pointed out, these are "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 is more balanced like a Buick even-fire engine. I need some clarification.Well in a V8 engine you have 2 cylinders at TDC at once, one on the power stroke, on at TDC exhaust, but since there are 4 pairs, they are balanced out and you have a firing event every 90*. On an I4 you still have 2 pistons at TDC at the same time, but now their 180* out, makes for a longer time between power events. also a rougher engine (ever wonder why a V12 purrs like it does?) since you have allot of energy when the plug fires at TDC, but you lose most of it by 110-150* ATDC, and after that it starts to consume power. In a 6+ cylinder engine there are other cylinders to take up this slack at 135*ATDC(V6) and 90*ATDC(V8) so the vibration is minimized since there is very little, to no time that the crankshaft is unloaded. Thus the more cylinders the more time the engine is actually making power through out it's rev., this is why you see rather small displacement 12 cylinder engines, the more cylinders, the more power you can create /rev (potentially, all things being equal, like thats possible but theory is nice) and since the power events are almost constant in a 12 cylinder engine, they idle exceptionally smooth and their delivery is exceptionally smooth as well. You probably already know this crap, I misunderstood you thinking you meant that cars were firing 2 cylinders at once Why 720*?? Because the crank rotates 2x to every cam rotation, only half of the cylinders fire every crank rotation, but they fire every full camshaft revolution. Your RPM's are measured at every firing event of the #1 cylinder, or every full camshaft revolution, so in reality, when your tach says 10k RPMs, your crank is spinning at 20k. There is a reason why V engines are at the degree separation that they are at, 90* for V8's and 60* for V6's. This allows the use of a stronger, simpler common pin crank shaft, while maintaining even firing events between cylinders, thus a smoother idle, and better power delivery. Inline engines such as the 4 cylinder, and I6 cylinder simply put them at even intervals, so that 2 cylinders are at TDC at the same time. This leaves 180* crank separation for the 4 cylinder, and 33.3333 degrees for the 6 cylinder. Although there are some goofy engines out there, MB had a I5 diesel for a long ass time, and now GMC has the I5 in their small trucks.Forgive me, My dad ran a auto shop and I've been obsessed with the internal combustion engine since I was a kid, I've probably got as many if not more books on the IC engine than most people with Masters degrees have/had through out school Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 I understand all that (at least that's what I spent a lot of time reading today), but I don't know why Yamaha is calling it UN-even fire when all they did was set the pins at 90* offsets to keep the load on the crank through the 720* stroke. Its better to watch the video on the micro site, but I grabbed the screencaps.R1 OLD crankpin locations:0* - 180* - 180* - 0*Like you said Dweez, 2/4 are on the intake+compression cycle while the other two are on the power+exhaust cycle, but you can see that harmonics and vibrations would develop in this layout over the one below.R1 new crankpin locations:180* - 270* - 90* - 0*Tell me why that's such a novel concept? Or explain to me why that wasn't done YEARS ago? Was it a reliability issue? Was it that no one came in and challenged the status quo? Maybe it's just me or maybe that once it's been explained it just seems obvious, but why would you NOT design it at the 180* - 270* - 90* - 0* configuration from the start?That's where I need explanation. Enlighten me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phugitive Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Nice write up except.On a v8 your RPM's are measured at every firing event then doubled so that the tach reading is the actual crankshaft revolutions per minute.If you notice on tachs they have a switch for 4,6,or 8 cylinders that is so the tach knows how to mutiply the signal.Do you think a manufacture would advertise only 1/2 the maximum crankshaft RPMs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweezel Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 (edited) I'm an idiot, fuge I'm sorry, it was late I've had my coffee now, indicated rpm is crankshaft output rpm. I was thinking each fire is measures, but it's not most systems are a waste spark this is why on LSx motors you have to set the tach to 4 cylinder mode so it picks up every fire and displayed the correct rpm. My appoligies. Edited February 3, 2009 by Dweezel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfman Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 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.Thanks! I found that earlier today and watched it....then realized I had already seen it a couple months ago... I don't know why I was having trouble picturing this today.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweezel Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Do you think a manufacture would advertise only 1/2 the maximum crankshaft RPMs?This bothers me, Only the ill informed care about max RPMs, The only reason I care about max RPM's (which get this, isn't when the valve train is in danger, it's when the engine quits making power) is so I know when my motors quit making power so I should shift. Advertising max RPMs is IMHO akin to HD advertising leather fringe and air cleaner covers. It has no real use, but it impresses the sheep. Spinning an S2K to 9k isn't a great achievement. It's simply the only way they could get a 2.0l turd to make 200hp. HP doesn't exist. It can't be measured, it can only be figured, again HP=TQ x RPM / 5252. So either spin it fast, or make it low. 200hp at 9k rpms is pathetic BTW, my 'bird made 200hp at 2200rpms, (at the wheels) and 433 at 6500rpms, and it was still climbing but in fear for the crappy stock rod bolts, I didn't spin it any faster, there wasn't any need to. And for the record, it also made 403lbs/ft tq at 4100 rpms. which is damn near 3x the tq the Honda mill produces. Torque, it's what moves you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfman Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 (edited) Dweez...if your tach isn't measuring your crank speed but rather the cam speed than what is it measuring on a 2-stroke??????Edit: I really hope I'm misreading your previous posts and you aren't claiming that the crank shaft is spinning at twice the speed my tach shows... Edited February 3, 2009 by wolfman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfman Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Ok...I re-read. I think you were just saying that if you were measuring the RPMs of the camshaft it would be half the RPMS the crank is spinning at... Agree. The way you were saying it made it sound like you were saying the tachometer on my motorcycle or car was actually showing the camshaft revolutions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The King Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Reminds me of a Buell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweezel Posted February 3, 2009 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 (edited) No I'm an idiot, it was late and I was overcomplicating the problem. Indicatedrpm is crankshaft output rpm. I had my coffee now. Edited February 3, 2009 by Dweezel 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.