FZ6 vs FZS600

THANOS · 08-01-2004, 01:21 AM

I was owning the FZS6/2002 for a couple of years and now for the past several weeks I own a brand new FZ6/2004Fazer.
Having riding experience from both bikes i 'll try to describe the different feeling each one gives to the rider, because I see there is a lot of conversation about which bike is preferable or better.
Note that I am not claim to be a test rider (just having fun with my bikes) and I have ridden the old one for 12000 miles, but the new one only for 2000 miles or so up to now.

The old one was an excellent bike with a lot of usable power from low to high revs, awesome brakes, very roomy and comfortable for travelling, nice sound and headlights, really i can't find any serious downside about it. It gave to me many happy moments the past couple of years with only a minimum of care (just oil changes and servicing).
So I was waiting the new model to be an even better bike with all the previous advantages plus many new others.

The true is that the FZ6 even it is called "Fazer", is a totally different bike.

Sitting on it, you are higher than the old one - having better visibility to the cars in front of you- and closer to the front wheel, making you wanting to open the throttle and go away…
All buttons and switches are in ideal position and the new seating position suits well heights near mine (1,76 meters). Nothing annoys my knees and foots and in general it gives nice and sporty feeling to the rider.
I don't like much the digital multi-instrument in front of me which seems very poor compared to the old's analog instruments but it gives all the information needed (exept it is hard to follow the engine's rpm during direct sunlight) and anyway i hope i 'll get used to it.

The detuned R6 engine is very smooth and is revving noiseless, quickly and happily.
There is enough power to the low revs (2,5 - 5,5k) for moving lazy to the city, but right after this point at mid revs (6-8 k) there is a hole in torque available (specially compared to the old Thundercat engine), leaving the rider with 2 options. Either waiting to pass this point or lowering one or two gears to overtake it.
Not very comfortable and this is one of the new model's downside…
After this point, at high revs and specially above 9k, there is plenty of power which gives the bike an excellent acceleration in every gear, and at this point the FZ6 is faster than the old one and comparable only to 600cc supersport bikes.
It is amazing how quickly you can enter the red zone (at 14k !!!) if you don't give the proper attention and most important, the engine seems to enjoy it …

For all the above the bike needs 6-6,5litres/100Km of gasoline which is about 10% + more than the previous FZS, even it is equipment with FI system... Kind of strange

The suspension set up is very good. At front, the FAZER 1000 's forks work very well (even they are unajustable) giving the bike very good control of the front wheel and better feeling at cornering and hard breaking.
The back spring is harder than the old one with better damping, and with only one click increasing at preload (I am weighting 92 kgrms) works also well.
The above set up combined with the bike's geometry and the different seating position gives better cornering, flickability and stability at high speeds. I have the feeling that this is the new's bike greater improvement compared to my previous FZS.
The bike feels lighter and more solid at low speeds making movement at heavy traffic very easy and also is more stable at high speed on highway even it is wearing the Dunlop tyres (which I don't like and opting for a pair of Pirelli Diablos soon). I will surprised if anyone has complains about the way the FZ6 is moving and turning !

Of course there is the a side-effect for the bike's sportier feeling. The stiffer suspension set up, combined with the harder seat makes the FZ6 a little less comfortable than the FZS600 in bumpy roads (and we have plenty of them at Greece…) and at many hours travelling.
Nothing very serious, but for them who want a very comfortable bike maybe it matters.

Breaking is another story… The new's model brakes are just one step (maybe two) backwards compared with the previous model's awesome brakes. At low speeds they are just fine and more progressive, but at high speeds (and -or- with the bike loaded) there are just very weak and they need more power from your hand to stop the bike. Even doing so, you have the feeling that the bike is not going to stop in time… I still don't understand why YAMAHA didn't left the previous brakes on.
As time passing by and i am getting used to them, i see that they are not as bad as i believed at first. They do stop the bike and they are preferable from the old ones at wet and at slippery conditions. Is just matter of the feeling they give to the rider.
Only at high speeds and (or) with the bike loaded you will miss the braking power the old ones were able to offer...

The bike is less roomy from the old one and the compartment under the seat is much smaller (due to the exhaust passing through) but it is still a comfortable bike for dual riding. Just be carefull in what you put at the compartment cos the temperature in there can be very high at some cases.

The fairing offers good protection from the wind (better than the 2002 model) and you can travel at 150+ km/hour very easily without the need for an aftermarket screen (at least for my 1,76 meters height).

A plus to the new model is the existing of the immobilizer which in a degree protects the bike from theft.

When the night falls, you will discover that only one headlight is on at low beam just as pre2002 models. You have not serious problem with it as it is very bright and the beam is very "open", but the dual headlights of the 2002 model equipment with the Philips Vision-plus bulbs was simply better. You can't blame Yamaha for this (just following the new regulations) - every new model has the same problem. Take into consideration that there is no way to switch off the light during the day if the motor runs…
BUT, as i have written to the U.K. forum there is a simple, safe, and with no cost mod that one can have dual headlights on at low beam. The mod combined with the brighter Osram Silverstar bulbs has turn the FZ6's lights to be much better than one needs...

For the end i left the appearance of the bike. In general, everybody admits that is a very beautiful and modern-look motorcycle. Whenever I ride it people ask me at traffic lights for details. The new alloy engine suits very well to the alloy delta-box frame (something which at R6 you don’t see it because of the fairing) and the dual exhausts under the seat gives a narrow and aggressive style-everybody likes it.

In general it is a good bike, sportier than the previous model with only a few minor downsides. It is very easy and fun to ride, very fast (except for the 6-8k revs area), capable both for fun, sport-touring and city movement. Maybe the biggest problem with it is that is called to replace an equally very good bike and after 7 years everybody was waiting for an even better FAZER !!!

FazeX · 08-01-2004, 12:32 PM

Nice review. I was curious about the previous model that we didn't see in America. I think we are about the same size. I just bumped up my rear preload a notch, and it feels much better. My only real issue now, is the front fork likes to dive a bit too much. I think I may change the fork oil out at the end of the season. I also agree with your assesment of the brakes. They aren't bad, but I do feel like I have to put the squeeze on when stopping from speed.

Cheers,

-J

greece · 08-02-2004, 03:37 AM

Thano oraio to sygritiko pou ekanes. Se poia poli eisai? Ego thessaloniki.

ZeuSeason · 08-02-2004, 09:55 AM

Thanks for the comparo. I can't say I agree with you on your opinions of the new FZ6 but thanks for taking the time breaking both bikes down comparing them.

rennsport · 08-02-2004, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZeuSeason

Thanks for the comparo. I can't say I agree with you on your opinions of the new FZ6 but thanks for taking the time breaking both bikes down comparing them.

On what points do you disagree with him?

THANOS · 08-02-2004, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greece

Thano oraio to sygritiko pou ekanes. Se poia poli eisai? Ego thessaloniki.

Living in Athens.

mxtr · 08-02-2004, 02:23 PM

I can agree with it, in the 6000 rpm range the FZ6 is not as good as the old one. I have a graph from a dutch magazine that tested the two fazers, and shows the R6 in it also. The torque is even lower than that of the R6! Maybe because the engine wasn't broken in yet when they tested it?

winelands · 08-03-2004, 07:35 AM

Interesting comparison. Going to the shorter stroke motor means less torque in the midrange (where we spend a lot of time). Even the smart EFI cannot hide this.

I heard of one report stating that the fuel consumption is also worse compared to the previous fazer. What is your experience?

Johann

THANOS · 08-03-2004, 08:57 AM

[quote=
I heard of one report stating that the fuel consumption is also worse compared to the previous fazer. What is your experience?

Johann[/QUOTE]

Yes, unfortunately this is true.
The new FZ6 needs about 10-12% more gasoline than the previous FZS600, even it has FI system, even there is almost 10-12 years difference beetween their engine's age, and even both engines have similar horsepower per capacity

Strange thinks...

mxtr · 08-03-2004, 03:51 PM

Oh what I forgot to mention. Because the FZ6 uses different gearing ratios, it revs higher and was faster than the FZS in acceleration tests. So less HP and torque don't mean that much. Unfortunately it drinks more fuel as well, but not so dramatically as mentioned in early tests.

rennsport · 08-03-2004, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mxtr

Oh what I forgot to mention. Because the FZ6 uses different gearing ratios, it revs higher and was faster than the FZS in acceleration tests. So less HP and torque don't mean that much. Unfortunately it drinks more fuel as well, but not so dramatically as mentioned in early tests.

On trips I am averaging 44 mles/gallon, around 40 miles/gallon when mixing in-town commuting. That is not bad at all.

jcaesar · 08-03-2004, 05:21 PM

Great Review/Comparison. Since the archives are still down, I am going to temporary remove the "Topics from the old SBN forum worth linking" thread, and add a new one called "Topics from the new SBN forum worth linking", and then I will add this as one of those worth linking.

mxtr · 08-05-2004, 04:13 PM

Here are some interesting figures from the test in Moto73:

FZS600 FZ6
Acceleration
0-100km/h 3.7 sec 3.5 sec
0-150 7.0 sec 6.6 sec
0-200 14.6 sec 13.7 sec
80-120 km/h 4.0 sec 3.6 sec in 4th gear
6.1 sec 4.8 sec in 6th gear
120-160 km/h 4.4 sec 3.8 sec in 4th
6.9 sec 5.5 sec in 6th
max power 95 hp 98 hp (yamaha)
91 hp 101 hp (measured)
max torque 61.2 Nm 63.1 Nm (yamaha)
62.8 Nm 64.7 Nm (measured)

Weight 189 kg 187 kg (yamaha)
220 kg 208 kg (measured, fully loaded)
So Yamaha had been lying about the FZS weight!
Weight 107/112 kg 105/102 kg Front/Rear

Cavi · 08-05-2004, 09:40 PM

keep in mind that yamaha had to delete the engine from the old FZ6 as it would not stand up to future enviormental laws, I'm not sure if that is Europe or USA

rennsport · 08-05-2004, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cavi

keep in mind that yamaha had to delete the engine from the old FZ6 as it would not stand up to future enviormental laws, I'm not sure if that is Europe or USA

It was to meet European regulations.