Sport Bikes banner

81 - 99 of 99 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
hks1255 said:
hey all whats up?
ive been wondering for sometime now what is the fastest stock 600cc sportbike?

thank you, clay
Whenever I get asked this question I always give the same answer. The bikes are so close that it doesnt really matter unless you are racing them. And even if you are racing it its also how you work with a bike. Some riders could literally be faster on a 600 then they would be on a 1000 simply because of how they work on the bike. How well then can use the power and how comfortable with it. I simply stick with 1 brand (Yamaha) Ive owned a honda and a suzuki and I stick with yamaha mainly for the reliability I have had alot of problems with the honda and the suzuki. For instance my 01 YZ 125 never had a part replaced on it besides tires which a raced for 1 full season. It still had great compression and started first kick when I sold it last summer. My 03 YZ 250 Has been great with the exception of it not starting once which was a problem with the oil seperating from the gas. And the R1 I had a bad headlight wireing harness which i think was from a set of bulbs i bought from my dealer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,622 Posts
CBRWildChild said:
0...wow...makes sense though...on a wet sump setup...its easier to "cut" through thinner oil...

i usually take the mobile 1 to about 900 to maybe 1500 miles before i change it...it usually starts to change at that point...but quite a bit is redline or close riding...i only ride for fun these days...meet up and hit the twisties...and i have to try and keep up with a busa...
My tuner (friend actually) is the tuner for an AMA FX and SS team (front page story again) he seems to think that 0 weight would work on the street. I am a bit afraid of it for a street application, personally.

Oh, and it's VERY EXPENSIVE. That's why it gets saved for the track only, when that last bit of HP helps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
The GSX-R600 because it has a five percent reduction in aero drag. That good for like another 4 mph on top.
 

·
KH, Rest In Peace Brother
Joined
·
20,852 Posts
Fargin_Bastige said:
Yeah, you got me pegged.

As a matter of fact, if you had brain one in your moronic skull, you would look on the front of the website and notice, what we who actually ride, call a Track test. It is of a Daytona 675, written by ME.

Of course, they don't have a Starbucks at Road America. You know, a race track. How many have you been to? Please tell me about a real rider?

Oh, and how many times were you invited to ride the Ducati Desmosedici? Officer can testify that I have been invited. They just arbitrarily throw those out to people who sit in coffee shops and don't ride bikes, ya know.

For the record, I run Motul racing oil. I'm sure a case of that could get me an 03 GSXR.

Ducati isn't going to just throw anyone on one of these bikes! They only extend this privilage to people that have their head and ass wired together (and their right wrist :lao). I am still waiting for my shot at one of them :lao

+1 on the Motul :dblthumb
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,622 Posts
OFFICER737 said:
Ducati isn't going to just throw anyone on one of these bikes! They only extend this privilage to people that have their head and ass wired together (and their right wrist :lao). I am still waiting for my shot at one of them :lao

+1 on the Motul :dblthumb
My head and ass were wired together at bondage night last week.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
45,772 Posts
OFFICER737 said:
Shit, I think I am going to get a perscription for all of SBN for some Valium or lithium :eek:nfloor
+1 on this... I was thinking a case of Midol might in order since SBN seems to have collective PMS lately, and it's not just the women! :eatpop :lao
 

·
Yes I'm a FIB
Joined
·
2,139 Posts
chandra.hp said:
Who the hell was riding these things?
A 1.99 60ft. for the 600RR? There is no way there could be a .2-.3 sec difference in between bikes in the 60 ft. times
A really good 60 footer is in the high 1.7 range.
They must have different riders for different bikes to have such a disparity in those times.
If the same rider rode all those bikes there would proly' be only a .1 diff. in the 60 ft.
That's my $.02
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
a 636 is the fastest in a straight line it has about 40ccs on any other 600 bike, down the track or highway or what ever you have. but track performance is more the rider then the bike. i'm sure everyone who has friends they ride with knows somebody that can outride you in the twisties so just imagine you and that person racing around the track.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
20,922 Posts
Cheezus H. Chrimminy!!! WTF is wrong with some of you people??? This thread should be locked, and time outs issued.

:locked
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
theyre all fast as balls, the differences are fractions of a second. ride what you think looks and feels best cause when the 600s are all so close in performance nothing else matters
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,525 Posts
sckego said:
OK, somewhat off topic, here, but go back to the chart that chandra posted...


Are these bikes specifically set up for the 1/4 mile? It seems like they completley run out of steam as soon as they pass that mark... look at the ZX-6R... 0-137.3 in 10.4 seconds. To get another 2.7 mph faster (up to 140) took another 2 full seconds. The same goes for all the rest of the bikes in that chart... The Triumph gets to 135.7 in 10.5 sec, and then takes another 2.5 seconds to add another 4 mph. Is it just coincidence that their acceleration happens to die at the 1/4 mile mark, or do the manufacturers specifically optimize the bikes for the quarter at the expense of acceleration at higher speeds?
Bikes have drag limits. Once you reach higher speeds, it takes a lot more to push you faster. A larger displacement engine can overcome more drag than smaller engines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
geezus, WHAT TEXT BOOK DID YOU COPY THAT OUT OF?

SEE TITLE ABOVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!QUOTE=Greg in H-Town;2359432]Warning: math geekery ahead. And yes, I realize this is all theoretical BS.

Here's an interesting question for the math geeks out there. Is there a way to calculate a theoretical ranking based on given specs? Fer example, suppose you calculate the area under the curve for all the dyno runs; this would not only include the peak HP number but account for power in the lower RPM ranges. An example would be something like this at the bottom:

All HP numbers would be RWHP to factor out gearing differences (although obviously the lower-geared bike would reach a given speed quicker, but maybe redline limited). The max of the Y scale on the chart would be something like the highest HP number +10% (that part is largely arbitrary) and weight more heavily the HP numbers under the curve between the higest and lowest peak HP numbers. The X scale would maybe be the highest RPM peak HP number. Express the results in a power/weight ratio (peak wet weight).

The problems I see with the approach are:

Difficult to normalize results due to differences in what RPM the peak HP is measured
No allowance for aerodynamics
Tourque values are not considered

Again, this is nothing more than a mental exercise... discuss. :)[/QUOTE]
 

·
Turbo nerd.
Joined
·
13,732 Posts
quoted myself anyway
 

·
Turbo nerd.
Joined
·
13,732 Posts
Nope.

I think the fastest production 600cc is still the R6, I know it was the first to get radared over 170mph, not the 636, or the 675 (or the 650 its predecesor) or even the 848 (runs out of tach).

Here's an interesting question for the math geeks out there. Is there a way to calculate a theoretical ranking based on given specs? Fer example, suppose you calculate the area under the curve for all the dyno runs; this would not only include the peak HP number but account for power in the lower RPM ranges. An example would be something like this at the bottom:

All HP numbers would be RWHP to factor out gearing differences (although obviously the lower-geared bike would reach a given speed quicker, but maybe redline limited). The max of the Y scale on the chart would be something like the highest HP number +10% (that part is largely arbitrary) and weight more heavily the HP numbers under the curve between the higest and lowest peak HP numbers. The X scale would maybe be the highest RPM peak HP number. Express the results in a power/weight ratio (peak wet weight).

The problems I see with the approach are:

Difficult to normalize results due to differences in what RPM the peak HP is measured
No allowance for aerodynamics
Tourque values are not considered

Again, this is nothing more than a mental exercise... discuss. :)
None of that would matter, getting the area under a the curve is easy, but all that really tells you is the average power produced, depending on where you evaluate the integral.

Normalizing that against the wet weight would still be a theoretical value, in the case of many bikes the rider is a third of its weight, that is a large variable, no matter how you slice it. Not to mention that the aerodynamics is the single biggest factor in top speed (unless a bike is geared such that it hits redline before it aerodynamically limited), in which case none of it matters, you can easily calculate the RPMx final drive in 6th gear times known wheel diameter. I know Dunlop publishes their tire diameters.

...and before you ask aerodynamic drag is a MOTHERFUCKER to calculate, since it's dependant on frontal surface area, and angles, without getting paid or a grade for it I wouldn't tackle that without getting special favors.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,605 Posts
Damn look at the first couple os pages of this thread...almost all of those members are gone...officer 737 hasn't post since 2009
 
81 - 99 of 99 Posts
Top