Oooh baby....you are sexy! - Page 13

z06boy · 08-17-2009, 01:00 PM

I'm talking about regular riding around here. I don't daily commute on my bikes. If I take them out for a ride usually it is a "spirited" run and I don't mean racing but I don't mean stop and go traffic either. After getting off of my R1...the R6 is flat below 8k period and I don't really like it...that's why it's now my wife's bike.

Don't get me wrong...it's a great bike but mainly for the track so you can rev the $hit out of it. If you ride in this area and plan to pass a car on a two lane...you better rev the R6 up but on my R1 it take a LOT less effort.

It's not being stupid...it's being factual.

Homeslice · 08-17-2009, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by z06boy

I'm talking about regular riding around here. I don't daily commute on my bikes. If I take them out for a ride usually it is a "spirited" run and I don't mean racing but I don't mean stop and go traffic either. After getting off of my R1...the R6 is flat below 8k period and I don't really like it...that's why it's now my wife's bike.

Don't get me wrong...it's a great bike but mainly for the track so you can rev the $hit out of it. If you ride in this area and plan to pass a car on a two lane...you better rev the R6 up but on my R1 it take a LOT less effort.

It's not being stupid...it's being factual.

First, there is a big difference between an 06-07 R6 and a 03-05. 06-07 were the worst years in terms of low-end power. For 08 Yamaha made some changes.

Also, some of you guys weigh 100 lbs more than me

z06boy · 08-17-2009, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Homeslice

First, there is a big difference between an 06-07 R6 and a 03-05. 06-07 were the worst years in terms of low-end power. For 08 Yamaha made some changes.

Also, some of you guys weigh 100 lbs more than me

I'm not disagreeing with this at all.

I've owned a few "middleweights" BUT admittedly haven't owned one in a long time until I picked up the 07 R6.

I remember how my 600's felt from the early to mid 90's and knew how much these bikes have been improved and when I hopped on the R6 after buying it I thought...geez...is there something wrong with this bike ?

After break in when I was able to run it up through the rev range I realized even more how much this bike was geared for the track.

Yes weight makes a big difference too.

That's why the wife and I can't have the same HP/TQ and bike weight...I don't want her faster than me.

Amber Lamps · 08-17-2009, 01:37 PM

You guys are killing me!!!

I think it has a lot to do with where you are coming from. When I traded in my V-Max for my FZR1000, it took me forever to get used to how "high" I had to rev the bike to get a decent launch. I actually stalled the damn thing quite frequently until I got used to it!

I doubt that you can find an "expert" that won't tell you that a 1000 is a far better bike for city riding than a 600 simply because of the amount of torque and the way it is delivered.

IMHO for city riding or freeway commuting a liter bike is better hands down.

smileyman · 08-17-2009, 01:38 PM

I can comment here. I have owned 5 in line 4 600s and an SV 650. All of my 600s made power up top but only the YZF600R, not the R6 now called R6S, and ZX6R had any push in the midrange. All were good up to a point but the race reps needed to rely on hi rpm HP to get any real thrust. The SV did not have the Hi rpm to rely on but used the mid range torque to good effect. I did not know anything about mid range tho until my Buell! Bottom line the 675 is not a liter bike and dont have the big torque numbers. It does seem to compete well with most of its competition in the middleweight class...

Amber Lamps · 08-17-2009, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smileyman

I can comment here. I have owned 5 in line 4 600s and an SV 650. All of my 600s made power up top but only the YZF600R, not the R6 now called R6S, and ZX6R had any push in the midrange. All were good up to a point but the race reps needed to rely on hi rpm HP to get any real thrust. The SV did not have the Hi rpm to rely on but used the mid range torque to good effect. I did not know anything about mid range tho until my Buell! Bottom line the 675 is not a liter bike and dont have the big torque numbers. It does seem to compete well with most of its competition in the middleweight class...

QFT! Although, if I were in this market, I'd have to go with the 750... costs about the same to buy and has WAY better numbers.

z06boy · 08-17-2009, 01:52 PM

Yep some people buy the R6S over the R6 due to this...more mid range...so better day to day city riding.

karl_1052 · 08-17-2009, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shmike

Peak HP and peak torque on the Buell XB12R is at 6750 RPM.

That's at the very TOP of the rev range.

Fact.

Buell XB12 makes 60 lbs/ft of torque at 2000rpm(75lbs/ft at 6000rpm)
Triumph 675 makes 35lbs/ft of troque at 3000rpm(47.0lbs/ft at 10400rpm)

Fact.

shmike · 08-17-2009, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by karl_1052

Buell XB12 makes 60 lbs/ft of torque at 2000rpm(75lbs/ft at 6000rpm)
Triumph 675 makes 35lbs/ft of troque at 3000rpm(47.0lbs/ft at 10400rpm)

Fact.

I'm glad someone caught that.

It is a bigger motor with HUGE pistons compared the the 675, of course it has more torque.

The torque curve of the 675 is very linear and builds steadily like most inlines.

The Buell curve is funny. It is close to peak at around 2700, then falls on it's face and doesn't get back into the 70's until around 5500.

FACT.

With the Buell, you're best served to keep it between 2000-2700 or between 5500-6750. Either way it is a narrow window.

OPINION.

Tmall · 08-17-2009, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shmike

I'm glad someone caught that.

It is a bigger motor with HUGE pistons compared the the 675, of course it has more torque.

The torque curve of the 675 is very linear and builds steadily like most inlines.

The Buell curve is funny. It is close to peak at around 2700, then falls on it's face and doesn't get back into the 70's until around 5500.

FACT.

With the Buell, you're best served to keep it between 2000-2700 or between 5500-6750. Either way it is a narrow window.

OPINION.

There are NO flat spots when you're riding it, and it pulls hard from 2500-7100 in every gear.

FACT

The window is far from narrow, as the bike revs slower than a short stroke 4. The only problem I have with the power band is that it doesn't drop anywhere, so I find myself hitting the limiter from time to time, since it just pulls hard all the way to it..

FACT

08-17-2009, 01:38 PM	#125
smileyman White Trash Hero Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: NW Arkansas Moto: Buell 1125R Porco Rosso Edition Posts: 4,895	I can comment here. I have owned 5 in line 4 600s and an SV 650. All of my 600s made power up top but only the YZF600R, not the R6 now called R6S, and ZX6R had any push in the midrange. All were good up to a point but the race reps needed to rely on hi rpm HP to get any real thrust. The SV did not have the Hi rpm to rely on but used the mid range torque to good effect. I did not know anything about mid range tho until my Buell! Bottom line the 675 is not a liter bike and dont have the big torque numbers. It does seem to compete well with most of its competition in the middleweight class... __________________ Arkriders.com To be the best you must first be willing to risk the worst! Last edited by smileyman; 08-17-2009 at 01:41 PM.. Reason: clarity

08-17-2009, 01:52 PM	#127
z06boy Letzroll Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Lake Norman area, NC Moto: 07 Red R1 & 07 Blue R6 Posts: 5,265	Yep some people buy the R6S over the R6 due to this...more mid range...so better day to day city riding. Last edited by z06boy; 08-17-2009 at 01:55 PM..

08-17-2009, 01:00 PM	#121
z06boy Letzroll Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Lake Norman area, NC Moto: 07 Red R1 & 07 Blue R6 Posts: 5,265	I'm talking about regular riding around here. I don't daily commute on my bikes. If I take them out for a ride usually it is a "spirited" run and I don't mean racing but I don't mean stop and go traffic either. After getting off of my R1...the R6 is flat below 8k period and I don't really like it...that's why it's now my wife's bike. Don't get me wrong...it's a great bike but mainly for the track so you can rev the $hit out of it. If you ride in this area and plan to pass a car on a two lane...you better rev the R6 up but on my R1 it take a LOT less effort. It's not being stupid...it's being factual.

08-17-2009, 01:37 PM	#124
Amber Lamps Moto GP Star Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 14,556	You guys are killing me!!! I think it has a lot to do with where you are coming from. When I traded in my V-Max for my FZR1000, it took me forever to get used to how "high" I had to rev the bike to get a decent launch. I actually stalled the damn thing quite frequently until I got used to it! I doubt that you can find an "expert" that won't tell you that a 1000 is a far better bike for city riding than a 600 simply because of the amount of torque and the way it is delivered. IMHO for city riding or freeway commuting a liter bike is better hands down.