fish_antlers
Administrator
The Truth is Out There
Posts: 21895
|
posted January 14, 2006 10:24 PM
 Edited By: fish_antlers on 14 Jan 2006 23:47
2006 ZX-10R WET WEIGHT!!!
Alrighty.. Bikeland went back today with a pair of scales and we weighed the 2006 10R. We used two brand new dial type scales I purchased from Zellers... seemed to read pretty accurate for people's weights as we pre-tested them, so I assume you can say the measures are +/- a few pounds, but we did re-weigh and recheck the bikes so the #'s seem accurate and are in line with the #'s published in the owner's manuals...
so here they are...
We weighed a 2006 production model ZX-10R and a 2005 ZX-10R production model, both bone stock, stock exhausts, both FULLY wet. Both bikes are runners.. Both bikes had approx 3/4 of a tank of gas.. very close in amounts of fuel. Bikes were rolled onto both scales (front/rear) at the same time.
Please bare in mind that 1 gallon of gasoline equals 5.8 to 6.5 lbs. Since we did not have the bikes topped up it is possible that the wet weight of either bike could be out by 5 lbs or even more. Also bare in mind that the owner's manuals clearly state a minimum 11 lbs difference between the two machines.
Weight is in Lbs.
2005 ZX-10R
Front: 210
Rear: 198
Total WET weight: 408lbs
(Owners Manual states: 375 dry)
2006 ZX-10R
Front: 219
Rear: 218
Total WET weight: 437 lbs
(Owners Manual states: 386 dry)
____________
What business is it of yours where I'm from, Friendo?
   
|
GUNNER
Needs a life
Posts: 5778
|
posted January 14, 2006 10:28 PM
Holy Fuck Batman!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Did they fill the tires with water?????? Wait till you see the 14's numbers!!!!!!! Blahahahahaha
|
zeta xray
Expert Class
Posts: 416
|
posted January 14, 2006 10:36 PM
WOW..... I expected the '06 to weigh more. The exhaust has to be quite a bit heavier, but that is much more than I would have suspected.
____________
It is good to be green.
|
GUNNER
Needs a life
Posts: 5778
|
posted January 14, 2006 10:39 PM
29 pounds!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! In 1 model year. That's more weight than Kirsty Alley(sp) put on in one year 
|
fish_antlers
Administrator
The Truth is Out There
Posts: 21895
|
posted January 14, 2006 11:06 PM
Edited By: fish_antlers on 14 Jan 2006 23:24
I believe both bikes hold about 4.5 gallons of fuel, so fuel accounts for at least 26.1 lbs of the bike's weight when full.
____________
What business is it of yours where I'm from, Friendo?
|
GUNNER
Needs a life
Posts: 5778
|
posted January 14, 2006 11:34 PM
What are you telling me Fish one was full of gas and the other empty  I guess Kirsty has a her pocket full of twinkies to
|
fish_antlers
Administrator
The Truth is Out There
Posts: 21895
|
posted January 14, 2006 11:36 PM
Edited By: fish_antlers on 14 Jan 2006 23:42
nope.. both bikes looked pretty close to being the same when you looked in the tank... but looks could be deceiving.. I'd throw a gallon either way to be safe..
only real way to tell would be to top up both bikes and we couldnt do that....
hey zeta... if your going to quote me on other sites, please do it properly and include a link...
it's all we ask.
____________
What business is it of yours where I'm from, Friendo?
|
GUNNER
Needs a life
Posts: 5778
|
posted January 14, 2006 11:43 PM
Edited By: GUNNER on 14 Jan 2006 23:44
Thanks for the info Fish it's the first real info on the 06 yet that didn't come from that girl at Muzzy's  She just can't keep he mouth shut! Flash her some tool and she goes to blabbin
|
GUNNER
Needs a life
Posts: 5778
|
posted January 14, 2006 11:49 PM
Fish when you weigh the 14 you better take bigger scales 
|
fish_antlers
Administrator
The Truth is Out There
Posts: 21895
|
posted January 14, 2006 11:51 PM
I had thought about that. These scales top out at 280. It is possible that they will not be enough if the weight of the bike is biased either way. The 12R weigh in at 535 wet so they should have it covered, barring any unforseen weight gains for the 14!
____________
What business is it of yours where I'm from, Friendo?
|
GUNNER
Needs a life
Posts: 5778
|
posted January 15, 2006 12:00 AM
Get BIGGER scales!!!!!!!!!!!!! Blahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!! You'll need them it's at least 25 more
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 15, 2006 12:22 AM
Edited By: trenace on 15 Jan 2006 00:23
Good info!
Well, even if the 2006 had a gallon more gas than the 2005, and let's say the 2006 might have had tires weighing 2 lb more due to different model of tire and/or less wear, that 29 lb observed difference would "at best" correct to perhaps a 21 lb difference.
Throw in possible inevitable measurement error, maybe 19 lb... and that's assuming everything went the way of making the 2006 look heaviest possible.
Maybe the crank is a couple of lb heavier, so that leaves 17 lb or more.
The exhaust must be heavier, but 17 lb heavier?!? (Or more?)
Anyhow, if all that weight gain really is the exhaust, what an improvement to be had from going to aftermarket exhaust! Even moreso if measurement error or gasoline difference were not that much or not in those directions.
|
worm~hole
Needs a life
Miles to go before I sleep....
Posts: 10623
|
posted January 15, 2006 01:35 AM
...hell, all of this bike trivia deserves an episode on MythBusters...you know that they'll do it RIGHT!
____________
“We sleep safe in our beds because rough men
stand ready in the night to visit violence on those
who would do us harm.”
-George Orwell
|
zeta xray
Expert Class
Posts: 416
|
posted January 15, 2006 07:13 AM
quote:
hey zeta... if your going to quote me on other sites, please do it properly and include a link....
It was your fault. I plead temporary insanity because those numbers you posted turned my brain to jello.
____________
It is good to be green.
|
fish_antlers
Administrator
The Truth is Out There
Posts: 21895
|
posted January 15, 2006 08:48 AM
Edited By: fish_antlers on 15 Jan 2006 09:08
no prob zeta... imagine how I felt when I had to reweigh the bike several times to make sure!
As for the weight, it is apparently "relocated" higher on the bike to imporve handling. The 06 is supposed to turn a 3 sec. faster lap time over the 05 so there may be a more to this than just pounds.
Remember I did state that the bikes were'nt topped up, so it is possible that there could be an 8 lb discrepancy is gas alone. Factor in the scale's error and it could be a weight difference of only 17lbs between the bikes....
(8 lbs gas difference, 4 lbs scale error= 12 lbs... 29lbs- 12 lbs= 17 lbs )
tren... both bikes are brand new... no "wear and tear".. they have under 20 mi on the odometer.
I also believe the weight is in the exhaust.
Here;s a very interesting tid-bit. I was told that the STOCK CAN off an 05 would bolt directly onto the 06 with a bracket/ hanger added to hold it on. Now, I need KB or someone else to confirm this.
I was also told that they had seena 5hp gain when boltin on the 05 can.
NOw, the aforementioned is totally unconfirmed... and I wouldnt give it too much weight until one of our aftermarket manufacturers answers...
KB..is this pure fiction, or is it possible?
anyone here weigh their stock 04 or 05 completely full/ wet? that may help with a starting point
____________
What business is it of yours where I'm from, Friendo?
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 15, 2006 09:40 AM
Edited By: trenace on 15 Jan 2006 09:41
One of the articles on the bike did say specifically that the new exhaust cost several hp.
Personally I would have guessed that to be due to a combination of the length, possibly different catalysts giving a difference, and different cans rather than can/cans alone. That's a lot between production cans. On the other hand, maybe available volume really is restricted that badly on the '06 and/or a lower noise standard is being met?
|
fish_antlers
Administrator
The Truth is Out There
Posts: 21895
|
posted January 15, 2006 09:48 AM
I believe, tren, if you read anything that rob, doug or KB has written on this site there are numerous explanations as to why underseat exhausts rob HP... mainly it's the 90' angles as far as I understand.
____________
What business is it of yours where I'm from, Friendo?
|
zeta xray
Expert Class
Posts: 416
|
posted January 15, 2006 10:09 AM
In addition to the bends, I think the additional length is also a factor in undertails having difficulty matching the hp of "conventional" exhaust.
____________
It is good to be green.
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 15, 2006 10:11 AM
Edited By: trenace on 15 Jan 2006 10:12
I believe, Fish, that if you read anything they have written on this site -- to use your expression -- you would not have attributed it to the bends involved as the main factor.
|
fish_antlers
Administrator
The Truth is Out There
Posts: 21895
|
posted January 15, 2006 10:14 AM
well, my understanding is that the greatest factor in robbing HP is the inclusion of 90' bends for the exhaust gasses to pass through., I'll wait for someone like KB to explain and correct me...
____________
What business is it of yours where I'm from, Friendo?
|
zeta xray
Expert Class
Posts: 416
|
posted January 15, 2006 10:20 AM
AND if a conventional exhaust can make more hp, can it overcome the alledged/assumed increase in aerodynamics of an undertail exhaust?
And another question for the more knowledgable. Does the AMA and other race oranizations require entrants to keep the same type of exhaust as the bike was produced with, in Superbike and Superstock class?
Inquiring minds want to know.
____________
It is good to be green.
|
fish_antlers
Administrator
The Truth is Out There
Posts: 21895
|
posted January 15, 2006 10:32 AM
quote:
Does the AMA and other race oranizations require entrants to keep the same type of exhaust as the bike was produced with, in Superbike and Superstock class?
good point! never thought about that one! :EEK
____________
What business is it of yours where I'm from, Friendo?
|
bovinespongiformencephalo
Pro
variant Kreutzfeldt-Jakob
Posts: 1060
|
posted January 15, 2006 11:35 AM
Three seconds a lap? Who's rectal sphincter was that pulled out of?
|
fish_antlers
Administrator
The Truth is Out There
Posts: 21895
|
posted January 15, 2006 11:41 AM
that's the claim being tossed around, that the 06 was 3 seconds faster than the 05 around kawasaki's track in japan...
____________
What business is it of yours where I'm from, Friendo?
|
GUNNER
Needs a life
Posts: 5778
|
posted January 15, 2006 12:28 PM
Well, They got to tell us something positive to sell that tird They couldn't very well say HEY! it's 29 pounds heavier and ugly to boot!!! Go out and buy one!!!
|
|
|
HOME
NEW TOPIC