posted September 04, 2006 08:21 PM
WoW! I had the great honour to ride Fishanttlers ZX 10R today. Wow what a fast forward machine. PK, Fish, and I went for a short ride to Squamish BC and a bit beyond.
I entered the "speed worm hole" only once but it was nuts. I think it was through the top of 2nd and all the way though third while passing a car. When you pull the trigger on one of these things you gotta have some were to go! Fun times, but not really my bag anymore. I guess you have to ride more than once every 3 or 4 years to ride these bikes!
posted September 05, 2006 05:57 PM
I've got em both in my garage, CR.... they are very different bikes... the 10 feels like a scalpel, the 14 pulls like a freight train..
____________ What business is it of yours where I'm from, Friendo?
quote:FBA since you have a 10 and 14 piped and all that...
Do you agree that the 14 feels as fast as the 10, maybe it's me but it seems that way!!!
Not really, like Fish says, the 14 pulls like a freight train, instant power delivery. For me though, the 10R shoots out like a rocket when it's in it's powerband...I believe at low RPM's the 14 easily outpulls the 10...but when the 10 gets up to about 6.8-7K, IMO, not much will catch it including K5's and 6's...at least it feels that way.
When I mapped her with the flies out, I found that leaning her out gave her an even more intense punch at low end and mid range. I think what makes this thing appear to be so insanely quick, is the severe engine braking effect when you ease off or let go the throttle. Even the '06 doesn't have that feeling, in fact, when I went up against my bud's 06 10R, I cleaned his clock -- hard.
Riding that 10R is truely a blast...and while I love the 14 and it's truely sick prowess, it has nothing on the 10 as far as power goes. If I want to rock and roll and carve, 10's the ride for me and when it's more comfort on a long ride and I don't care about the lack of storage (LOL), it's the 14. I won't sell either of them and I certainly won't buy the 06 10...it's not for me. It hasn't got the same level of comfort as th 04/05 and it's not as wild either. Just my .02...
____________
FYYFF!!!
posted September 05, 2006 10:34 PM
remove the twin balance shafts and have the crank assembly internally balanced on the 14...
whoa here come the tomohawk missile...............
____________
natural selection.....
destiny will overcome intervention.
Some are not worthy of the effort.
posted September 06, 2006 09:41 AM
I'm a little one-dimensional in what I do with my bikes anymore. To me, the 14 is a little one-dimensional, but not in my dimension.
The 10R turns while going fast quickly, and it turns while it slows quickly. The 14 doesn't...
All the extra drama the 10R displays along the way is just there to impress the crowd.
posted September 06, 2006 05:54 PM
Edited By: CrotchRocket on 6 Sep 2006 18:56
I've DragRaced both the 10 and 14...They feel close in velocity and power delivery when your in top of 2nd and 3rd gear...But I can feel the weight difference!!!
quote:
I don't think anyone was debating the handling differences.
No, the original post was expounding on the merits of the 10R as a street bike, or so I took it. Even as a gentleman's ride, the 14 is pretty linear.
What I don't really 'get' is the straight-line acceleration hangup a lot of people have, and compare the bikes on that basis... I 'get' torque: People who want to be able to just twist the wrist and go at any moment on the street would be better off with the 14 than the 10, IMO, because they want torque.
So the original post had me in the mindset that the writer was surprised that the 10R seemed to have as much torque as it did. And that moved the basis of comparison off mere torque, so I brought in handling.
I even threw in some subtle humor about one-dimension and acceleration in a straight line.
quote:FBA since you have a 10 and 14 piped and all that...
Do you agree that the 14 feels as fast as the 10, maybe it's me but it seems that way!!!
... thought this was the direction the topic had turned...and you had replied to, some could construe it as straight line action purely a power and straiht line comparison, and others as in cornering and all round ability....
IMO both bikes are compareable in a straight line outright accelleration, power is just delivered in different ways, the results are similar, just different characteristics.
In every other respect the bikes are quite different. Now put them in the curves and there is a distinct difference, just as there would be for touring and distance riding,
posted September 07, 2006 10:09 AM
Edited By: salsa1 on 7 Sep 2006 11:20
I read the ZX-14 reaches the 1/8 in less than 6 sec in capable hands.. seen a totally stock specimen pull 10.1 sec 1/4 mile times racing against one myself on my 10R...
I managed only 10.3 at same track when all stock ;albeit different day on my 04 ZX-10R ...
my point.:
I don't have much doubt the ZX-14 has about a .2 sec advantage "on average" over the 10R in the 1/4 mile and thus straight line acceleration...I still have loads of fun with the light weight package of the 10R and not because of it's ability to handle curves.. but thats me...I did not buy it to please anyone else.. or to win arguments either..lol..it's a great looking bike and has a comfort level not found in many liter bikes...
I am still impressed even aftyer two years....got a 9.72 sec 1/4 mile so far (last week) and plan to finish installing my wide band o2 sensor system and fine tune a/f ratio with secondary butterlies and air filter removed plus tune for oxygenated fuels as well...it's all fun.... still maybe one day I might get a ZX-14...but I don't feel compelled to....I am having too much fun as is...spectators and racers at the track "really like" my black lowered and stretched ZX-10R...
Me the most....
It is quicker in the 1/4 mile than a number of fully dedicated drag bikes at the track
I ride it to the track and comfortably cruise back home.. then take a short spin to get a movie or go to work with it "as is" the next day.... best bike I ever owned...
posted September 07, 2006 10:38 AM
Oh, I hear ya..
I am not boasting about the 14.
I think they are all great bikes, some more suited for specific purposes is all.
If I had already owned a 10, I would not have bought the 14.
I needed a new bike, and with the long straight roads around here, I picked the 14.
If I lived where the roads had more curves, or there was a track nearby I would have bought a 10r or a gsxr 1000, actually took some serious considering to decide, the fact that I paid $2000 more for the 14, made it a difficult decion as well, and to this day I still wonder.... what if..........
posted September 07, 2006 06:59 PM
They're both fine machines...both of them haul sick ass...both are amazing to ride and both very comfortable...if I had to choose between one and the other, I'd have to flip a coin, because I wouldn't be able to make a rational decision... ____________
FYYFF!!!
posted September 07, 2006 08:33 PM
Not yet, in the process of makin some decisions... need more info .
I think I'll be balls deep in her sooner than later... LOL
The long stroke and heavy rotating assembly.. dual counterbalancers are what makes the engine less frantic... tractable, more torque but slower revving.
posted September 09, 2006 07:11 PM
Edited By: dubious on 9 Sep 2006 21:11
yes but, HP is not all thats gained.
Dyno's do not show all, unless the time it takes to meet pk power is measured.
A bike that will pull revs quicker, making the same power and same weight will pull a bike making the same power that pulls revs slower.
Example:
I had a yz 250 years ago, an 97.
GYTR had a long rod kit, and spacer for the motor.
Nothing changed but dwell time at TDC and BDC.
It allowed a more complete intake charge and better burn characteristics on the power stroke.
The bike only made 3-4 more HP than a similarly set up bike without the long rod kit.
Evidently Yamaha did not have the optimum stroke to rod length ratio.
Thing is it would rev so much faster and would pull bikes dynoing 5 HP more than it..
same day same dyno...
Yes lightening rotating mass is different than rod / stroke ratio but allowing this beast to rev out more like a zx10 will make it that much more effective, and if I decide to do it , my crank will be getting stroked and rods, with the rotating assembly internally balanced.
Therefor the secondary balancer will not be necessary.
IMO secondary balancer is a band aid fix for a production bike to keep manufacturing costs and vibs down.
as you know It takes many times the energy to rotate a mass then non rotating, also less gyro forces will equal better handling... ask anyone who has riddena cr500 and a cr250 the same day!, or as some might know a 600 and a literbike same day
So If I decide to do this it will be all or nothing.
While I'm in the crank assembly might as well go for the gusto, whats 300 bones more for balancing when you have $3000 into it already...
HOME
NEW TOPIC
posted September 04, 2006 08:21 PM
posted September 04, 2006 08:44 PM
Edited By: 