blueford
Needs a job
Posts: 2984
|
posted January 22, 2006 07:53 AM
Official dry weight is 210kg or 462lbs!
According to the brochure dry weight is 210kg or 462pounds.
  
|
Gary B
Expert Class
Posts: 167
|
posted January 22, 2006 08:13 AM
About time that comes out...seems about right.
|
fish_antlers
Administrator
The Truth is Out There
Posts: 21894
|
posted January 22, 2006 08:17 AM
nice... where'd ya score that? 
____________
What business is it of yours where I'm from, Friendo?
|
VPN
Zone Head
Posts: 718
|
posted January 22, 2006 08:25 AM
210kg=463lbs - finally somethig real
Seems to be the same as the ZX-12R weight and certainly less than Busa
I think that the 217,5kg (479,5lbs) might be the ABS weight then
The wet weight could be 210kg+15kg = 225kg or 463lbs+33lbs = 496lbs
ANyway with 210kg and perhaps 210hp at crank would make it 1kg/1hp
If not - time for lighter exthaust & PCIII
:-D
|
Ra12r
Zone Head
Posts: 919
|
posted January 22, 2006 09:01 AM
I wonder why they can't get it down closer to the 1000 considering the technology parts of the shelf used on them...?
____________
All must bow to the "Ra Supremecy"...
|
blueford
Needs a job
Posts: 2984
|
posted January 22, 2006 11:22 AM
Why would they list it, at exactly the same dry weight as the 12? To me, with an all new bike that would be hard to do even when trying to do it?
The 12 is 210kg the 14 is 210kg not 217 or 206 but 210 on the dot? Seems creepy weird!!! 
|
GUNNER
Needs a life
Posts: 5778
|
posted January 22, 2006 12:35 PM
I'm NOT buying into that BS either It's heavier without doubt 
|
GUNNER
Needs a life
Posts: 5778
|
posted January 22, 2006 12:46 PM
If it was less weightKawasaki would have already said something. That wouldn't be tipping their hand at all. They're hoping some kind of performance numbers will take everyone's eye off the scales. Look at the 10R test Fish just completed as an example. AS reported by Fish the bike is fast. So now the fact that it's heavier don't seem to be such an issue to many, BUT! Keep in mind that it could have been liter and had it been it would have certainly been even faster So now the aftermarket gets rich selling lite weight parts as well. Because as long as there's the possibility of making it better we'll all try. Lite weight materials cost BIG money. The 14 will be introduced the same way you can bet your ass. That's why folks like Ricky G and Coby A have them sitting in their shops. Gainsville is just around the corner and it needs to be fast so it don't FLOP at the dealer. Just like the 10 needed to haul ass in Cali at the track for the same reason. Kawasaki isn't stupid and the numbers are there they just aren't about to lose customers by releasing them before the bikes have a chance to lay down some smack.
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 22, 2006 12:49 PM
 Edited By: trenace on 22 Jan 2006 12:54
Not really creepy weird, as it's not an astounding coincidence -- first, let's say it was going to fall within a range of plus or minus three kg (6.6 lb) then the chance of it being "on the dot" is one in seven, hardly bizarre.
Second, there might have been a directive to make the bike not heavier than the 12, yet it was coming out heavier... in this case, weight might have been shaved off incrementally till it matched, and then having matched, redesign of parts (to lighten them yet further) stopped.
Either way, not something outrageously unlikely.
Thanks for the scoop info, Blueford!
Also BTW I note in there the wheelbase is an inch longer than the 12, not the two inches that I thought was posted elsewhere. An inch of increase is not unreasonable, though it won't be preferred by those who would have wanted their 14's to be bigger-motored 10's.
|
GUNNER
Needs a life
Posts: 5778
|
posted January 22, 2006 12:58 PM
Well Fish weighed the 06 before he went to Cali and knows what it was. BUT his numbers didn't match what Kawasaki said. Real world verses Sales/ Marketing world........ And the truth shall set them free!!!!!!!
|
VPN
Zone Head
Posts: 718
|
posted January 22, 2006 01:05 PM
Dry weight with battery or without?
It's still not in production
It will be that 210kg, right?
OR
maybe that commercial was also a pre-run
???
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 22, 2006 01:10 PM
Edited By: trenace on 22 Jan 2006 13:13
The Japanese-spec definition for dry weight (which differs from the European definition) does have something in it regarding the battery, but I can't recall if it counts the battery but not the electrolyte, or does not count the battery at all. I think it's that it does not count the battery at all but can't swear on it.
It's also been reported as being the sum of the design weight of the parts, not the measured weight of an actual assembled bike.
In contrast, curb weight is the measured weight of an assembled bike ready to ride, full-up.
It is the only manufacturer-reported weight that is precisely meaningful for the standpoint of comparing one bike to another. One can't, from dry weights, say that because one bike has a value say 5 lb lighter that it must indeed be 5 lb lighter on the road -- it might actually be the heavier bike in practice. But if they carry the same fuel and one is reported 5 lb lighter in curb weight, that's probably right.
|
Drowland
Zone Head
Posts: 733
|
posted January 22, 2006 02:16 PM
quote:
Not really creepy weird, as it's not an astounding coincidence -- first, let's say it was going to fall within a range of plus or minus three kg (6.6 lb) then the chance of it being "on the dot" is one in seven, hardly bizarre.
Second, there might have been a directive to make the bike not heavier than the 12, yet it was coming out heavier... in this case, weight might have been shaved off incrementally till it matched, and then having matched, redesign of parts (to lighten them yet further) stopped.
Either way, not something outrageously unlikely.
Thanks for the scoop info, Blueford!
Also BTW I note in there the wheelbase is an inch longer than the 12, not the two inches that I thought was posted elsewhere. An inch of increase is not unreasonable, though it won't be preferred by those who would have wanted their 14's to be bigger-motored 10's.
|
road rage
Expert Class
Posts: 129
|
posted January 22, 2006 02:16 PM
This mutha is gonna fly and I don't care what anybody else says, it's gonna fly at that weight. 30 Lbs lighter than the Honda Blackbird (CBR1100XX - 492 Lbs dry) with nearly 50 horsepower more. This bike has to run low 9 sec flat or better, I just don't see how it wouldn't otherwise.
Phil
|
VPN
Zone Head
Posts: 718
|
posted January 22, 2006 03:01 PM
210kg=463lbs
BTW:
What is the curb weight of the ZX-12R?
|
road rage
Expert Class
Posts: 129
|
posted January 22, 2006 03:18 PM
210 kg is 462 Lbs, why are you saying 463 Lbs then?
What's up with this single pound difference.
Phil
|
blueford
Needs a job
Posts: 2984
|
posted January 22, 2006 03:52 PM
Edited By: blueford on 22 Jan 2006 15:53
quote:
210 kg is 462 Lbs, why are you saying 463 Lbs then?
What's up with this single pound difference.
Phil
Because 210 kilos X 2.20462262 = 462.97074 lbs. Mathematician bikers round off!! 
|
VPN
Zone Head
Posts: 718
|
posted January 22, 2006 04:06 PM
You just wish it were one more pound lighter
So, how much is the "real" weight of the ZX-12R?
Maybe ZX-14 weights about the same with fluids
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 22, 2006 04:32 PM
Kawasaki's curb weight figure for the Twelve (2005 model) is 542 lb.
|
CrotchRocket
Moderator
Bracket Racing with Betsy
Posts: 8038
|
posted January 22, 2006 05:12 PM
Who cares about dry weight
My 2002 12 weighs 510lbs. with Akrapovic pipe, ready to ride with 1 gallon of gas in tank!!!
I will guess the 14 will weigh around 500lbs. with an Akrapovic pipe, ready to ride with 1 gallon of gas in tank!!!
____________
Jason Miller StreetBike Seminars
*****DragRacers do it better, because they dont cut Corners*****
|
Drowland
Zone Head
Posts: 733
|
posted January 22, 2006 05:15 PM
By the brochure it looks like the 14 has no adjustable suspension? WTF Its got to be a wrong right?
|
rac4it
Needs a job
Bergie
Posts: 3009
|
posted January 22, 2006 05:17 PM
That published dry weight number means precisely NOTHING, just as the published numbers for the ZX12R didn't mean anything either. They were WAY off reality.
Fill it with oil, and half a tank of fuel, and put it on the scale, THEN tell us how much it weighs.
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 22, 2006 05:27 PM
Edited By: trenace on 22 Jan 2006 17:37
Well, when there's nothing else to go by, people's hope is that change in dry weight figure, from the same manufacturer between similar models, may correlate with change in curb weight, or weight of the sort you describe.
Not guaranteed to though, and certainly not guaranteed to do so precisely -- e.g., the curb weights of the ZX-12R and ZX-10R vary by much more than the dry weights --- but when you have nothing else to go on, it's at least a hint.
So from this info, the best best is that the 14 will neither be greatly lighter nor greatly heavier than the 12. Whether it will be exactly the same in curb weight or not is another matter.
|
worm~hole
Needs a life
Miles to go before I sleep....
Posts: 10623
|
posted January 22, 2006 05:44 PM
210 kilogram = 462.970 750 588 pound
462 pound = 209.559 674 94 kilogram
463 pound = 210.013 267 31 kilogram
.33 pound = your average man's testical weight
1 kiloton = Chuck Norri's testical weight
____________
“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
|
trenace
Needs a job
Posts: 3056
|
posted January 22, 2006 05:50 PM
Edited By: trenace on 22 Jan 2006 17:52
Actually I take back part of the above post -- while the new dry weight figure is good evidence that the 14 will not be much (if necessarily any) heavier than the 12, it does leave room that it could be substantially lighter, as -- just as the 10R's curb weight is much closer to its dry weight than the 12's is -- that could be the case, or somewhat towards the case, with this bike as well.
In other words, with the 10R Kawasaki did a better job with the newer bike of getting the production weight to match up with the design weight than with the older bike, and that could be the case here too.
Not necessarily, but maybe -- while being substantially even more "off" than the 12 was would seem unlikely.
So the only thing I would take out of this dry weight figure is that the 14 is probably not substantially if any heavier than the 12. Whether it is lighter or not remains unknown.
|
|
|
HOME
NEW TOPIC