masszx14
Pro
A mind beside itself!
Posts: 1806
|
posted January 07, 2013 07:17 PM
Well, long story short- the BST wheels on my 14 will go on my 2011 10r and I sold the oem 14 set 3 years ago. Used oem wheels are cheap and I'll have to buy a set anyway, why not get the lighter version and have a little project on my hands.
BTW I'm a huge Michelin fan and went to countless sets of the Power Cups and Power Slicks at the track in 2012 on my gixxer (on BST wheels again  ), the 14 has rocked Michelins since I bought it.
If you want quicker steering I suggest you go to a lot taller than a 190/50 on the rear, you can also look into extending the shock lenght.
____________
universal@mind
  
|
weighmaster
Expert Class
Posts: 301
|
posted January 07, 2013 07:35 PM
 Edited By: weighmaster on 8 Jan 2013 03:37
Losing a few pounds on a very torquey bike will not even be noticeable so why spend money on it? Getting a lighter tire makes a lot of sense to me because tires wear out anyway so that is like a 2 for 1 deal.
Just because I have my shift light set at 7500 doesn't mean I shift there. I've been up to 10K several times because my shift light used to be set there and perhaps I will set it back to that.
Perhaps you are the one with the simple minded brain. Perhaps read up on the physics of weight loss and inertia.
Also, should I contact Michelin and tell them what they are advertising is BS according to you? Why would you know something about weight loss that they don't know? Do you have millions of dollars of test equipment and lots of Engineers working for you?
As far as weight loss, I could do the front wheel swap with lighter tire and have one rotor and caliper removed and I would beat the OSR kit weight loss easily at a fraction of the cost. That would probably be close to 10 pounds lost up front and since I am gearing the bike up anyway and don't normally use full throttle in 1st gear, wheelies are not a concern.
So put that in your pipe and smoke it.
|
osr
Expert Class
Posts: 459
|
posted January 07, 2013 08:55 PM
I thought you left -- Good lord-- let it go you were proved wrong on your weights - you said you would leave now go.
and how are you going to say will the ZX10 wheel hold up on the back? you were trying to get me to see if the zx6 wheel would fit on the front so you must not have been to worried about it.
|
weighmaster
Expert Class
Posts: 301
|
posted January 07, 2013 10:08 PM
Edited By: weighmaster on 8 Jan 2013 06:16
osr, I was not proved wrong on my weights. You were! I have an accurate scale here and the actual 14 and 10 wheels. The only thing I don't have is a loose 14 rotor. YOU were the one that advertised almost 10 pounds saving of the pair which was WRONG! It is only about 7 pounds saved for the pair and not all of that 7 pounds is in the wheels, some is in the rotor where is makes very little difference.
Also you advertised more than 7 pounds of rotating mass in the rear alone saved and that also was WRONG. You even admitted it was wrong and changed it online so you are projecting your own incorrectness onto me which is not right. The weights I have for my 10 and 14 wheels are accurate. That is, anything I put on my scale and read the weight of is accurate. Why wouldn't it be? I even weighed a gallon of water on it and got the correct weight.
People, why would he ask me to leave unless he knew I was right? If I was wrong, it seems he would just let me keep flapping my gums and make a fool out of myself but he knows I am right and that he posted wrong weights and got caught by me.
Also, the front wheel does not have power applied to it directly nor do I do stoppies so I am not as worried about the front wheel being lighter but the rear yes because of direct power, passengers, and wheelies. I wonder what the Kawasaki Engineers would think of this idea if I asked them. It took them many years to lighten up the 14 wheels so they probably did extensive testing so just slapping some 10 wheels on a 14 is not a good idea without them being testing carefully under many conditions.
|
tuusinii
Pro
Posts: 1031
|
posted January 07, 2013 11:03 PM
There are many factors when losing weight on wheels/tires and Michelin is (of course) advertising their 3 to 1 ratio wich is probably right when You calculate the inertia of the tires which affects the acceleration times. But loosing weight also helps the suspension because of less unsprung weight and will make the tires hook up better because the bike can accelarate the tires faster (up and down) thus the tires follow road better. There the inertia isin't so big deal but actual kg (or lbs) count. If someone can save 7 lbs with really low $ why not go with it? And saving weight in the wheels is really noticeable when riding bike on turns. I also repeat my advice to change the tire to higher profile if You want better turning bike - weight is not the only thing affecting - and not even the most critical. And losing one brake disk on front isn't very wice - maybe on drag bike only but not on street (and not really on track). Stock ZX14 is warping disks even with two disks up front and You never know when You need the brakes when there is some jerk coming in front of You behind stop sign! And about front wheel not needing to be strong is not right. These bikes stop faster than they accelerate wich directly means that when braking it means there is more "power" going trough the front tire than back. By the way I'm also an Michelin fan when it come to tires.
|
eklipse636
Needs a life
ZX-14
Posts: 6046
|
posted January 08, 2013 01:28 AM
Weighmaster- the only thing is I can out together in my head is that your just too smart for your own good ..
What the hell are you doing hanging out asking us questions? You already know the answer. There is no point in us saying anything because you already know.
You said you were leaving..... Please don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. Don't look back, just go
____________
Best: 60ft 1.351 1/8 5.68 mph 123.98 1/4
8.89 mph 151.32
|
weighmaster
Expert Class
Posts: 301
|
posted January 08, 2013 03:14 AM
To me it seems like looking at both the 14 and 10 wheels side by side (I have all 4 here, 2 fronts and 2 rears all off the bike), the weight savings appears to be more towards the center, where it matters least.
What I was saying about the front wheel is I am not worried as much about that one being lightened because I don't do wheelies and then slam the front end down and I don't ride on the track. If I go fast on the street, I usually let the wind slow me back down. When using the brakes, I am usually at normal, street legal speeds (or close). I do however occasionally use the full power of the engine so the rear wheel strength is important to me.
It would be interesting to ask a Kawasaki Engineer what stresses the front wheel the most, hard braking, a hard landing from a wheelie, or a stoppie. I almost always use both brakes when stopping.
I don't do any twistie stuff on my 14 so I am actually going to a lower profile front tire to save even more weight where it counts most, in the tire.
Also, Michelin's 3:1 advertised ratio is a tire to wheel inertia ratio. Tire to rotor ratio they advertise as 4:1 so the 5 pounds saved with the osr rear wheel conversion kit gets divided roughly by 3.5 ratio which translates roughly into a 1.5 pound saving in the rear tire which I can easily beat going from my Shinko 009 190/50/17 at 14 pounds to a Michelin Power Pure 190/50/17 at an advertised 12 pounds.
|
eklipse636
Needs a life
ZX-14
Posts: 6046
|
posted January 08, 2013 04:49 AM
If you don't do twisties, accelerate hard, don't press the brakes hard, etc WHY do stuff to the bike to make it a accelerate faster, brake faster, etc?
The rear wheel isn't going to break. There is only 100lbs difference between the bikes, and the hp is close, wh do you think the wheel would break??(give us another 6-8 paragraphs on your theory that engineers didn't think of)
____________
Best: 60ft 1.351 1/8 5.68 mph 123.98 1/4
8.89 mph 151.32
|
tuusinii
Pro
Posts: 1031
|
posted January 08, 2013 05:45 AM
Why not use about 100$ for actual weight savings and some performance gains when You anyhow need the parts. So basically it's not even extra money to spend. If at the same time someone uses the same amount to custom sprocket that doesn't give any performance gains and probably is even heavier so giving You performance loss... 
|
weighmaster
Expert Class
Posts: 301
|
posted January 08, 2013 05:55 AM
Edited By: weighmaster on 8 Jan 2013 13:57
...636, the answer to your first question is I do sometimes accelerate hard, even using the full power of the engine. Since the 10 front wheel is a direct swap, thus very cost effective, why not do it? Also because I want 2 different style and 2 different color wheels on my 14. Personal preference. I like to be different than 90+ % of bikes out there with matched wheels.
I didn't say the rear wheel would break. My reasoning is if the 10 rear wheel was a good match for the 14, why didn't Kawasaki save a lot of time, effort, and money and just use it on the 14? There has to be a good reason. Probably because they want to sleep well at night knowing the 14 wheel can handle the load. If the 6 spoke ZX-10R wheel was the best design, why isn't the 14 wheel just a beefed up version of it? Why is the ZX-14 wheel 5 spoke branching into 10 instead of just 6? If you cannot answer these questions with relevant facts to back it up, then you cannot say for sure if the wheel will break or not under any condition. It would be interesting to do destructive testing on both wheelsets and see which is stronger and by how much.
Also, even though the HP of the 10 and 14 are close, the torque is not. Therefore I don't think HP is a good yardstick on how strong a wheel should be. For example, what if a pair of ZX-10R rear wheels were used on a light car that made 330 HP (shared between 2 wheels) and quadruple the torque of a ZX-14?
|
osr
Expert Class
Posts: 459
|
posted January 08, 2013 06:50 AM
From the WM, "Personal preference. I like to be different" -- I think you are doing a very good job at it too!
I don't think there is going to be a problem with the zx10 rear wheel holding up - I have had it on my bike for 3 years -I 'm fat about 270 suited and the bike puts out close to 350 hp on the bottle - shit i even had a bottle fall out on the top end and I ran over -- it gave it a nice flat spot but running 165 mph at the time I was happy thats all that happened.
From WM: If I go fast on the street, I usually let the wind slow me back down.
I emailed that to Kawasaki they are going to try and work the Air brake back into the next ninja 250!
|
weighmaster
Expert Class
Posts: 301
|
posted January 08, 2013 08:05 AM
Edited By: weighmaster on 8 Jan 2013 16:09
That still doesn't answer the question of why Kawasaki didn't use ZX-10R wheels on the ZX-14 then or at least use the same design, just a little "beefier".
osr, at 150 MPH, chopping the throttle IS a very effective "air brake" and that one never gets warped.
|
Bently
Needs a life
2012 14r In Blue and no Mods!
Posts: 5428
|
posted January 08, 2013 08:20 AM
I think chopping the throttle is called engine breaking, sitting up like a dumb ass at 150 is using Air as a brake.
|
madnessracing
Pro
Vmax and Busa Beater
Posts: 1140
|
posted January 08, 2013 08:37 AM
quote:
That still doesn't answer the question of why Kawasaki didn't use ZX-10R wheels on the ZX-14 then or at least use the same design, just a little "beefier".
osr, at 150 MPH, chopping the throttle IS a very effective "air brake" and that one never gets warped.
WM I was the very first one to do the 10r wheels on the 14 and when I did I weighted the wheels and the 10r were 7.8lbs lighter than the 14 and If kawasaki dont put zx10r wheels on the 14 is because they have to meet safety regulations due to its weight and power.
____________
Shorty's Performance
Team Madness Racing
|
masszx14
Pro
A mind beside itself!
Posts: 1806
|
posted January 08, 2013 07:10 PM
Edited By: masszx14 on 9 Jan 2013 03:11
quote:
quote:
That still doesn't answer the question of why Kawasaki didn't use ZX-10R wheels on the ZX-14 then or at least use the same design, just a little "beefier".
osr, at 150 MPH, chopping the throttle IS a very effective "air brake" and that one never gets warped.
WM I was the very first one to do the 10r wheels on the 14 and when I did I weighted the wheels and the 10r were 7.8lbs lighter than the 14 and If kawasaki dont put zx10r wheels on the 14 is because they have to meet safety regulations due to its weight and power.
Soot me an email with a pic of the wheel set you mentioned for sale,
it's my name here @ yahoo. Thanks
____________
universal@mind
|
weighmaster
Expert Class
Posts: 301
|
posted January 09, 2013 09:36 AM
Edited By: weighmaster on 9 Jan 2013 17:52
quote:
quote:
That still doesn't answer the question of why Kawasaki didn't use ZX-10R wheels on the ZX-14 then or at least use the same design, just a little "beefier".
osr, at 150 MPH, chopping the throttle IS a very effective "air brake" and that one never gets warped.
WM I was the very first one to do the 10r wheels on the 14 and when I did I weighted the wheels and the 10r were 7.8lbs lighter than the 14 and If kawasaki dont put zx10r wheels on the 14 is because they have to meet safety regulations due to its weight and power.
That is great. What is frustrating to me though is osr did not post the exact weight savings and where the savings are. For example, I would want to know how much weight savings is in the bare wheels alone (not the rotors). Then I would like to know how much is saved in just the rotors (because that uses a different formula for inertia). I would also like to know how much of the weight saved is in non rotating components such as the rear caliper and hanger, and finally, I would like to know how much weight is added back it with the rear wheel conversion kit. I suspect the true weight savings is in the 7 to 8 pound range but where is important.
If you look at a 14 and a 10 wheel, the 10 wheel has much larger of those "cutouts" in the hub and other cutouts the 14 wheel doesn't even have. I suspect some weight is saved in the spokes and the rim but I am not sure how much. I don't have fancy measuring equipment but it appears to be the '06 14 rear wheel is 6mm thick in those "cutout" openings in the hub and the '06 10 rear wheel is only 5mm thick. I remember reading that cast aluminum alloy wheels need to be thicker than forged aluminum wheels to get similar strength. It appears they made the 14 wheels slightly thicker probably for strength. The 10 wheel basically looks more like a piece of swiss cheese vs. the 14 wheel.
The front 10 vs 14 wheel (both '06 vintage) also appear to be about 1mm difference in thickness at the "cutouts" but those look more like 3mm vs 4mm to me. I just used crude equipment (a flashlight and a tape measure) so someone else can get it more exact than me. I am not the measuremaster.
|
Wheelie
Needs a life
Old Man
Posts: 6902
|
posted January 09, 2013 12:31 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
That still doesn't answer the question of why Kawasaki didn't use ZX-10R wheels on the ZX-14 then or at least use the same design, just a little "beefier".
osr, at 150 MPH, chopping the throttle IS a very effective "air brake" and that one never gets warped.
WM I was the very first one to do the 10r wheels on the 14 and when I did I weighted the wheels and the 10r were 7.8lbs lighter than the 14 and If kawasaki dont put zx10r wheels on the 14 is because they have to meet safety regulations due to its weight and power.
That is great. What is frustrating to me though is osr did not post the exact weight savings and where the savings are. For example, I would want to know how much weight savings is in the bare wheels alone (not the rotors). Then I would like to know how much is saved in just the rotors (because that uses a different formula for inertia). I would also like to know how much of the weight saved is in non rotating components such as the rear caliper and hanger, and finally, I would like to know how much weight is added back it with the rear wheel conversion kit. I suspect the true weight savings is in the 7 to 8 pound range but where is important.
If you look at a 14 and a 10 wheel, the 10 wheel has much larger of those "cutouts" in the hub and other cutouts the 14 wheel doesn't even have. I suspect some weight is saved in the spokes and the rim but I am not sure how much. I don't have fancy measuring equipment but it appears to be the '06 14 rear wheel is 6mm thick in those "cutout" openings in the hub and the '06 10 rear wheel is only 5mm thick. I remember reading that cast aluminum alloy wheels need to be thicker than forged aluminum wheels to get similar strength. It appears they made the 14 wheels slightly thicker probably for strength. The 10 wheel basically looks more like a piece of swiss cheese vs. the 14 wheel.
The front 10 vs 14 wheel (both '06 vintage) also appear to be about 1mm difference in thickness at the "cutouts" but those look more like 3mm vs 4mm to me. I just used crude equipment (a flashlight and a tape measure) so someone else can get it more exact than me. I am not the measuremaster.
blah blah blah, why dont you just put the zx10 on the front and move on? weeks of the same posting, blah blah blah, you're worried about 2 lbs? blah blah blah, you hate OSR because they swatted you like a pesky fly, blah blah blah, you are not worth 1 sale, can't blame OSR for telling you like it is, post this non helpful garbage on another site,
wee
|
weighmaster
Expert Class
Posts: 301
|
posted January 09, 2013 06:14 PM
Edited By: weighmaster on 10 Jan 2013 02:41
Looks like I can shave 10 pounds off the front then. Tire:1, wheel:2, rotor+caliper+plumbing:7. That will be interesting. If the single rotor warps then I'll just swap it with the good one.
Garbage? I disagree. Someone else may benefit from my experimentation. Who said this site is for drag racers only? I assume street riders are welcome here too. Look how many of you thought I didn't even have a ZX-14 that were wrong.
Who said I hate osr? I just said they posted the wrong weight savings and corrected it after I spotted the error. If they don't want to sell to me because of that, why would I care? I'd much rather put the $125 saved towards a rear tire that is 2 pounds lighter. LTT is a cool thing.
Oh and I have no problem hanging on at 150 MPH as a human parachute. My windshield is off too so I get wind blasted even more. The bike only accelerates at about 1G so that is quite manageable. 1G = 21 MPH of acceleration every second so that would be 0 to 105 MPH in 5 seconds. If the bike went 0 to 100 MPH in 3 seconds, then I might have some trouble hanging on but it doesn't.
|
Wheelie
Needs a life
Old Man
Posts: 6902
|
posted January 09, 2013 06:24 PM
quote:
Looks like I can shave 10 pounds off the front then. Tire:1, wheel:2, rotor+caliper+plumbing:7. That will be interesting. If the single rotor warps then I'll just swap it with the good one.
Garbage? I disagree. Someone else may benefit from my experimentation. Who said this site is for drag racers only? I assume street riders are welcome here too. Look how many of you thought I didn't even have a ZX-14 that were wrong.
Who said I hate osr? I just said they posted the wrong weight savings and corrected it after I spotted the error. If they don't want to sell to me because of that, why would I care? I'd much rather put the $125 saved towards a rear tire that is 2 pounds lighter. LTT is a cool thing.
Oh and I have no problem hanging on at 150 MPH as a human parachute. My windshield is off too so I get wind blasted even more. The bike only accelerates at about 1G so that is quite manageable. 1G = 21 MPH of acceleration every second so that would be 0 to 105 MPH in 5 seconds.
replay, look everybody, you can save 2 pounds,
wee
|
weighmaster
Expert Class
Posts: 301
|
posted January 09, 2013 07:26 PM
Edited By: weighmaster on 10 Jan 2013 03:42
Somehow I get the feeling many people posting here are 200+ pounds and are jealous of me being about 170 suited up. My true bodyweight (unsuited) is low 160s.
So my bike will be getting some "trick" parts soon so I'll have to reshoot a pic. I think it is shaping up very nicely and it runs great. Probably the best bike I ever owned. I think the Engineers did a great job except for a few things...
1) VIN is upside down when viewed (from the throttle side and while behind the throttle).
2) The speed sensor is near the sprocket, not on the front wheel which is bad.
3) They didn't leave enough room for a 19T (+2) front sprocket.
4) It could use more storage space.
5) Programming the gauge cluster is not as straightforward as it should be.
6) Shift light should have 2 triggers, a low RPM and a high RPM such as 7500 and 10K.
7) Low fuel warning should have an override so you can still see other functions.
8) Gearbox should have a wider range (closer to 3:1 between low and high gears).
9) Belly pan design should be better so when removed, doesn't look like a linkage issue.
10) Why did they use old technology AGM batteries as stock?
Other than those (and a few others that don't come to mind right now), I really like the bike.
So maybe after I get my bike all lightened up the way I want it and with the exhaust plug, maybe I'll make a few 1/4 mile passes to see how rusty I am after 20 years of not drag racing. Who thinks out of maybe 3 runs I'll get lower than 10 seconds? Any predictions on E.T. and MPH? I think with my bike and me being light, I should post some decent MPH.
Who thinks I can get 9.99 (or better) and 140 MPH (or better) after about 20 years of not being at the dragstrip?
|
eklipse636
Needs a life
ZX-14
Posts: 6046
|
posted January 09, 2013 07:29 PM
Wm- take that bike to the dealer so they can install you a new windscreen.
I'm not sure if your local mc can handle a job like windhsield swap. Make sure they check the book for estimated time to install so they know how to charge you.
____________
Best: 60ft 1.351 1/8 5.68 mph 123.98 1/4
8.89 mph 151.32
|
Bently
Needs a life
2012 14r In Blue and no Mods!
Posts: 5428
|
posted January 09, 2013 07:45 PM
quote:
Somehow I get the feeling many people posting here are 200+ pounds and are jealous of me being about 170 suited up. My true bodyweight (unsuited) is low 160s.
So my bike will be getting some "trick" parts soon so I'll have to reshoot a pic. I think it is shaping up very nicely and it runs great. Probably the best bike I ever owned. I think the Engineers did a great job except for a few things...
1) VIN is upside down when viewed (from the throttle side and while behind the throttle).
2) The speed sensor is near the sprocket, not on the front wheel which is bad.
3) They didn't leave enough room for a 19T (+2) front sprocket.
4) It could use more storage space.
5) Programming the gauge cluster is not as straightforward as it should be.
6) Shift light should have 2 triggers, a low RPM and a high RPM such as 7500 and 10K.
7) Low fuel warning should have an override so you can still see other functions.
8) Gearbox should have a wider range (closer to 3:1 between low and high gears).
9) Belly pan design should be better so when removed, doesn't look like a linkage issue.
10) Why did they use old technology AGM batteries as stock?
Other than those (and a few others that don't come to mind right now), I really like the bike.
So maybe after I get my bike all lightened up the way I want it and with the exhaust plug, maybe I'll make a few 1/4 mile passes to see how rusty I am after 20 years of not drag racing. Who thinks out of maybe 3 runs I'll get lower than 10 seconds? Any predictions on E.T. and MPH? I think with my bike and me being light, I should post some decent MPH.
Who thinks I can get 9.99 (or better) and 140 MPH (or better) after about 20 years of not being at the dragstrip?
Lowerd and strapped or stock height unstrapped? if stock height and no strap I say 10.40 at 142
|
weighmaster
Expert Class
Posts: 301
|
posted January 09, 2013 09:22 PM
Well, stock height but with a smaller than stock front tire, no strap. Actually, I wont know the exact setup of the bike until I find out when they have the drag racing, how much it costs... 10.40 at 142 doesn't sound very impressive considering I went 10.75 at 132.9 about 20 years ago on my Honda CBR900RR that only had maybe 120 RWHP. The bike was SWB and not set up for drag racing at all. It was setup for wheelies which back then were a lot of fun for me. I remember one time I lifted at about 35 MPH and clutch shifted from 3rd to 4th to 5th and when I touched down, the speedo shot up to 115. That was fun.
I am hoping on the 3rd run I will break 10 seconds and go 143+ MPH. I would think with 40 more HP and a few inches more wheelbase than my old 900, I can post some good numbers. 1st run likely wont be impressive but it will help me learn what the bike can do.
I will reprogram my shift light for 10K.
|
weighmaster
Expert Class
Posts: 301
|
posted January 10, 2013 03:07 AM
Edited By: weighmaster on 10 Jan 2013 11:09
Just F.Y.I., I have a new Michelin Power Pure 120/60/17 front tire and it weighs only 7.9 pounds. That may be 1.1 pounds lighter than the Bridgestone BT021 120/70/17 tire I currently have on my ZX-14. That along with the 2 pounds saved by swapping in the ZX-10R front wheel should be quite noticeable. Should be interesting. Of course I will have the front height adjusted to compensate for the smaller diameter/radius tire.
I am still undecided about going with a single front brake rotor setup but I suspect I will keep the duals for better feel, especially since I have an aftermarket shorty front brake lever.
Also, to the person who stated the bike slows down faster than it accelerates, that may be true if both brakes (front and rear) are used but let's suppose a stock '06 ZX-14 can go from 0 to 100 MPH in 5 seconds. Can that same bike go from 100 to 0 in 5 seconds (or less) only using the front brake? I'm not so sure I would want to try that test but I may if I get a chance. I almost always use both front and rear brakes unless I am testing them individually.
|
tuusinii
Pro
Posts: 1031
|
posted January 10, 2013 04:14 AM
When braking hard Your back wheel will be almost in air so it doesn't help braking much.
|
|
|
HOME
NEW TOPIC