Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > MO Reader Feedback

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-15-2003, 03:13 AM   #31
DrkRzn
Founding Member
 
DrkRzn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3
Default Re: '03 600s, Other choices

Vlad,



I should be getting a 03 R6 to replace my 98 YZF600R for the very beginning of next season. I'll let you know if I do the 8 hour trek to Springfield, Illinois on the R6 (done it twice on my 600R, and 860 km (530 miles) is a little TOO much for any sport bike in one day, IMHO). Wondering if it is possible to even survive such a journey at all on an R6... If I survive to tell, I'll post



Regards,



Shaun.
DrkRzn is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 04-15-2003, 03:45 AM   #32
jamesohoh7
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 211
Default Re: '03 600s, Part II: On the Dirty Boulevard...

So, I can't remember from the articles I've read, but is it possible to adjust the Kawi's ride-height in the rear? Looking at the pics, there doesn't seem to be a ton of room left to drop the forks much. But, it would seem to me that if you lowered the rear a tad and dropped the forks down through the clamps (i.e. raise the front), the two adjustments might level the bike out a bit to prevent the crotch-cramp and also slow down the (apparently) snaky steering?? A couple of millimeters here and there might make a big difference, hmm? Or, does stuff like that go outside the scope of a test of showroom-stock bikes? (time constraints and all that...)



Great info though, glad to see that there's no real dogs in the test.



-James
jamesohoh7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2003, 05:00 AM   #33
ollie
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 52
Default Re: '03 600s, Part II: On the Dirty Boulevard...

In my opinion, this comparo is worthless without the Honda. I realize you couldn't get one from the factory, I just feel the need to state that point for the record. I couldn't make a purchase decision based on this incomplete comparison, and that's what comparisons are for, right?
ollie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2003, 05:54 AM   #34
rsheidler
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,459
Default Re: '03 600s, Part II: On the Dirty Boulevard...

Seems kinda obvious -- Roadracing World? Wonder what their orientation is? Probably commuting?



If I remember correctly, their test was entirely a track test, so big surprise that they had the same pick as your track test (I think it was even the same track).



When you read any reviews (books, movies, or motorcycles) you need to understand the reviewers' perspective, and I usually find the reasons WHY they like or don't like a bike (or book, movie, etc) more useful than the specific ratings they give.



As you say, consider the source.



Bob
rsheidler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2003, 07:38 AM   #35
micty
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11
Default Inconsistencies between Part 1 and Part 2?

Basically, Part 2 concluded that the 636 is inferior to the R6 based on its ergos and nervous handling. Fine, but those comments appear to contradict some statements in Part 1, such as:



From Part 1 of the 600 shootout, re the 636's ergos and handling: "Don't let my description scare you away though, the bike is actually surprisingly comfortable in EVERY DAY LIFE and doesn't feel like it is going to bite you ... That seat may be too steeply raked, but it's still comfortable to your tailbone after OVER AN HOUR on the freeway." (emphasis added)



From Part 1 of the 600 shootout, re the 636's ergos: "The riding position feels natural, could even be OK for DAY-LONG sport touring." (emphasis added)



Re R6 vs. 636 ergos from Part 1 of shootout: "Overall, aside from the ultra steep seat on the ZX-6R, the Yamaha feels quite similar to the Kawasaki in ergonomics. The funny thing is, in the real world, even with a flatter seat, it doesn't seem to be quite AS COMFORTABLE to ride." (emphasis added; presumably comparing the R6 to the 636)



Also, there were comments in Part 1 about the R6's seeming tendency to tuck.



So, MO, pls. explain these the apparent inconsistencies between Part 1 and Part 2.
micty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2003, 08:30 AM   #36
micty
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11
Default Re: '03 600s, Part II: On the Dirty Boulevard...

Just to clarify: I think the 03 6R's 636cc motor is different from the euro-02 6R's 636cc motor. I believe the latter is just a bored version of the previous motor, while the 03's motor is new. (Sorry if this is old news)



But I agree - I would be thrilled if they would stuff the new motor in the old body. But I would still be glad if they had to use the 02 636 motor in the old body (e.g., to reduce costs).
micty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2003, 08:48 AM   #37
sarnali
Founding Member
 
sarnali's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,415
Default Re: '03 600s, Part II: On the Dirty Boulevard...

The whole "buy a bike based on road tests" is flawed anyway because you're assuming that the bike you buy and ride in your enviroment is going to perform like the bike the testers rode in their enviroment. I'd buy the Triumph because I think it looks cool, in fact the best place to learn about a bike is in the owners reviews that some web sites have. Magazine road test's are strictly entertainment. Brit. tests especially, I don't think you're going to last long on the street around here riding like that.
sarnali is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2003, 09:03 AM   #38
nweaver
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 458
Default Too sharp for their own good?

Bike complained about a full lock-to-lock tankslapper on the CBR-RR. MO got a nasty shake/slapper on the ZX-6R.



Are the geometries just getting too sharp for their own good? The needs of the racetrack overwhelming the street?

nweaver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2003, 09:31 AM   #39
johnnyb
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,597
Default Re: Too sharp for their own good?

Y'know, people with serious engineering qualifications have studied headshake for eons and never figured it out. Steep geometry alone isn't the cause--look at the rock-solid Buell Firebolt and Lightning, bikes with super-steep rake and short trail. From my own experience, headshake results from a combination of steepish geometry and suspension that doesn't react quick enough over bumps--either too slow or too fast... I think.
johnnyb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2003, 11:03 AM   #40
SeanAlexander
Founding Member
 
SeanAlexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Newport Coast, CA
Posts: 1,538
Default Re: Please tell me it ain't so...

I dyno'd the 749S back to back before and after the ECU reprogram and the peak HP and torque numbers were unchanged. The bike makes peak power at 9,800RPM either way and trails off above 10,000RPM, therefore that extra 1,000RPM is mostly overrev (like JB just said) and wouldn't have made a huge difference on the track.
__________________
I thought I'd found true happiness in my personal bath body bar.... Then I tried DOVE! with 1/4 moisturizing cream!!!
SeanAlexander is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off