2012 Kawasaki Ninja ZX-14R Preview

[czsummy]

that is more bike than anyone needs, that has quite the kick to it i dig it

[schizuki]

Originally Posted by seruzawa

Well, I for one and glad that they did something about the old ZX-14's lack of power.

Buy now and they'll throw in a free bottle of Extenze.

[sarnali2]

Originally Posted by schizuki

Buy now and they'll throw in a free bottle of Extenze.

"You'll need every one of those 200+ HP to haul your tackle around when you try new and improved Extenze! "

[rsalco]

Originally Posted by Kevin_Duke

Back in '06, OEMs were still using their bogus "dry weights," which was basically invented numbers that had no basis in reality. The last few years have seen the emergence of curb weights, which are pretty much factual. Re the 14R, it'll accelerate quicker, I'm sure.

Yes, that's true, for years the published or advertised weights were calculated from the bill of materials for the particular bike, not a physical weight. Still, 100+ lbs.??? I just don't think that's likely. And, since my first post, info has been posted up in Europe that the new bike is 197 hp at the crank, 207 at speed with the ram-air. Seems t'me if it's faster tho' heavier that can only come about with an increase in mid-range torque which would make sense with the added displacement. And some tuning to focus on that. After all, in 1/4 mi. acceleration - what Kawi is touting - the first 60' are critical, and that's mid-range torque.

Anyway, it'll be interesting to see the road tests.

[Kevin_Duke]

Originally Posted by rsalco

Yes, that's true, for years the published or advertised weights were calculated from the bill of materials for the particular bike, not a physical weight. Still, 100+ lbs.??? I just don't think that's likely. And, since my first post, info has been posted up in Europe that the new bike is 197 hp at the crank, 207 at speed with the ram-air. Seems t'me if it's faster tho' heavier that can only come about with an increase in mid-range torque which would make sense with the added displacement. And some tuning to focus on that. After all, in 1/4 mi. acceleration - what Kawi is touting - the first 60' are critical, and that's mid-range torque.

Anyway, it'll be interesting to see the road tests.

I managed a 9.85 on the old one, uncorrected, which converts to about a 9.60 when corrected for temperature and elevation. The new one's gotta be at least two-tenths quicker, maybe three. We'll find out how quick in about a month.

[rsalco]

Originally Posted by Kevin_Duke

I managed a 9.85 on the old one, uncorrected, which converts to about a 9.60 when corrected for temperature and elevation. The new one's gotta be at least two-tenths quicker, maybe three. We'll find out how quick in about a month.

Be lookin' foward to it!

There may be a new bike in my future!