2017 Dyno comparison (new Gixxer)

I don't think there will be any issues. I mean, I am assuming Suzuki has had plenty of time to test it since they haven't done shit in 10 years.

The bar was raised when BMW came out with the S1000RR in 2010 that broke into the 180-190hp range off the showroom floor on pump gas (back then Liter bikes were in the 156-164 range, depending on the bike/dyno. Hell some R1s that were tested were in the 148-152 range back then). It was almost as if BMW put out a production bike with a Superstock engine build. But that motor has proven to be reliable and people have been racing them for years. The same goes for the ZX10. Most people think the uber powerful 2011 ZX10 was "in response" to the BMW but it actually wasn't. That new ZX10 had been in development since late 2006/early 2007, and was supposed to come out the same year the BMW did, but they put it off a year due to some minor issues.

Then the Panigale game out putting out the same HP numbers (and 90-100ft/lbs of torque). Suddenly those 3 bikes rendered all other models uncompetitive in stock (motor) trim (in series where the riders are of relatively equal talent, and they use spec fuel and tires). But all of those bikes have proven to be reliable when racing over these years. My 1299S has been bulletproof mechanical wise (and it puts 202hp and 105ft/lbs to the rear wheel on U4.4). The only issues we had were bolts backing out due to vibration.

There are lots of guys that can build SS motors that are just as, if not more reliable than bone stock motors (Livengood, RM, Huey, KWS, Hanshaw, etc). Hell, I ran a Livengood Stage III Superbike motor for 2 full seasons plus several track day weekends. When it was rebuilt it was still in excellent shape, wasn't using a drop of oil, etc. It didn't need to be rebuilt, we just did it simply because it had been 2 years. It is just a matter of knowing what you are doing, and not skimping when it comes to parts.

Cheap
Fast
Reliable

You can only have two. You can have a motor that is fast and reliable, but it won't be cheap (you wouldn't believe the HP my R6 makes if I told you, and it would be a pretty expensive build if somebody walked in off the street and asked for the same build...but it has been bulletproof). Most people think high HP motors are time bombs, that is only the case when people either skimp on parts/materials, or don't know what they are doing.

Suzuki has obviously taken their time developing this bike. Assuming they know what they are doing, have done plenty of testing, and didn't skimp on materials/parts, it should be just fine.

 

They have always been ugly (or maybe "boring" is a better word), even in race trim. The 2008/2009 version of the 600/750 was probably the best looking version. But ever since they went to that bulging in the middle elephant headed looking front, they have looked like shit.

 

By that reckonin', can't wait for Honda's next generation! Oh, wait...we have been waiting.

And the K only mentions 'Zuks being fugly so that we'll respond with pics of really beautiful examples...they're his secret fetish.
I didn't fall for it, but, almost. It's a real beauty.

 

That is the sad part...we have waited 10 years, and according to Honda, it only got a 10hp bump (which should put it around 170ish, give or take 3-4hp depending on bike and dyno). Which still falls well below the competition. I am sure the electronics are good, they are the same everyone else is using. And I like the idea of the SP homologation versions so you can get lighter wheels and Ohlins in SS form. But that still doesn't change the fact that we waited 10 years, and they are still 10-15hp down from the competition. How long before they come out with another update...another 10 years?

As i said before, I am sure it will be competitive in SBK trim. But in a STK series where no motor work is allowed, it could suffer. I cant understand how Honda could not give us anything new for all these years, then when they finally do, they put out a bike that makes less HP than the ZX, BMW, and Panigale made 5-6 years ago.

But with all of that being said, I will wait to see how it performs, and wait to see some real dyno numbers from a completely unrestricted version. But the SP2 costs exactly the same as the 1299S (and just under the 1199R), while making 20-30 less HP, 20-30ft/lbs less torque, and probably weighing 40-50lbs more (obviously because the Panigale doesn't have a frame). So it will be hard to justify spending $25-26k on a Honda.

 

Dude, you're thinking wrong. A 10 hp dump is plenty for the street where some of the liter bikes are already putting out too much for most riders.

Now how much more will it put out with the usual tweaking that race teams put into their bikes? Remember, a lot of those nifty neato brand new whatevers are the first to go in the dumpster when prepping the bike.

If I'm running a race team and I'd take the Honda over the ducati 8 times out of 10.

 

I'd venture to say Fogarty was down 20 hp when he won the '99 WSB title...155hp.

This is his '98 bike on which he won the '98 Title. (I just like the pic. )

 

Yeah, I know. I am still in "offseason mode" so I am just bullshitting about bikes for the sake of passing time. Truth be told, modern 600's make too much HP for street riders (where 99% of these bikes will end up). Hell, The Grom is a great street bike and it only makes 11hp. Well, it used to make 11hp.

I was just sorta rolling the new Honda's lack of stock HP into the discussion we were having about WSTK, and how for several years only the BMW, Panigale, and ZX10 were able to run up front...because they made the most stock HP. I was expecting after this long without anything new, that Honda would come out with a MONSTER of a new bike (like by all predictions/testing so far, Suzuki has done).

As far as the Ducati vs Honda thing, from a financial standpoint, I agree with you. From a competitive standpoint (if we are taking money out of the equation), I would have to disagree. The Ducati is much lighter, much more powerful, easier on tires, and better in less-than-ideal track/grip conditions (due to the way the Twin puts power down). It can put down over 200hp and over 100ft/lbs, without opening the cases...while still having a 15,000mi valve service interval (just like the I-4's).

There is a dude on my Ducati forum that has 22,000 mi on his Panigale, with 1/3rd of those miles being on the track, and it has been bulletproof. He had the valves checked around 16k and everything was in spec, and has been running on it hard from day one. Some people still think of Ducati's as the mechanical time-bombs they were in the past. That isn't the case with the modern ones.

 

All I really have to say is...
I like my 155hp street bike.
(389lbs with enough gas to get to the gas station.)

 

Those are all good points. I agree that Suzuki should have had plenty of time for development and testing lol. Seems promising, but I won't be getting one anyway, because at the end of the day it's still a Suzuki :P It'll be cool to see how competitive they'll be in racing, especially STK1000 if anyone decides to run in that class.

Lots of bikes in the 200-hp range now that have shown to be reliable. The 1299 and 1199R are beasts....and yet, people who live in the past still say they're unreliable

Honda is disappointing. All this time and it's barely better than the last one (on paper). I agree about the SP models. It's a nice addition to have different trims. Seems like a lot of manufacturers have taken after Ducati with having a base model, and then another 1 or 2 at higher price ranges that include some nicer options like wheels, suspensions, etc. But like you said...$25k for a Honda that's down on power?? Yeah, fuck that. You'd have to be nuts. I'd take the Ducati or Aprilia over that any day since the price is very similar. Or at least an R1M.

 

The Honda is a good looking bike. I think it looks tons better than the Gixxer.

 

Well, you huff methane for a living so you can be excused for most things 'tarded but not that.

 

FWIW, I'm not a Honda snob.
One of the nicest "other" brands I've seen...

 

I will wait and see how the Suzuki performs before I pass judgment. I actually used to have a "soft spot" for Suzuki's. My first bike ever was a Suzuki, then my first track bike was a Suzuki, my first Liter bike was a Suzuki, then later on I raced a Suzuki 750. In total I have had 5 Suzuki's. BUT, after I got rid of that 750 I said I wouldn't own another one until they came out with something that made me say "that is badass, I have GOT to have one". BNG's year after year don't make me say that. So I haven't bought another one. But this new 1000 could change my mind.

I agree. If I was going to spend $25k on a motorcycle, the Honda wouldn't be my choice. Especially not as a race bike. I would either get the Ducati (like I did), or get an R1 and then use the left over $10k for mods. I wouldn't get the R1M because all of the stuff that makes it an "M" are either shitcanned when race prepped, or can easily be "flashed" into a base model. The M doesn't come with lighter wheels, or different calipers, or more HP, or anything like that. The M is cool, but as a race bike platform it is a waste of money.

BTW - I also like the idea of all of the homologation specials companies are coming out with. I think it is great. It gives people the opportunity to have a nice bike without breaking the bank, but then it also gives other people the opportunity to have a bike with Forged wheels, Ohlins Forks, and shit like that...while remaining SS legal.

 

Just about anything can look badass in race trim. The SERT bike comes to mind for example. But the Suzuki's still look lame or boring compared to the Panigale, ZX10, and R1.

Fuck that BMW.

 

i'd ride it!

Fogarty on those Ducatis was some of the most entertaining and impressive riding Ive ever seen. Ive seen alot but he rang out those beasts like they were xr100s. i rank him right up there among the best ever.

 

that flag decal has to bother you.. it does me. lol

 

Didn't you say in another thread you had an RSV4 at one point? Was it a race bike or just street bike? If so, what year was it and what were your thoughts on it compared to the 1299? I've ridden both around a track, but the 1299 was a bone stock street bike that was a demo model that a dealer brought to the track and unfortunately only got 2 laps on it due to a red flag so I never got a chance to push it much. The RSV4 was track-prepped and it was miles better than any bike I had ever ridden on the track. Felt like a well setup 600 with an additional 50-60 hp (this was a 2012 factory rsv4).

 

I don't. Top 10 superbike riders of all time? Yeah. Inside the top 5? Nope. He killed 'em when he was on the "A" Michelins but not so much on the lesser ones.

 

Damnit. I didn't really pay any attention to the bike. Now that you pointed it out, it is aggravating the hell out of me.

Somebody delete that shit.

 

It is? Then nope! and good!