600 vs 1000

Lot's of people say the 1000 has lower mid corner speeds than the 600 but talking to an AMA data guy he said this was not the case.

Not sure if he was full of sh*t or his statement was dead on.

Be nice to see some data on this topic.

 

The 600 to 750 gsxr proves that it all has to do with the mass of the motor and power delivery. The bikes have the same exact chassis...but the 750 feels heavier. Some riders go faster on the 600...and that is because when you have more power....it is harder to get to wide open throttle (wheelspin). So...a 600 pulls of the corner a bit, then the 750 catches back up about the time your in the braking area for the next corner... the 750 has more mph so you have to brake a bit sooner.... guys always think more hp= faster lap times...but it doesn't always work that way. A lot of 600 guys think they are going to get on a 1k, go the same speed in the corners and go way faster on the straightaways...doesn't work that way.

So depending on the track.... Like JGP for instance... it takes a real fast rider to go faster on a 1k then a 600 there. You have to be more precise with your line and your entry speed on a 1k...the braking areas are longer. You should spend less time at full lean then a 600. More physically demanding...they are heavier feeling and pull on you harder...the longer braking areas wear on you.

The 1k's..you have to respect the torque more...it takes better throttle control.... 600's are way easier to ride. I guess you could think a 1k is easier to ride if you are no where near the limit and kind of being lazy....riding around in 1 gear...

They are both really cool...but take different riding styles to go fast on. As far as why they are different...power delivery, torque...rotating mass of engine and gyroscopic effect of wheels from higher speed in some situations.... like the end of the straightaway

 

Depends on who the rider's data is. For the top guys this is a fact, althou for the most part you are splitting hairs, not much dif between them

 

IMO, the gyroscopic effect has a big effect. It makes the 1000 a lot harder to turn than the 600. There are also other things that make it harder to turn like bigger tires, and more overall weight, but the gyroscopic effect has the biggest effect.

 

I have a 1000RR and a 600RR. They are very similar as far as sharing some bits like the tank shelter and rearsets. But the 1000 is a bigger overall package. The 600 feels like a kid's bike and even when I think I'm going slow on a warm up lap for example, my knee is instantly on the deck. Getting the 1000 down like that takes much more concentration and physical work.

I think a big factor in the difference is power, usable power. 1000's currently have ~95% more power. A modern sportbike takes about say 50hp midcorner, 75hp at 75% exit, and 100hp at 90% on using modern equipment (tires and such). Fine tuning your wrist on a 1000 to use what is 1/4 of it's power mid corner and about half as you drive out without lifting the front is tricky. But the more body english and muscle you can put into that exit drive pays off, at the expense of fatigue and tire wear.

So a 1000's full power is only practical from 90% out of the corners. Mid corner to that point is a bull ride if you're not careful. IMO twins maximize both worlds because the power delivery is much more linear, not an explosion of hp (1000) or noise (600), just solid torque. After all, torque is what moves objects, horsepower just makes them move faster.

Personally 1000's are more fun to ride cause I like wheelies. Although flicking a 600 around and scraping elbows on a 600 is exhilarating as well.

 

I've raced a 600, 1098 and now my 750 (and did track days on my old ZX10 street bike). Even my 750 doesn't go side to side like a 600 does. You can really feel it in faster corners (like going into the carousel at Nelson) trying to turn it. But I love that little extra power. My ZX10 felt like it wanted to stay upright while turning. But I do think the 750 is great being right in the middle

 

...still kicking myself in the ass.

 

I think everyone should ride a 600 before a 1000 because of the essential skills that it teaches . . . riding a 1000 not only means more power, but like D-WIRE mentioned, also means longer braking zones, straighter lines, and a completely different strategy on the track. My general thoughts are that there are far too many people that jump on 1000s that really get the fundamentals of corner speed, and never really get as good as they can be with their racing because of it. After all, how many people (D-WIRE excluded) are on 1000s because they can ride beyond the potential of a 600 anyway?

 

Few years back I raced a 636 and a 10R in the same season, some races jumping off the 636 and on the 10R.

They felt pretty much the same size/weight-wise. They both wanted to stand a bit in the turns, the 10 was set up to be a little nose-heavier/twitchier, and the 636 was just tank-like stable.

I was a pretty good rider that season, but nowhere near as good as now (and I'm a much better racer now). I was faster on the 10R by about 1/2 second a lap (at Arroyo) at the end of that season, so I continued to race the 10R and sold the 636.

Now, I race a 1K7. Even compared to the 04 10R its a ton wider in the engine, and I'm a lot more aware of the engine mass while racing.

BUT, it's set up better. My forks work the way they should, the swingarm angle comes to where it should, the wheelbase is right, the bike doesn't flex and twist.

The 10R, when I started going faster than that season I had the 636, was a nervous bike. I couldn't keep both wheels in contact with the ground, and it seemed like the bike was ALWAYS doing more than I asked of it, or trying to twist me off of it. It was a TON of work to keep it on the track at something like a competitive pace, and there was no margin for inattentiveness or relaxation, or I'd run off track, miss the corner, miss a turn in point, etc. Sometimes I was committed to the turn and had no remaining margin for a competitive correction, meaning I couldn't decide mid-corner to try to drive under someone if I had been on his outside.

The 1K7 is a big bike. No freaking doubt about it. But it's a TON more forgiving and has way better power, brakes, handling, yadda. Worse slipper clutch, but that's it. It's STILL more work than a 600, and takes more of my effort - my arms can really ache throwing that bike around a 12-lap race, and I'm in pretty damned good shape.

I've ridden a few 600s in the same day as that 1K7. And I want a 600 (I REALLY like the 675, actually). But I'm going to keep racing the 1K7 (I already own it, and I have more to learn, so no real incentive to ditch it). The 600s are lighter and easier to turn. The motor cases are narrower, the bike frames are smaller, the reciprocating mass feels less on the 600's (and I think some of it is the alternator on the end of the crankshaft, actually as the 10R didn't have that feel, having the alternator behind the cylinder banks - a bad design for a racebike that led to expensive repairs). The 600's will transition faster with lighter input from the rider - it's not the steering geometry, or the steering input that translates forward momentum to the side-to-side motion (it can be, in a slow transition). It's the rider's added input/energy to the bike to pick it up and throw it over, and it's less on the 600s than on my 1K7.

I agree with the guys who say the 1K is as fast mid-corner as a 600, matches my perception, too.

Lots of words. Hope someone finds an answer in there.

 

Yep, based upon the coefficient of traction a 1000 can carry the same speed at apex (noun) as a 600...or a 250...or a 125 (assuming they have the same quality suspension/tires etc).

Granted, a 1000 may apex (verb) the curve in a different spot to better utilize its strengths, but when apex (noun) is being defined as the point or vertex of a curve, a 1000 can carry the same speed as anything else.

Most people think "smaller bikes are faster in the corners" but that simply isnt the case, at least not scientifically.

But as with anything else, the biggest variable is always the rider.

 

Chris, how do you explain 800cc MotoGP bikes going faster in their first year than the 990s they replaced?

 

Im sorry i will have to disagree with what you just said.

They could if they had the same amount of friction between the tires and the same weight.

But since they dont, they can carry the same speed through a corner.

 

Ever noticed how bigger bikes have bigger tires?

 

Several reasons. More overall corner speed (my previous post was simply talking about the exact point of apex), advances/improvements in tire construction, advances in electronics allowing for more time at full throttle, etc.

 

Exactly. That is the point I was trying to make (how a 1000 can carry just as much, if not more, speed at apex as a 600 or even a 250). I just wasn't going to spell it out, I wanted the engineer to think about it for a lil while.