So, I was researching this when I had my Fizzer... goal was to adapt a 2nd Gen R6 (2003- 2005) setup. Two primary issues, first being the throttle bodies have the wrong spacing. I've seen video showing a modified rack stuffed up against a YZF600R head so it is possible to get them to fit. The video was showing the bike starting and idling using a microsquirt to drive it, I'd rather reuse the R6 ecu which brings up issue two, the lack of a cam trigger that the R6 setup expects. My plan for this was to have a shop drill a hole in the valve cover over an exhaust valve that points up closest to when the notch in the R6 exhaust cam trigger wheel points at the sensor on that bike. That plus a TTL level inverter between the sensor and loom should be enough to make the ECU happy. From there, pick your tuning method, either a piggyback ala PowerCommander or flash the ECU if that's your pref.
on the 250, 300, r3, and several older right side up forks - I just figured they would have tried to go with 41s in order to bring it more inline with the LWT bikes like the r7
Hell yes, I got a text from my buddy who owns a dealer and he offered me the allocation. It's locked in and I'm getting it probably in June. Gonna use it as a street bike/occasional track bike. If I wad up my CBR600RR somehow I'll turn the ZX-4RR into a race bike. D Superstock looks good, hopefully it'll be eligible for some sort of endurance class. I think it'd be fun in race trim for an endurance race.
I think you're favoring a bike that you clearly like, more than what reality actually shows. Your RZ didn't weigh 370lb with a full 6 gallon tank of gas. That's about what it weighed with half a tank of gas, with the capacity actually being 4.5 gallons, so, full of gas we're talking over 380 pounds for the stock RZ. Then RWHP being about 43 in stock form. Compare that to the ZX400 (we'll be conservative and say 60 hp for the ZX400 and 415lb with a full tank of gas. That would work out to 8.8 lb per hp for the RZ and 6.9lb per hp for the ZX400. Yes, the ZX is heavier by 30 pounds, but it's going to scoot down the road faster than the RZ. Not to mention the fact that any racer worth his salt is going to go through the same weight reduction exercise as you did, including ditching the the heavy-ass stock exhaust that has three catalytic converters. I like the RZ a lot, but the choice easily favors the ZX just based on weigh and power.
First one of these to hit the junkyard. The lump, injection, harness and all electronics gadgets are getting put in this. The way the Kawasaki God's intended it to be;
I do not doubt that this new 400 Kawasaki would be faster than an RZ350 but I think the numbers above are skewed to favor the Kawasaki. I have found more than one place that put the stock RZ350 at 54 HP at the rear wheel. Using this number puts the two bikes about even. Even if the 54 HP is exaggerated I also believe 60 HP is exaggerated for the Kawasaki also, BUT it sounds like a great bike.
I knocked quite a bit off the hp numbers I saw for the ZX. Hp numbers I'm seeing are in the mid 70s. I'm also inclined to think that the chassis and suspension of the ZX are much more up to the task than the RZ. We all know the SV isn't much of a benchmark for handling, but here's an example of how the RZ compared: My brother-in-law raced an RZ for a decade before switching to an SV, but he kept the RZ around for awhile. He happened to have both bikes at the track one day and decided to take the RZ out just to see how it felt in comparison to the SV. He did about two uninspiring laps before he pulled the RZ in, got off the bike, pointed at it and said: "FOR SALE!" I think the ZX400 will be better. JMO
This is a little unrelated for this comparison tgold but I suggest when looking at hp to weight ratios we always add to the weight an estimated rider with gear number to the weight. In your above comparison where the bike weights are close it doesn't mess up the comparison as much as if the bike weights are very different.
