FZ6 is a beast!

[Dry Martini]

Hey guys my old Ninja 250 is just as fast as my new Ninja 300, it actually can keep up with it too! [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Leave it to Kawasaki to build a newer, bigger bike that is slower than the previous model it replaced.


This space intentionally left blank.

 

[Dry Martini]

Because I'm talking about wheel horse power and none of you dumb dumbs seem to think my numbers are right. There's absolutely no ****ing way the r6 makes 130 or even 120 whp. The reality is the r6 only makes 10-15 extra wheel horsepower over the fz6. That's not enough to make a difference unless the riders have identical skill levels. I'd argue that most riders might be a tiny bit quicker on the fz6 due to it having its power slightly lower in the rev range.

It's down right idiototic to quote crank numbers because you can't ride a ****ing engine.

I honestly don't even understand your argument against. We both agree that the r6 is faster than the fz6 but that it comes down to the rider. However I think you believe the r6 is faster than it is. Having spent quiet a bit of time on a 2006 r6 recently I can for sure say it's slower than the fz6 until you get it over 12,000 rpm.

So who said the R6 had 130hp? And since
The subject of companies lying about their bikes has been brought up, I have never seen anything published by Yamaha that shows HP numbers.


This space intentionally left blank.

 

[thisisbenji]

So who said the R6 had 130hp? And since
The subject of companies lying about their bikes has been brought up, I have never seen anything published by Yamaha that shows HP numbers.


This space intentionally left blank.

Not sure where your getting your numbers from but at the crank a 2009 fz6 makes about 97hp and a 2009 R6 makes about 131hp at the crank

That's where the crank number came from, I haven't been able to find a reliable source that backs it up. None of the official Yamaha documents show a claimed HP.

 

[ChevyFazer]

Yamaha does post their horsepower numbers just not on the US site, the 130 HP number comes from wikipedia which sited Yamaha as their source

http://www.yamaha-motor.eu/eu/products/motorcycles/supersport/yzf-r6.aspx?view=featurestechspecs

 

[thisisbenji]

Yamaha does post their horsepower numbers just not on the US site, the 130 HP number comes from wikipedia which sited Yamaha as their source

YZF-R6 2015 Technical details - Motorcycles - Yamaha Motor Europe

Well there we go, although 123.7 PS is 122 HP rather than 130 HP.

Is there something similar for the FZ6?

 

[ChevyFazer]

That's for the 2015 r6 I was comparing 2006-2006 r6-fz6

Wikipedia is where I got my fz6 numbers as well. Granted its not Yamaha's site they claim they pull their numbers straight from Yamaha and since their info for the 2015 is same as what Yamaha claims I trust them

 

[thisisbenji]

That's for the 2015 r6 I was comparing 2006-2006 r6-fz6

Wikipedia is where I got my fz6 numbers as well. Granted its not Yamaha's site they claim they pull their numbers straight from Yamaha and since their info for the 2015 is same as what Yamaha claims I trust them

So here's my conclusion then..... either the FZ6 makes more crank than wikipedia claims, OR the R6 makes more power on the road moving (with ram air) than it does on the dyno. If this is the case the R6 would make a higher WHP number on the road than it would on the dyno.

That being said.... I still can't really tell any differences in power riding the two back to back unless I'm shifting at redline WoT. The R6 actually feels a bit slower if anything when your not racing.

 

[ChevyFazer]

That's true, tons of cars and bikes alike make more power while moving vs a stationary dyno when they have any sort of ram air intake

 

[ChanceCoats123]

So here's my conclusion then..... either the FZ6 makes more crank than wikipedia claims, OR the R6 makes more power on the road moving (with ram air) than it does on the dyno. If this is the case the R6 would make a higher WHP number on the road than it would on the dyno.

That being said.... I still can't really tell any differences in power riding the two back to back unless I'm shifting at redline WoT. The R6 actually feels a bit slower if anything when your not racing.

Isn't that the exact point of the R6? It's a supersport bike made for going fast on the track where you can ride up to the redline. It's not a bike made to be fast on the street (unless you're riding like you're at a track).

But either way, what you've said is just more evidence that an FZ6 could beat an R6.

 

[Dry Martini]

Well if one rides the R6 like they would the FZ6, it will not seen any faster.

Ram Air is a very important part of the R6 engine. A dyno test is all but worthless.


The 98hp number was quoted back in 04 in various bike magazines.


This space intentionally left blank.

 

[thisisbenji]

Well if one rides the R6 like they would the FZ6, it will not seen any faster.

Ram Air is a very important part of the R6 engine. A dyno test is all but worthless.


The 98hp number was quoted back in 04 in various bike magazines.


This space intentionally left blank.

Isn't that the exact point of the R6? It's a supersport bike made for going fast on the track where you can ride up to the redline. It's not a bike made to be fast on the street (unless you're riding like you're at a track).

But either way, what you've said is just more evidence that an FZ6 could beat an R6.

Yup this is true, but how many supersports do you think are actually tracked regularly? On the street the acceleration at redline isn't enough to really put any real distance on the FZ6. In my experience it only makes a good size difference if it's constantly wot turn after turn on a track.

On the street maybe the R6 will pull a bike length, but that's honestly not enough because you'll likely catch the R6 in the braking zone as most people aren't as hard on the brakes on the street as they would be on the track.

 

[ChanceCoats123]

Out of all the 600cc supersports in the wild, how many do you actually think see track day duty?

Out of all the people who have 600cc supersports, how many do you think actually need a bike that can do 160mph?

 

[thisisbenji]

Out of all the people who have 600cc supersports, how many do you think actually need a bike that can do 160mph?

You do realize you can get to WOT without going 160mph? My car will do 160 mph as well... that doesn't mean I'v ever had it over 100 mph. Heck, I rarely get over 90 mph, but I hit WOT constantly.

 

[ChanceCoats123]

You do realize you can get to WOT without going 160mph? My car will do 160 mph as well... that doesn't mean I'v ever had it over 100 mph.

So if we're just going to ask each other a bunch of what if questions, why are we even having this conversation? Why do I have a 600 if I never go over 65mph? Why does anyone ever do anything more than they would need? My point in asking the original question, which was "Isn't riding to the redline the point of having an R6?" was that obviously the R6 is only faster when you ride it faster. Don't be deliberately dense, dude. I get that you've had tons of saddle time on an R6 and I've had none. But apparently you don't seem to get that the point of a lighter bike with track oriented parts and a 2000rpm higher redline IS FOR RIDING TO THE REDLINE... I'm done responding to your quotes in this thread because the conversation has started to leave the realm of civil and we don't need to bicker back and forth when I've already said that I agree with you. So have a good rest of your night.

Also, as a final note, just because you "can't feel" the difference, doesn't mean it's not there.

 

[thisisbenji]

But apparently you don't seem to get that the point of a lighter bike with track oriented parts and a 2000rpm higher redline IS FOR RIDING TO THE REDLINE...

Your right I guess I don't get it, I always thought the point of the R6 was to CORNER faster. After all, you sure as hell don't buy one over the FZ6 for the motor, you buy it because that thing handles like it's on rails.

The R1 is the bike you want if you concerned about straight-line speed.

Also, your the one who keeps picking arguments. Every time I think we've come to agreement you think of some other dumb statement to argue about.

I mean ****, half my responses haven't even been directed at you, but you pick them apart based on YOUR riding circumstances without considering that other people might have a different vision of what a bike is meant for.

 

[Dry Martini]

Your right I guess I don't get it, I always thought the point of the R6 was to CORNER faster. After all, you sure as hell don't buy one over the FZ6 for the motor, you buy it because that thing handles like it's on rails.

.

Actually it is both the superior handling and more power, even if it is higher in the rpm range.


This space intentionally left blank.

 

[thisisbenji]

Actually it is both the superior handling and more power, even if it is higher in the rpm range.


This space intentionally left blank.

Yeah I know it has more power, but we really need to decide if we're talking about street vs track.

Also if it's strictly street location might be key. Here in Illinois there's pretty much zero areas on the street where it would be advisable, or even necessary, to leave a corner at 14,000 + RPM.

Of course the extra power helps on the track, but on the street for the most part it isn't enough power to really put a gap on a FZ6. Something like a R1 on the other hand has enough power to gap the FZ6 on the street.

For the R6 to put distance on the FZ6 it needs repeated straights in between corners that are held at wide open throttle, there's not too many places I can think of to do that on the street.

So generally, on the street, the only reason to get the R6 would be for the suspension/cornering or for the styling.

For the track though, it's R6 all day over the FZ6.

 

[FIZZER6]

Yeah I know it has more power, but we really need to decide if we're talking about street vs track.

Also if it's strictly street location might be key. Here in Illinois there's pretty much zero areas on the street where it would be advisable, or even necessary, to leave a corner at 14,000 + RPM.

Of course the extra power helps on the track, but on the street for the most part it isn't enough power to really put a gap on a FZ6. Something like a R1 on the other hand has enough power to gap the FZ6 on the street.

For the R6 to put distance on the FZ6 it needs repeated straights in between corners that are held at wide open throttle, there's not too many places I can think of to do that on the street.

So generally, on the street, the only reason to get the R6 would be for the suspension/cornering or for the styling.

For the track though, it's R6 all day over the FZ6.

I almost bought an R6 as my first motorcycle because it felt the best under me of any 600CC supersport. Then...I felt the ergonomics of the FZ6S! Wow the FZ6 is comfortable compared to an R6. I do not understand how people ride supersports on the street as a daily riding motorcycle. I would love to have one for my 7 mile commute on twisties but would I ever want to strap a bag on an R6 and do a weekend trip of 500-900 miles? Heck no!

I still would prefer an R6 for every corner I throw my FZ6 around but once I'm on the open road with the FZ6 I can sit up and relax like any standard motorcycle. You can't get a better all around motorcycle, for the price than the FZ6.

 

[ChanceCoats123]

Yeah I know it has more power, but we really need to decide if we're talking about street vs track.

Also if it's strictly street location might be key. Here in Illinois there's pretty much zero areas on the street where it would be advisable, or even necessary, to leave a corner at 14,000 + RPM.

Of course the extra power helps on the track, but on the street for the most part it isn't enough power to really put a gap on a FZ6. Something like a R1 on the other hand has enough power to gap the FZ6 on the street.

For the R6 to put distance on the FZ6 it needs repeated straights in between corners that are held at wide open throttle, there's not too many places I can think of to do that on the street.

So generally, on the street, the only reason to get the R6 would be for the suspension/cornering or for the styling.

For the track though, it's R6 all day over the FZ6.

This! This is 110% right. I've got zero qualms with this. I was never trying to pick apart your arguments before, I was just trying to make sure both of us (and everyone in the thread as well) were presenting actual information instead of our opinions about what we think is right. It was never anything personal, and I apologize if I came off that way.

 

[Dry Martini]

Yeah I know it has more power, but we really need to decide if we're talking about street vs track.

Also if it's strictly street location might be key. Here in Illinois there's pretty much zero areas on the street where it would be advisable, or even necessary, to leave a corner at 14,000 + RPM.

Of course the extra power helps on the track, but on the street for the most part it isn't enough power to really put a gap on a FZ6. Something like a R1 on the other hand has enough power to gap the FZ6 on the street.

For the R6 to put distance on the FZ6 it needs repeated straights in between corners that are held at wide open throttle, there's not too many places I can think of to do that on the street.

So generally, on the street, the only reason to get the R6 would be for the suspension/cornering or for the styling.

For the track though, it's R6 all day over the FZ6.

Well I do not pick flat lands like Illinois to ride. I pick nice mountain roads with plenty of curves. If I were choosing a bike for solo riding, I would choose the R6 over the FZ6.


This space intentionally left blank.