Busa vs ZX14 vs BlackBird vs K1200S

[Vic_E55_2001]

Performance Bike Magazine test. I found it interesting.

 

[proud dad]

The 14 is not more aerodynamic.A wind tunnel test was done in NC.And aero's fell in this order.
2006

busa
gixxer1000
zx-10r
zx-14
The busa cut the air better than the little gixxer1000

 

[Vic_E55_2001]

and you right but they performed different test.
I believe in their test, they not biased by Kawa paying shid load of money for ZX14 campaign.

 

[proud dad]

drive train loss

 

[BA BUSA]

With the clutch pulled in on the coast down test, where does the drive train come into play

This only compares rolling resistance and the AERO

 

[proud dad]

less friction in the mainshaft of the trans

I'm guessing.I guess I just don't understand the purpose in the test.something is a little free'r with the 14 or the busa would coast past them all[by the aero's]

 

[Busa505]

alot of thier top speed numbers are really off from tests i have seen on diff bikes for the busa they got it at 181 .....thats way off test i read

 

[JINKSTER]

I'm lov'in it...2+2 ='s...

The ZZR power delivery is lacking in the lows
yet the engine begs you to highside on corner entrances?

anyone who has passed the dragon on a busa
knows how important "Linear Power Delivery" is..
especially on bikes as large and weighty as a busa...

and it sounds like the ZZR is a wadding looking for a corner to happen in.

L8R, Bill.

 

[Vic_E55_2001]

aerodynamics are more complex then just air resistance. That is what they tested in this test.

 

[JuiceSC]

(Busa505 @ Sep. 09 2007,10:59) alot of thier top speed numbers are really off from tests i have seen on diff bikes  for the busa they got it at  181 .....thats way off test i read    

I read that as "top speed reached on the track", not all out top speed of the bike.

 

[Vic_E55_2001]

(JuiceSC @ Sep. 09 2007,12:34)

(Busa505 @ Sep. 09 2007,10:59) alot of thier top speed numbers are really off from tests i have seen on diff bikes for the busa they got it at 181 .....thats way off test i read

I read that as "top speed reached on the track", not all out top speed of the bike.

Same here.

 

[DaCol.]

Coast Down

, there is alot more than Aero to coasting down than just tucking and pulling in the clutch  

! If they don't know that, it leaves alot of doubt in their other numbers.  

 

[Vic_E55_2001]

(DaCol. @ Sep. 09 2007,17:40) Coast Down

, there is alot more than Aero to coasting down than just tucking and pulling in the clutch

! If they don't know that, it leaves alot of doubt in their other numbers.

I didn`t get it. I understood their statement that they are not saying that ZX14 is most aerodynamic, they simple don`t have ability to test bike in Boeing Facility. They tested drag and said that lowest drag does not mean that this bike has best aerodynamics"

Am I incorrect here?

 

[DaCol.]

They say the most efficient at rolling the longest distance from 155 mph is the most efficient at going 155 mph (or that's what I think they are saying) . Which means

I don't know what

. Really, what does that mean ? Surely they are not trying to say if you roll futher by tucking and pulling in the clutch and can roll futher, then your more efficient at 155 mph. There is just too much more to efficency than that. So, I'am now not sure what they are trying to say. If they want efficiency they would need to measure HP or MPG at 155 mph to get that, wouldn't they 

 

[The Big Red One]

(DaCol. @ Sep. 09 2007,21:55) They say the most efficient at rolling the longest distance from 155 mph is the most efficient at going 155 mph (or that's what I think they are saying) . Which means

I don't know what

. Really, what does that mean ? Surely they are not trying to say if you roll futher by tucking and pulling in the clutch and can roll futher, then your more efficient at 155 mph. There is just too much more to efficency than that. So, I'am now not sure what they are trying to say. If they want efficiency they would need to measure HP or MPG at 155 mph to get that, wouldn't they 

I think what they were trying to find out is which bike had the least resistance in the real world counting all the real world factors (aeros/driveline/tranny/oil/clutch/tires/chain/sprockets ect) cutting through the wind coasting down from 170. Just because the 14 coasted farther doesn't mean it has the best aeros per say, I think it just means that particular bike had the best combination of factors.