Gen-2 vs Gen-3 aerodynamics

Got-Busa?

Donating Member
Registered
Figured I'd post in here for discussion...

Gen-2 is lowered approximately 2" for profile reference, disregard stock Gen-3 height.

Lots of aero changes, let the testing begin! :beerchug:

2869424A-6C4A-4E1C-BDA8-A59FB29C94D6.jpeg


7005CB9A-22C3-4789-B2FE-C941858404BF.jpeg


6ED68E68-1AC2-4A55-98ED-7B4341C74073.jpeg


5937F6E1-8BD8-4ED9-81EA-71C138CE5D0B.jpeg


27FE61F7-73EC-41F0-AC72-7C053ABB0D5E.jpeg


6B918595-67E4-418C-8A04-03E2433BFDF0.jpeg
 
I can only imagine with the technology today plus the advancements in wind tunnel testing the new one will flow air far better then any older version - the side covers seems to go slightly higher on the new version as well. I suspect it could be color difference but still it appears to have been re-tweaked - ditto for the rear tail again revised shape for aerodynamics?
 
Any notable difference in the chain?
New running Drive chain, RK GB50GSVZ5, 114Links Versus Chain, RK GB50GSV Z4, 114 links
What lubrication will be required with these new chains - anything special?
 
First, the Gen 1 was designed specifically to get past 200 MPH, so it's aero-centric design is obvious. The Gen 2 was an aesthetically tamed version of the original with slightly less aerodynamic efficiency I presume. But on the Gen 2 it is obvious when the bubble envelops the bike and you zip up to the redline in 6th gear. The Gen 3 does not appear to be anywhere as concerned with the airflow at 200 mph and keeps a lot of the ealier gen's aero-cues primarily for branding. However, the Gen 3 seems to have given more consideration to air in the engine area where previous Gen's covered all that up to reduce friction at speed.
 
First, the Gen 1 was designed specifically to get past 200 MPH, so it's aero-centric design is obvious. The Gen 2 was an aesthetically tamed version of the original with slightly less aerodynamic efficiency I presume. But on the Gen 2 it is obvious when the bubble envelops the bike and you zip up to the redline in 6th gear. The Gen 3 does not appear to be anywhere as concerned with the airflow at 200 mph and keeps a lot of the ealier gen's aero-cues primarily for branding. However, the Gen 3 seems to have given more consideration to air in the engine area where previous Gen's covered all that up to reduce friction at speed.
Be interesting to see a drag coefficient of each bike...I'd imagine it would be very close.
 
First, the Gen 1 was designed specifically to get past 200 MPH, so it's aero-centric design is obvious. The Gen 2 was an aesthetically tamed version of the original with slightly less aerodynamic efficiency I presume. But on the Gen 2 it is obvious when the bubble envelops the bike and you zip up to the redline in 6th gear. The Gen 3 does not appear to be anywhere as concerned with the airflow at 200 mph and keeps a lot of the ealier gen's aero-cues primarily for branding. However, the Gen 3 seems to have given more consideration to air in the engine area where previous Gen's covered all that up to reduce friction at speed.
I disagree but if anyone wants to donate to the cause we can get all 3 to a wind tunnel and find out? :D
 
Suzuki even stated that in the wind tunnel it had the least drag of any bike they've manufactured, you can tell just from the front alone from the single piece front fairings and integrated signals and a lot less bolts on the plastics this thing glides through the air... I've tapped her out and its crazy how she feels, so stable and wants more and more I swear 250mph feels like it could be possible on this thing.
 
Suzuki even stated that in the wind tunnel it had the least drag of any bike they've manufactured, you can tell just from the front alone from the single piece front fairings and integrated signals and a lot less bolts on the plastics this thing glides through the air... I've tapped her out and its crazy how she feels, so stable and wants more and more I swear 250mph feels like it could be possible on this thing.
So pretty much like the other 2 generations, I would say the drag coefficient would be very close on all three with maybe the gen 1 coming out ahead slightly if I were to guess...

All of the write ups stated the Hayabusa has one of the lowest drag coefficients of any production bike they've tested...not just the gen 3 but all Hayabusas.
 
Last edited:
Hi.
To me it looks like Suzuki went back to Gen1 style, the tumors are gone, the instruments and especially the rev counter look suspiciously like the gen1 style and the fuel tank has simpler lines.
BTW i also want to cover the ram air intake for less drag since my bike is turbo, did you actually noticed any aerodynamic improvement at speed?
Chris
 
A couple of things I noticed.

The Gen 3 front fender has a cutout in it - other years don't

The Gen 2 pictured doesn't have bar ends.
Was that to reduce drag?
 
Back
Top