Hayabusa vs. gsxr-1000


Dear Everone,

I have just become a new Hayabusa owner and I want to know something! Which is the fastest, Hayabusa or 1000! The Guiness Book of World Records 2001 says the Busa is the fastest production bike out there, however the Speed Channel says otherwise! If someone out there could tell me why they are saying this please tell me why!!!!!!
Fastest (top-end) is the busa. Quickest (1/4-mile), depends on the rider, leaning towards the 1000. Remember that power-to-weight is not a factor in top speed as it is with acceleration in fixed distances. The coefficient-to-drag area (CdA) to power is the key and, stock-for-stock, the busa makes more power than the 1000 and has a smaller CdA.

Keep in mind that books and magazines will always be biased. Just look at the recent (superbike mag, I think) where they listed the busa with a ~10.5 1-4 mile time... only later saying that the bike tested was having clutch problems. They should never have even printed those numbers. They really should sell those magazines with included salt grains.
The Busa leaves the GSXR1000 behind on top speed and would blitz the bugger on acceleration as well if it was remotely as stressed as the 1000cc motor.

The Busa engine barely breaks into a sweat as it took the fastest production bike title. All engine internals are capable of living with significant increases in power output via nitrous or turbo boosting. Try that with a GSXR1000 engine!!!! in fact try that with a ZX12 motor, go on, pleeeeeze.

i dont know much bout busa motors

what makes them take so much more stress?
all forged internals?

once again i know nota darn thing about 'bike' motors...now cars..thats another story
The busa motor for starters, is built with more metal, since weight conservation was not as much as a factor as it is with the 1000. Its power comes at lower RPMs whereas the 1000 needs to reved much higher before its power is produced. Here are some BHP (crank) comparisons to some sportbikes (note the 12R revs. It has had complaints about life and reliability).


GSX1300R - 173 BHP @ 9800 RPM - 101.8 ft-lbs. @ 7000 RPM
GSXR1000 - 158 BHP @ 10800 RPM - 81.1 ft-lbs. @ 8400 RPM
GSXR750 - 139 BHP @ 12500 RPM - 62.7 ft-lbs. @10500 RPM
GSXR600 - 114 BHP @ 13000 RPM - 50.2 ft-lbs. @10800 RPM
GSX1400 - 105 BHP @ 6800 RPM - 92.9 ft-lbs. @ 5000 RPM

Kawasaki (note factory figures list numbers with +16 HP for ram air. Stock numbers listed below.)

ZX-12R - 174 BHP @ 10500 - 98.8 ft-lbs. @ 7500 RPM
ZX-9R - 144 BHP @ 11000 - 74.5 ft-lbs. @ 9200 RPM


CBR1100XX - 152 BHP @ 9500 - 87.8 ft-lbs. @7250 RPM
Fireblade 954 - 150 BHP @ 11250 - 76.7 - 9500 RPM
(...and just for fun)
VTX1800 (v-twin) - 95 BHP @ 5000 RPM - 115.1 ft-lbs. @ 3000 RPM
Own both, we've tried racing them about everyway imaginable. For our test the Hayabusa came out on top every time....
thanx for the info about hp stats!

now for some of my imput, bhp dosnt stand for crank power. that would be listed just that, crank power.
it stands for brake horse power and is measured with nothing hanging off the motor, for example (on a car) no power steering pump, NO ALT, no ac, etc...basically just the water pump to circulate coolant.

the term bhp is widely confused not many people knows what it means.
but in 72 that was the last year they used net figures to rate cars. net is basically bhp..that why if u look at a 350 from 72 and a 350 from 73 there is SOO much differnce in the #'s its crazy..because the regulations changed and made them rate their motors with ALL accersories attatched to the motor.

even though a 72 350 might say 250 hp and a 73 195..they are pretty much the same when it comes down to the rear wheels due to the whole conversion they did in their ratings.

so these #'s are crank numbers and not bhp numbers right?
i assume so but im not positive

i also have another question that wasnt answered, busa parts in the motor or cast right? not forged (stock)?

another question, how much hp spray do people usually throw at a stock busa? and how much psi for boost if they turbo?

i know im gettin crazy ?'s but im just curious

Just a minor correction, possibly of just a typo on your part, but since you are so into this you shouldn't go through life misinformed. Through 1972 the bhp numbers were 'gross' not 'net', since they didn't include all the accessories which drained off power to the rear wheels. Since 1973 the numbers quoted are always net of the loss to the accessories and represent actual power available to move the vehicle. You are right that despite the big difference in the numbers there was no difference in performance. It was just a change in nomenclature to present a more accurate picture of what was available to move the vehicle. So far as I know nearly everyone uses rear wheel dynomometers any more to measure hp, so the figures used are nearly all 'net bhp'. There may still be a few racing or specialty shops and engine manufacturers that measure it at the crank while the engine is out of the chassis, and you would probably know more about this than I do.
Numbers are great to talk about, and always makes good conversations with your buddys, but with my experience, Ive found that in the real world the fastest bike is usally whatever the guy with the biggest Balls and most experience is riding. ha ha......really!... I once seen a guy smoke a kid on a cbr600, riding his girlfriends yamaha 600 radian.....he was a regular race track junky, but he certinly proved his point that day!

thanx supersport for correcting me!

what kinda car do you have? a ss somethin i assume??

if so u have any pictuers???

yea i know what u mean about hp #'s.
u can have all the hp in the world..but , for instance, if u cant hook what good will it do ya when the lil rice burner civic that slugs outa the hole takes you the first 1/8th mile..then only to put a car on you in the 1/4
sure ur trap speed was close to double his but still

Yep, power is only part of the story.  Traction is at least as important.  I have a C5 Vette to go  with the Busa.
Yep, muscle cars in the 60's always seemed to have huge amounts of power. The numbers I listed are factory specs from the European sites. I like to go by rear wheel HP, but if you're the manufacturer, you'd want to sucker the consumer into thinking the bike made more horsepower.

Just look at Kawasaki's sites. They list the ZX-12R as having 190 HP. Not only is that at the crank, but it includes 16 HP for ram air, something you won't see on the Dyno. Unfortunately, with misleading factory stats and biased magazine reports, you end up with a large group of blind, brand-loyal consumers talking poop whenever they can.

I'm sure we've all heard stuff like this:

"My 12 makes 30 more HP than your busa and is 100 CCs less..."

"My R1/1000/929/(insert squid bike here) can out-handle your slug anyday of the week..."

I, too, am a firm believer in rider ability. When it comes to big bikes, it's about 10% bike, 10% setup, 80% rider.
Yep, power is only part of the story.  Traction is at least as important.  I have a C5 Vette to go  with the Busa.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

In about 3 days when my loan paperwork goes through, I'll have the same garage lineup as you
albeit different colors!

what do ur guys's vettes run in the 1/4??

dont tell me you dont race them eitehr! if you dont then get out there and do it this season FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!!

i get carried away when people drive fast cars slow all the time

and another thing, so i take it a busa can out handle a r1?? or was i reading wrong?
im not into like hardcore corners through track racing. i mean it looks cool but im about cruizin OR flying in a strait line..and i thoguht that was the only thing the busa was good for.
but she can handle too??

the 12R i rode didnt feel like it wanted to lean very easly/far at least with my experience of riding

Narcissus, you are so right about the importance of experience, but it has to be the right kind of experience to really pay off.  There is an excellent article in a recent issue of Motorcycle Consumer News about Kevin Schantz Suzuki racing school down at Road Atlanta.  They say the key to maximum performance is to ride at your 80% level, rather than full out.  Over time you will become a better rider and beat all the other riders who try to go at 100% all the time.  I find that very interesting.  Think I will try to attend that school soon.  I went down there last year to the superbike races and really enjoyed them.  Already have tickets for this years race.
Jmasin, I hope you enjoy your matched set as much as I do.
73Nova355,  I know a guy who has raced vettes in SCCA competition for many years.  He told me that he was a drag racer for 15 years before that.  He said when he finally found out that cars could turn corners he left drag racing for good and never looked back.  Thats kind of the way I am.  Road (track) racing is so much more fun, especially in the open classes with maximum power.  Having said that, I was goaded into drag racing last year to against a friends BMW M Roadster.  He is still uncomfortable that I beat him.  My Vette is standard edition with auto transmission. and I beat or matched the numbers shown in the auto mags for standard transmission models.  I got 5.3 to 60, and 13.7 at 108.1 in the quarter from standing start with no wheel spin.  So, I think I got one of the good ones.
And yes, Busas do handle extremely well for their weight.  I have no complaints at all on that count.
and another thing, so i take it a busa can out handle a r1?? or was i reading wrong?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Not exactly. With the right rider, it can run circles around any magazine-quoting, crap-talking poseur/squid fresh from the dealer room floor.

i dont thikn i can road race elanova..she's got stock suspension for a six cylinder hahahaha

i would like to try it with a capable car once though

what is a squid? new to the lingo. does that make me a squid i duno? lol