Author Topic: The Fat Lady Has Sung the ZX-14 (Read 25436 times) Tweet

MrHans · « **Reply #25 on:** February 09, 2006, 12:33:19 AM »

Quote from: jtownbusa on February 07, 2006, 07:37:58 PM

I THINK ITS A GOOD THING IF ITS QUICKER!! WE MIGHT FINALLY GET A NEW BUSA AND BESIDES THAT THING IS NOT VERY GOOD LOOKNG KINDA REMINDS ME OF THE OLD RF 900 WITH THAT SIDE FARING. CANT WAIT TILL ONE SHOWS UP BESIDE ME SO I CAN PUT IT ON THEM...........

I've still got my '94 RF900 and it's way better looking than the kwack. (well, the side panels anyways.)

THEMOTORHEAD · « **Reply #26 on:** February 09, 2006, 05:35:10 AM »

Quote from: Treysbusa on February 08, 2006, 06:22:53 PM

What is the weight of this big boat?

LESS THAN A BUSA

Commuta_Busa · « **Reply #27 on:** February 09, 2006, 07:48:56 AM »

so do you guys think a non-turbo modded zx14 is gonna break 200mph at maxton this year?

mountainmotor · « **Reply #28 on:** February 09, 2006, 08:49:53 AM »

Just wanted to add :

There are Busa's out there that are so mean even the owners have to throw them some raw meat before entering the shop

I think it will be awhile before the aftermarket helps get the new 14 close to what some of those normally aspirated Busa's are capable of and even then the bike still has the boosted Busa's to contend with .

The latter will be a tough row to hoe

Time will tell cause paper racing is worth what it's wrote on

Commuta_Busa · « **Reply #29 on:** February 09, 2006, 08:57:46 AM »

I'm sure some harrasement will go on between SH.org and zx14.net soon eonugh

Treysbusa · « **Reply #30 on:** February 09, 2006, 06:35:13 PM »

Quote from: mountainmotor on February 09, 2006, 08:49:53 AM

Just wanted to add :

There are Busa's out there that are so mean even the owners have to throw them some raw meat before entering the shop

Thats what im talking about. Theres already a guy here talking about how hes going to bust all these busa's asses. He dont even know what hes buying. Just what its suppose to be.

gnd111 · « **Reply #31 on:** February 09, 2006, 08:04:44 PM »

Kawasaki is saying the "dry" weight is 478lbs... Gonna be clsoe to Busa but less i am sure...

DarkFalcon · « **Reply #32 on:** February 09, 2006, 08:45:54 PM »

Quote from: THEMOTORHEAD on February 08, 2006, 08:59:18 AM

I THINK 167 SAE IS TOO LOW
JUDGING BY DESIGN ETC I WOULD SAY THAT IT WILL BE IN THE 175-180 SAE HP RANGE BONE STOCK AND MIDTO UPPER 180S W PIPE AND MAPPED

I think the first 12's were rated at 177 at the crank and they produce 160 at the tire for a driveline loss of around 10%; the Busa's are rated at 175 and typically produce around 155 for a driveline los of 11.4%. Let's take the mid-point of 10.7% and apply it against 190 at the crank..............you come up with 170 for the 14 on pump gas at the rear wheel out-of-the-box. They will all vary according to manufacturing tolerances but this is probably a good median/average of what we might expect. My feeling is the bike is for real and I don't care where the chips fall as I tend to believe competition is good and that, in the long-run, all of us will benefit. Some may argue that super bikes or hyper bikes comprise a small portion of the total market; to this I would say.............never overlook the ego's of corporate captains. If for one second you think they are out only to maximize shareholder wealth, you are sadly mistaken.

gazza414 · « **Reply #33 on:** February 09, 2006, 10:23:24 PM »

We have forgotten Kawasaki always claims with "RAM AIR"...... has this been factored in???

Gixxer1300r · « **Reply #34 on:** February 09, 2006, 10:42:01 PM »

Quote from: DaveO on February 04, 2006, 12:29:38 PM

More like 170 on pump....IMO only of course.

Dave

I have to agree with DaveO, I think you should be comparing the ZX14 to a 12 to 1 1363 busa, because I think thats where the performance will be.

rumble phish · « **Reply #35 on:** February 14, 2006, 05:24:27 AM »

Quote from: Cookie on February 05, 2006, 03:06:54 AM

I sat on the ZX14 at the MC show.

185 or not,, they are going to have to shed some serious weight off of that ugly pig to have anyone worried.

God,, that thing was homely.

Dude, the 14 was/is lighter than the Busa by a fair margin. I don't have #'s, just using my seat-o-the-pants scale. Sat on them back to back at the show. Both empty/no battery and the 14 was WAYYYY lighter.

mountainmotor · « **Reply #36 on:** February 19, 2006, 10:57:59 AM »

Approximately 45 days back while visiting the Kawasaki website they had the ZX14 listed as having 12.7:1 compression which was identical to other early specs from different sources about the internet .

Yesterday the K-Bike website showed the ZX-14 to have been de-tuned to 12.0:1 compression .

Now , I would like to think the early release bikes that's been in the USA for a couple of months were not the pre production 12.7:1 compression models , in the apples to apples thing .

On the web there are various sources citing that production of the new ZX-14 has been put on hold . Could lowering the compression be why ?

There's 3 threads going on about that new bike and I just decided to post in this one

flfiremedic · « **Reply #37 on:** February 19, 2006, 11:21:20 AM »

Mountain Motor, where are you located?

DarkFalcon · « **Reply #38 on:** February 26, 2006, 04:36:57 PM »

From another board:

richard gadson
Psychobike Junky

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote (Strip9R @ Feb. 23 2006 4:39 pm)
Has anyone dyno'd the bike in its complete stock form ie... No aftermarket exhaust, pump gas, stock sprockets?

in the 170's!!

mountainmotor · « **Reply #39 on:** February 27, 2006, 09:56:38 AM »

So , the Kawasaki website has the torque listed at 113lbs @7500 rpm , presumably at the crankshaft .

Can a guy just deduct 10-12% off that for rear wheel torque numbers ?

FastBikes4Life · « **Reply #40 on:** February 27, 2006, 03:41:53 PM »

Sales Rep at the Chicago motorcycle show had the weight of the bike (ZX-14) at 474 pounds. I think the Hayabusa and the ZX-12R are both about 475 pounds, right? No real big weight savings. It's going to come down to power. If 170 horses to the back is what this thing is doing then just imagine a Busa with a PC and a decent pipe. That's what your average ZX-14 is going to run like. Not bad but I really wanted this thing to put 180 horses to the back, not the crank.

Fast

Treysbusa · « **Reply #41 on:** February 27, 2006, 07:10:54 PM »

From the #s ive seen im not impressed with it. The zx12 was build in 00.They have had 6 yrs to come up with a couple of lbs lighter and thats alot of cc's for no more power than that. I am not talking bad about the 14 but.

rumble phish · « **Reply #42 on:** February 27, 2006, 11:19:04 PM »

Quote from: Treysbusa on February 27, 2006, 07:10:54 PM

From the #s ive seen im not impressed with it. The zx12 was build in 00.They have had 6 yrs to come up with a couple of lbs lighter and thats alot of cc's for no more power than that. I am not talking bad about the 14 but.

I don't think they were trying to build a better 12 (that'd be a TALL order. The 12 was/is one helluva bike)

I think they were trying to build a DIRECT competitor for the Busa, and to one up it.

I think they've accomplished both.

Here's to hoping there really is a "New and Improved" Busa around the corner...........

gnd111 · « **Reply #43 on:** February 28, 2006, 06:35:21 AM »

Quote from: rumble phish on February 27, 2006, 11:19:04 PM

Quote from: Treysbusa on February 27, 2006, 07:10:54 PM
From the #s ive seen im not impressed with it. The zx12 was build in 00.They have had 6 yrs to come up with a couple of lbs lighter and thats alot of cc's for no more power than that. I am not talking bad about the 14 but.

I don't think they were trying to build a better 12 (that'd be a TALL order. The 12 was/is one helluva bike)

I think they were trying to build a DIRECT competitor for the Busa, and to one up it.

I think they've accomplished both.

Here's to hoping there really is a "New and Improved" Busa around the corner...........

I think you are probably right on with that statement...

DarkFalcon · « **Reply #44 on:** February 28, 2006, 04:06:54 PM »

Quote from: mountainmotor on February 27, 2006, 09:56:38 AM

So , the Kawasaki website has the torque listed at 113lbs @7500 rpm , presumably at the crankshaft .

Can a guy just deduct 10-12% off that for rear wheel torque numbers ?

I don't think so Mountain. When looking at the Busa and the 12, I think 12% is a good driveline loss when applied against peak crank numbers.........and when trying to convert advertised crank to measured rear wheel horsepower. Measured peak torque numbers, though, are all over the board when compared to advertised crank #'s; in the case of the Busa and ZX10, measured peak torque will be closer to 95% of claimed peak crank torque. I think the underlying difference in the %'s has to do at the RPM at which the events occur; peak torque occurs before peak HP does. Under this line of thinking, driveline losses increase with RPM..........possibly RPM^.

ZXLNT · « **Reply #45 on:** February 28, 2006, 11:14:47 PM »

Quote from: Treysbusa on February 27, 2006, 07:10:54 PM

From the #s ive seen im not impressed with it. The zx12 was build in 00.They have had 6 yrs to come up with a couple of lbs lighter and thats alot of cc's for no more power than that. I am not talking bad about the 14 but.

Obviously or maybe not so obviously its NOT in the same state of tune the 12R engine. Its more mildly tuned which leaves more room for gains.. I find it funny that people on different message boards are comparing a stock ZX14 to a 1363 busa. Apples and oranges, for we all know that a bigbore busa isn't just a big bore. Its big bore, cams, exhaust, pc, etc etc..

gnd111 · « **Reply #46 on:** March 01, 2006, 07:33:58 AM »

ZXLNT - wanna bet the 14R has more aggressive cams than a stock Busa? Or even that they are more aggressive than Yosh Stage 1's for a Busa?

Wanna bet $1???

Facts are that with average riders the 14R couldn't get out of it's own way at the press release. And it still hasn't gotten any better looking...

chunter · « **Reply #47 on:** March 01, 2006, 07:51:05 AM »

"Facts are that with average riders the 14R couldn't get out of it's own way at the press release."

I still see a lot of busas, even with mods, running mid 10's at the track so I guess both bikes are tanks.

gnd111 · « **Reply #48 on:** March 01, 2006, 09:28:40 AM »

Quote from: chunter on March 01, 2006, 07:51:05 AM

"Facts are that with average riders the 14R couldn't get out of it's own way at the press release."

I still see a lot of busas, even with mods, running mid 10's at the track so I guess both bikes are tanks.

That is true. But the MPH on the new 14R is VERy similar to the 12R's and about 2mph more than the norm for Busa's. So it is not as strong as they would have led people to believe and not miles ahead of the Busa or 12R either like it should have been in power and refinement..

Birdoprey · « **Reply #49 on:** March 01, 2006, 12:28:39 PM »

Quote from: gnd111 on March 01, 2006, 07:33:58 AM

ZXLNT - wanna bet the 14R has more aggressive cams than a stock Busa? Or even that they are more aggressive than Yosh Stage 1's for a Busa?

Wanna bet $1???

Facts are that with average riders the 14R couldn't get out of it's own way at the press release. And it still hasn't gotten any better looking...

Heck, the ZX-12 had bigger cams AND bigger valves than the Busa. Thats how you get simmilar hp #'s with smaller cc's. Looks like the ZX-14 will have the cc, cam and valve size advantage. The ZX-14 should make more hp and tq. At the same weight, it should be faster as well.

I would like to have one of all three! (Busa, ZX-12 AND ZX-14)

News:

Author Topic: The Fat Lady Has Sung the ZX-14 (Read 25436 times) Tweet

THEMOTORHEAD