Been away from this forum for a while, and not been following the world of bikes due to work commitments (unfortunately).
Anyway, had a question for you all since things seem to have changed somewhat in the sports bike world in that time. When I was last buying sports bikes (only 3-4 years ago), the 600s were about 160kg and the 1000s were 170kg (ish). I’ve just been looking on the manufacturers sites as I fancied an upgrade and found the following dry weights:
This compares to (if I remember correctly)
2008 (ish) CBR600RR 159kg
2006 GSXR 1000 165kg
2007 GSXR 1000 172kg
What on earth is going on with the weights of these newer bikes? I’m assuming it’s some kind of emissions thing. Any light you can shed on this would be very much appreciated.
As an example, the GSX-R1000 now has twin exhausts where the K6 had a single. Added to that will be the catalytic convertors, probably one in each can and possibly one in the collector box. You also have the addition of air injection systems, exhaust butterfly systems and other such additions, all to reduce both exhaust and sound emissions.
A recent example of the ridiculous weights of modern bike exhausts, I changed the exhaust on my FZ1 to an aftermarket Akrapovic unit and it was about 5Kg lighter than the standard lump!
Just to point out your comment about going to dual exhausts on the gixer 1000, that happened between the k5 and k7, which accounted for the 7kg rise. I’m wondering what happened to make it go from 172kg in 2007 to the 205kg in 2010 - a giant rise in comparison to when they added the second exhaust.
Being somewhat cynical, I’d say it’s probably more to do with them advertising a more accurate weight than what they previously did :blink:
I seem to remember a few years back, Performance Bikes did an article comparing bikes advertised weights to actual weights and almost all of the advertised weights were considerably lighter than actual measured weights. Some manufacturers (possibly Triumph) went as far as to weigh the bike without brake fluid or battery acid when quoting a dry weight!
That is a good link, just compared my bikes BHP & Torque to the list and even after 8 years it is actually really close. GSXR 600 01-03 Between 100 - 103 BHP and about 45-46 Torque.
Dyno’d my bike recently and after tweaking the fuel a bit it had 101 bhp and 44 torque. Which is not bad for a bike that is 8 years old.
The claim is that the bike had 115 bhp when released.
A favourite topic of mine, why are bikes so heavy?
A regular feature at bike shows has been pals following me
around the stands sniggering as I rant “too lardy” on inspecting
new models
Yamaha said my 2000 R6 was 166kg and the 2010 one is 189kg !
But the 166 is dry weight and 189 is Wet weight (including full
oil and fuel tank) so I guess they are really very similar.
And you lose at least 5kg dumping the cat, so the new one would
be less than 164kg dry, i.e. allowing 20kg for fuel (17 litres)
and oil (3.4 litres) going on Yamaha numbers.
Thanks for the link above, it has R6 wet weight as a shade
over 190kg, lose the cat and 185kg sounds realistic if still a
bit lardy
That brings me onto another point…
What’s the carbon footprint of manufacturing all those
catalytic converters that are languishing in the corners
of peoples garages?
So that Euro legislation is really working well then!
