Yup the VFR ‘only’ puts out 100bhp, would you really need double that on a road bike?
Not on the road no, but when it comes to pub bragging rights every (claimed) horsepower counts !
My point exactly
TBH I would much prefer bikes to only be 100bhp and actually be better quality. spend money on bits that last longer. I am fed up of riding a bike through salt and having to wash it down after every ride cause everything furrs up and goes rusty. Thats the biggest reason I stopped riding my ZX6 in winter. I rode it through one winter everyday and washed it every day and bits still went a bit funny! Its not practical to keep washing a bike like that. Rather than an extra 3-4bhp more each model make it so the damn thing lasts longer.
I am not being funny but my ZX6 compared to the latest ZX6 on the road with 2 equal riders in real life conditions there would be very little in it!
I remember when we went out on a blap last year with myself, rottie, chris and Andrew,
Rottie had an original model ZX6, chris had a 98 R6, me on my 01 ZX6 and Andrew on his ZX7 and in a straight line on shear speed they were all pretty much equal on how fast they went so basically nothing in it. On the road its doesnt make that much difference which sports bike you have.
Terry, they don’t want the bikes to last longer, they want them to last for a shorter period of time, because then people would buy bikes more often, making them more money. It’s all economics. We want one things, they want another.
Also, in regards to do you need 200bhp on the road? No of course not, but as I said in my last post, road bikes are what make production race bikes, and race bikes need more performance to win, and winning bikes sell more road bikes. It’s all reciprical.
see what you’re saying supermofo. you’re right about the power kicking in at er, slightly above posted limits, which we all er, stick to 
they put stupid gearing on to be able to quote the accleration and top end speeds. almost all road bikes need adjusting really. I mean 97 in 1st gear?!?!?
the one qualifying aspect to is that a massively torquey powerful bike all through the rev range might actually make it a bit of a handful on the road - in the wet you’re have to be VERY careful not to wind up the throttle and get the rear making a break for freedom. even in the dry you’d be running the risk of overpowering the rear quite a bit. the r1 is putting out 75/80lbs of torque at 9k rpm. I’m not sure i’d want that torque at 3k!! 
I remember that r6 article, wasn’t a cheap set of mods but were definately the way to go if you had the bucks.
I think its the busa that they intentionally put in a flat section on the curve to make it easier at lower speeds. possibly a saving grace of the litre bikes is that the power effectively comes in in stages? if you’re running the revs you tend to know about it/are doing it intentionally. if you want that power earlier/harder i suppose at least you have the option of regearing at present
if we’re talking ideals I was thinking it would be great to have a bike like you say much greater torgque down the rev range, and a toggle switch to remap the bike to switch a percentage off when the conditions/grip get lousy (bit like the M button on a BMW). in the racing they remap the gp bikes to make it less powerful based on conditions altho this is with a pc
can’t wait to hear the motogp bikes at goodwood on sunday…have big expectations of the V4 roar!
True but economics works both ways. You only have the look at the fact the British bike industry went under due to crap reliability and people had, had enough and had an alternative. If (and I know this won’t happen) people stopped buying bikes cos they are made of cheese, the bike manufactures would produce a non rotting bike pretty much overnight I’m sure. So you can have what you want, you just have to be prepared to fight the long war If people actually made a stand and told the bike manufacturers its not good enough and we won’t part with our hard earned they would listen. Part of that is telling them, I don’t want an extra 2 bhp at 17,000rpm I want to ride my bike through winter without it looking like the cheap old nacker afterwards Same story on peak BHP.
Going back to the British Vs Jap bikes in the late 60’s early 70’s what if in the next 10 years the chinese produce a top looking sportsbike, with performance within a nats wisker of the japs latest bikes, that lasts for years and doesn’t need aftermarket bolts to stop it looking shite. Oh and costs less. Reckon the Japanese would be fecked thats what Cars last forever nowdays, doesn’t stop
Also in regard to production race bikes surely that shouldn’t be the case? After all a production race bike should be a race version of the roadbike, not the other way round? In the early days of wsb for example the bikes were roadbikes that were raced. Now we are being pushed into letting the companies convince us that what they need to get a 00.2 sec advantage round the track is what you need on your roadbike, which is utter bollox. People race tricyles for gods sake, yes they would prefer the lastest superdooper race bike, but they will race whats there. And personally I think your opinion and mine, should be more important than the needs of a racer.
I like it spinning up in the wet though JB, that’s part of the 1-litre fun We all want to be like Valentino at heart…
I would buy a bike that has slightly less BHP if it stayed in better condition longer and I could ride it on salt encrusted roads and not have to worry.
Good point mofo I had forgotten that race bikes used to be taken from road bikes not the other way around.
Agree there mate. there will always be a point at which it would ge silly, ie 100 lbs torque at 3rpm in the wet. But prob not much less silly than 200bhp and I think it would be nice as you say to have the choice as a rider to have what you want. Having gone from sportsbikes, to motards for 4 years changes your view on what is usable and makes you question most of the current bikes on the road today.
One of the other main advantages V4 engines is the power delivery - big bang firing orders in IL4 motors simulate this to some extent, but the V-twin like power delivery of a V4 is the best. Basically think of a clockface, a 90degree V4 or 90deg V-Twin fires at 12 O’Clock and at 3, then passes all the way round to 12 before firing again. This gives a sliding tyre time to start gripping again unlike an IL4 which bangs with a constant attack every 90 degrees. The difference is in the improved feel you really need on the edge
feel on the edge mate? i can’t even get my flippin knee down! 
Then you’ll just have to appreciate the sound
Still up for the LB trackday JB. For sure we can work on the knee down…
I think we have to remember that our bikes i.e litre bikes are based on WSB and not moto GP. Yes big bang engines emulate V4’s and yes I would have one just for the sound track
, but didn’t Virgin yamaha try the big bang thing on their R1’s and still get blitzed in the championship? Coming down to 800ccs aint gonna make much difference to what we already have. The big four manufactures can make what we want if they really wanted to, in fact they did in the forms of the first R1’s and the K1 gixxer thou. Both were light, had tons of torque etc. Truth is, I still belive the 750 is the way to go for sports bikes( back me here B and Andrew!) so much so I’m selling the K3 thou i bought off my mate 2 weeks ago!!
Perhaps WSB going to 800cc would be the way forward if the politics and economics would have it. That said, the two classes are now more similar in design than ever before and a lot of the technology is filtering down from GP to WSB to the road bikes. So they both seem to be going in a similar direction which is good for everyone. I wonder if this is what the manufacturers want. It would appear to make economic sense in many ways.
We can only guess which route will be taken but for me the smaller capacity superbikes would work. Can the rider in the street be convinced?