sv -> sports 600

[hlaf_lyfe]

how big is the jump?
any experiencies/ advice?

[DanAbnormal]

How long have you been riding and how long have you had your SV?

Low down grunt is not as immediate but they handle so much better, tip in like a dream and no wobbles when you rag the **** off it exiting a corner. Wind them up and they go like stink, ripping your arms out. At least, my Ninja did. :cool:

DO NOT listen to those who say "oh but they have no midrange at all and you have to be at 11'000rpm before they even start going". It's all a load of pap. Most SS600's are fine for commuting and town riding, the only thing you may experience is wrist/back ache at low speeds. But then the SV650S has this just without the sublime handling/braking/acceleration.

[Toypop]

I went from a pointy SVS to a 2004 ZX-6R 636.

I'd say the jump in performance was more of a shock than going from the 6R to the 10R. They are mental in comparison.

It doesn't feel less powerful in the mid range or low end. It is smoother and less snatchy for commuting around town.

Wrist pain is a lot worse but backside, back and right hand vibe pain is far better.

Fuel consumption was the same even though I was riding faster. Steering is much sharper, feels like riding a BMX in comparison to the SV.

[leatherpatches]

Well I can tell you my limited experience of switching. Please note, I'm certainly no expert who gets his knee down on every corner; just an everyday Joe who enjoys bikes and has recently changed bikes:

I have ridden an SV650s for four years since passing my test. In this time I have done nearly 43k miles in all months and conditions, including ice, snow and storms. It was a wonderful machine and never once let me down... not once. It needed one or two bits doing to it along the way, as you can imagine, but there was not a single morning when it didn't start and get me to work or wherever I was going. This includes three of the four years without a garage and two of those without even a cover. I kept up with the services religiously and fitted a scottoiler, but apart from that did very little to it at all. I didn't even wash it much. It was looking very warn come the end, with serious pitting from the salt on the roads. But I can't say enough good things about the machine.

However, the bigger bills had started rolling in and to be perfectly honest, the joy of biking had faded a little with commuting and just general malaise with the machine I'd had for such a long time. I was finding myself on full throttle quite a lot of the time and wanting more power. Not needing more power - the sv gave me enough - just wanting more to play with basically. The bike was getting a little tired to bother with new can and other mods so I started looking for a new machine, considering first the sport 600s. I ended up with a larger machine, but that's another story.

I borrowed a K7 ZX6R for a couple of days and nights while waiting for my new bike to be prepped. My experience was that it was a manageable beast. I agree with DanAbnormal when he says that the handling was in a different league. The bike was prepared to turn in much sharper and the braking was incredible. I'm certainly no expert but I felt more confident in corners with the ZX than with the SV.

Power-wise that ZX was pretty flat lower down the rev range. I know DanAbnormal anticipated this but up until you hit about 8k revs it certainly does not pull as well as the sv. There is less torque developed lower down and, as such, it makes for a completely different ride. However, the mid-range between 8k revs and 11.5k revs gave a real kick, developing lots of power insanely quickly. An added bonus was that the exhaust note started howling at these revs. The buzz is incredible when you are running like this. Over 12k revs was pretty hard to achieve legally. In first these revs lift the front wheel (which you may well want to do - I didn't on a loan bike with a £1000 excess). Second gear takes you beyond 90mph in this rev range and third gear and above is license losing speeds. So I'd think the highest rev band would be reserved for the track, mainly.

Comfort-wise the ZX was pretty cramped, with a large drop down to the bars which puts a lot of weight on the wrists if you're not using your legs properly. With standard screen there is very little wind protection and you certainly feel this when accelerating hard. The bike itself feels tiny, but this has a positive payoff when flinging it around in the twisties.

So, in summary, I would say that providing you have some reasonable miles under your belt in various conditions on the sv and you take it easy to start with, you will be fine on a sports 600. If the others are like the ZX (and if the older GSX-R600 that I tried indicates they are similar in nature) it really is very easy to ride them sedatel. Just keep the revs under about 8k and you'll be slower than the SV. The burst of power when the revs rise is one to watch, particularly pulling out of corners. I'd say think about what you want one for, though. If you're doing a lot of commuting or touring, then think again. They are not comfortable at all over distance and spinning the revs up is great fun, but really quite hard work over time. If you're after a lazier ride then stick with a twin. However, if you're prepared to put the work in then they can be an absolute hoot.

Now I'll retire and let people who really know what they are on about answer your question... :D

[Blue_SV650S]

Low down grunt is not as immediate

That is BS, I proved this wasn't the case in another thread. A SS600 has the same or more punch (power AND torque) low down as your SV ... it just has twice as much when the revs get up!! Ride both bikes at the same revs and the 600 is never 'weaker' than the 650!! :smt019

[leatherpatches]

That is BS, I proved this wasn't the case in another thread. A SS600 has the same or more punch (power AND torque) low down as your SV ... it just has twice as much when the revs get up!! Ride both bikes at the same revs and the 600 is never 'weaker' than the 650!! :smt019

I suppose this can't be denied. But it's also about what it feels like in everyday riding. My thoughts are that if you are forced to spend a lot of time between 0rpm and 7k rpm, then this is where the sv does most of it's work. However for the ZX and other 600s they are not really doing very much here. My experience was that in the lower gears (1st, 2nd, 3rd) this rev range was lucky to get you to 30 or 40mph, whereas on the SV you would be getting near the rev limiter and also near the national speed limit if you were in third.

So therefore you need lots more revs and lots more gear changes on the IL4 sports 600s to achieve the same effect as on the SV. (And hence more work)

I had a high revving (for a car) Honda Civic Type R before my current diesel TDi and it felt like a similar difference. The petrol Civic being the equivalent of the ZX6R and the diesel Golf being the equivalent of the SV. Hope that makes sense!

[DanAbnormal]

That is BS, I proved this wasn't the case in another thread. A SS600 has the same or more punch (power AND torque) low down as your SV ... it just has twice as much when the revs get up!! Ride both bikes at the same revs and the 600 is never 'weaker' than the 650!! :smt019

Dude, it's not BS it's my opinion. Besides, the SV felt like it got to, say, 10mph quicker than my Ninja. From setting off you have to give much more revs on a SS600 than you do on the SV, based on my experience with both kinds of bike. You clearly have some special kind of SV!

Please re-read my post again as I feel you've totally missed this part, so let me highlight in bold for you:

DO NOT listen to those who say "oh but they have no midrange at all and you have to be at 11'000rpm before they even start going". It's all a load of pap.

[neio79]

My Kwak has better handaling, brakes and will go quicker than my old SV. It is for me more comfy on the bum, but my left wrist aches more, probably down to the increased gear changes.

There is a big difference in power above 10K but bellow that the kwak is far feom gutlss, it pulls smothley. The FI is IMO smother than the SV and less snatchy in town.

Fuel ecconomy is about the same and that is riding pretty quick.

All in i prefer my ZX to the SV. And as said people who say they have no mid range are talking crap, they do and plenty of it, it just feels less compared to when it gets to its stride at 12K plus. And the rasp at those revs is just as addictive as the V twin growl.

I have said loads over these posts, people confue the feeling of the iidiate tourque of the SV with the feeling of BHP, so the SS600 feels gutless in comparison. A bit like a diesel will feel as though its faster than a sports car, but its not.

[Berlin]

According to the Dyno charts the SV650 is exactly the same as the SS600 (specifically the GSXR600) up until 8000RPM in terms of both power and torque. At that point the GSXR continues to make power at the same level of torque until it reaches 100 something horsepower.

So the Sv doesn't have stronger bottom end, It doesn't have more torque, it just has less power over 8000 RPM.

In changing to a SS600 you are going to get more Whollop from 8000 RPM and up. So if you run the SS600 up to 8000, it'd accellerate and perform exactly as an SV engine would in the SS600 frame.

But the likelyhood is that it has better suspension and a sportier geometry and weight bias so it's going to feel different.

If you do swap from one to the other, use the bit above 8000 RPM a little at first until you are used to the extra. Simple :)

Carl

[leatherpatches]

According to the Dyno charts the SV650 is exactly the same as the SS600 (specifically the GSXR600) up until 8000RPM in terms of both power and torque. At that point the GSXR continues to make power at the same level of torque until it reaches 100 something horsepower.

So the Sv doesn't have stronger bottom end, It doesn't have more torque, it just has less power over 8000 RPM.

In changing to a SS600 you are going to get more Whollop from 8000 RPM and up. So if you run the SS600 up to 8000, it'd accellerate and perform exactly as an SV engine would in the SS600 frame.

But the likelyhood is that it has better suspension and a sportier geometry and weight bias so it's going to feel different.

Once again if the charts say it's true, it must be. However, it most certainly doesn't feel that way when you're riding. Very confusing... :confused:


If you do swap from one to the other, use the bit above 8000 RPM a little at first until you are used to the extra. Simple :)

Carl

Totally agree.

[hlaf_lyfe]

ta guys very helpful.im changeing because i find the sv boring to ride hard so it seems like a ss600 will suit me better, so as allways take it easy till im sed to te bike.

[MR UKI (1)]

Get an SV Thou, scarily fast at first. Only managed to get out twice so far on mine (went from a pointy 650) and can't wait for some decent weather now :D

[yorkie_chris]

Once again if the charts say it's true, it must be. However, it most certainly doesn't feel that way when you're riding. Very confusing... :confused:


Because you don't feel power, you feel change in power, the kick the SS600 gives when it comes onto the cam makes the midrange feel weak.

For example, a mate of mine was advised to change the exhaust cam timing on a gixxer 750 engine, turned it into a bit of an animal, would sling the front wheel in the air as soon as you hit about 7k iirc. Felt loads more powerful ... put it on a dyno, with a direct before and after comparison, and it had lost 15bhp, it was the fact that all the power arriving in a lump made it feel strong.

[Blue_SV650S]

Once again if the charts say it's true, it must be. However, it most certainly doesn't feel that way when you're riding. Very confusing... :confused:




Totally agree.

I agree, the bum-dyno appears to tell a different story, but in reality, there is nothing in it low to mid engine torque/power wise .. ride at the same revvs and they have the same zest - the 600s are just dominated by the top end ... however what IS different is the chassis (an inadequate chassis will feel 'faster' for the same speed) ... and the way the power is 'pulsed' is very important - now that does give different 'character'/feel! ;)

ta guys very helpful.im changeing because i find the sv boring to ride hard so it seems like a ss600 will suit me better, so as allways take it easy till im sed to te bike.

I actually disagree (don't I always!! :D), as it is less adequate, I think the SV is LESS boring to ride hard ... a SS600 is so capable, realistically you will only ever use but a fraction of its ability on the road ... to my mind what makes the SV more fun than a SS6 as it is **** and you have to wrestle it to make it go fast!! :D Also for the very same reason you can have more fun at lower speed; better for both your licence and your life expectancy ;)

However, I think everyone owes it to themselves to ride or even own a SS600 and a Sports thou ... what they can do is mind blowing!! :shock: ... it also gives you more perspective on what the SV has to offer ;)

[DanAbnormal]

One thing I did notice, and this maybe a little off topic......was that after spending 6 months riding the Ninja, I got back on my Hornet and was pushing it harder and leaning more than ever before. A couple of times the front nearly let go on a switchback as I was a little over eager in my counter steer. Just something to think of if you have two very different bikes.

[Wayluya]

how big is the jump?
any experiencies/ advice?

Dunno. Last big jump I made was from MTX200 (2 stroke 26hp) to FZR Thou' (125hp).......IMO if you can ride a motorbike already and also have half a brain enuf to realise that a different bike will be........different :o - then all you need to do is learn the new one in your own time.........and before opening the throttle to the max for the first time - make sure you are not in first gear, nor in Tesco's carpark :smt045

It's not like moving from a Bicycle to a Jet Fighter :cyclopsani:

[andyb]

've just swapped from an Sv to a ZX6R. I'd agree with most people here. The power low down doesn't feel as urgent as the SV but once you get it going it pulls your bloody arms off! I'm not saying the ZX is weaker low down it just feels like that. Just re-iterating some more points, it handles like it's on rails. I got back on the SV to take it to it's MOT and I was happy to push it much harder than I and before. I've only been riding three years and although it's definitely a jump it's not that big. There is nothing wrong with the SV at all, I did and still do love it,I just fancied a change!

[rob13]

I have never really thought I needed anything more than what the SV offers in power, purely because i would rather keep my licence and the SV can do a good job of getting ride of that if needed. Handling on the other hand, I would like more of and I think the SS600s definitely offer me that. A change is always good as well, so maybe another year on the SV then ill see about upgrading. Hopefully a few of the 08 GSXRs might be coming down in price by then :D

[Alpinestarhero]

I guess the way in which IL4's produce their power - 4 little bangs instead of two bigger ones - the urgency in the lower part of the rev range feels less, compared to the V-twin SV

I'm yet to ride an Inline four, but when I do, I'll post my thoughts. Sometime around 12th july...

Matt

[sinbad]

How does standard SV650s gearing compare to that of a standard SS600?
Are you going any quicker at 5krpm in 2nd on the ss600 machine? (For example) At what speed does a ss600 redline in 1st gear, and how fast is it going at the SV650s' redline rpm?
No real reason for the questions, just curious.

[hlaf_lyfe]

i think ss600s do 60 - 70 in first, my sv does 40.
ss1000's do 100 odd in first...

all from what people have told me that have both bikes

[neio79]

At what speed does a ss600 redline in 1st gear, s.

well my 2007 ZX6R redlines at 86 in first, just over a ton in second, third is 120ish i think, and 4th , well ran out of clear road to find out yet :rolleyes:.

[Toypop]

The SS600 can hit a higher speed in a given gear because it rev's higher. If you let the SV rev to 16k it would also do silly speeds in each gear.

I actually think the gearing between my 636 and the SV were very similar - i.e. at a set rpm in a set gear you were doing the same speed. I think maybe the gearing was perhaps slightly longer on the SV.

The result being that the SS600 was revving slightly higher at a set speed and gear but it was very close.

I am thinking of 6th gear though as that is the only one where I took note. It maybe that the lower gear ratios are a different story but my perception was that at 70mph in 6th the 6R was revving a tad higher.

[muffles]

Oooh one of these threads again so soon! Normally it's only every couple of months, seems to be every week now :D

12th july...

Must be on the edge of your seat now, it's getting close! :cool:

[ThEGr33k]

DO NOT listen to those who say "oh but they have no midrange at all and you have to be at 11'000rpm before they even start going". It's all a load of pap.

You see what you say is almost true. They do have similar power curves till the SV runs out of poof BUT. What you really want to look at is the drive force diagrams of each bike. Id be willing to put ?10 on the sv having better low down drive in any given gear. So this WILL make the SV feel like it has more grunt. :smt056

Id work them out but I cant be bothered :p



Get an SV Thou, scarily fast at first. Only managed to get out twice so far on mine (went from a pointy 650) and can't wait for some decent weather now :D

I agree upto a point. If you want to upgrade go for a SV thou/Falco these have similar peak BHP to a SS600 but they have a lot more drive and torque. Makes them much better all rounders. And I can vouch (as can any falco forums) that a SS bike dont out handle it either :cool:

well my 2007 ZX6R redlines at 86 in first, just over a ton in second, third is 120ish i think, and 4th , well ran out of clear road to find out yet :rolleyes:.

Indicated... These jap speedo's are terribly inaccurate!

http://www.gearingcommander.com/

[neio79]

Indicated... These jap speedo's are terribly inaccurate!

http://www.gearingcommander.com/

true, yes but it still kicks the ass of most things in first, even indicated!! (mine indicated 86, SV indicated 50ish!!) and i would imagine that is an indicated higher reading than yours??

and it will go on to do a TRUE GPS tested 162MPH!!

So, its still a bit quick;)

[Tim in Belgium]

Anyone want to swap an up to date SS 600 (inc 636s, 675s and 749s) for an old outdated slow V-twin 650? Only 3 careful owners.....?

[ThEGr33k]

true, yes but it still kicks the ass of most things in first, even indicated!! (mine indicated 86, SV indicated 50ish!!) and i would imagine that is an indicated higher reading than yours??

and it will go on to do a TRUE GPS tested 162MPH!!

So, its still a bit quick;)

Well yes... but thats because my speedo is pretty much bang on right. Each gear shows what its supposed to on the speedo (works out through gear ratio's.)

My Falco's gearing and an SS600 gearing is very similar speed in each gear (except for my 5th and 6th which are much taller than a 600's... dont ask me why but its geared for over 180MPH... :confused: Good for cruising mind 70 at 4K rpm :D) so our actual speeds would be similar...

Anyone want to swap an up to date SS 600 (inc 636s, 675s and 749s) for an old outdated slow V-twin 650? Only 3 careful owners.....?


1000 twin Tim! :p

[kwak zzr]

i'm hankering after a gixer 750 now but i stil would like to keep the 1000 v twin because i really am enjoying its lazy ploddy torque, theres something still about that v twin noise that i cant quite get out of my head.

[MR UKI (1)]

i'm hankering after a gixer 750 now but i stil would like to keep the 1000 v twin because i really am enjoying its lazy ploddy torque, theres something still about that v twin noise that i cant quite get out of my head.

Kwak, what does the thou sound like with aftermarket cans compared to a 650 with an aftermarket can? Is it even better?

[kwak zzr]

depends on the cans, i had microns beta's on mine before and it sounded pants but i have ccc cans on now and i think it sounds great! stubby race cans would sound even better. i think having duel pipes make the noise sound better but thats just me:) best ask someone whos followed me.

[kwak zzr]

ooooo a few years ago in the tanant valley in wales i heard a raptor 1000 with twin wolf carbon cans on and the sound still stands out in my mind even today! the owner said he had removed most of the internals and it sounded like a Lancaster bomber!

[fizzwheel]

Kwak, what does the thou sound like with aftermarket cans compared to a 650 with an aftermarket can? Is it even better?

Mattsv's sounds rather tasty, its loud, but it has a nice tone. It also has the added advantage that it spits blue flames out the cans on overun to.

He's got Remus' on his.

I've never heard a 1000 twin that I thought sounded rubbish, they all sound nice, its the extra CC gives you better tone IMHO.

[kwak zzr]

i destroyed my old tyre last week with one final burnout in my drive way, i must say the noise was a tad embarrassing :)

[kwak zzr]

Mattsv's sounds rather tasty, its loud, but it has a nice tone. It also has the added advantage that it spits blue flames out the cans on overun to.

awww my sv1000s dont pop or bang on the over run like my 650 used to:( i miss that, i want mine to belch flames and pop and bang again, any ideas?

[fizzwheel]

Dont know what he's had done, I think a Yoshi box and a remap..

I remember it distinctly following him out of Poole Quay I heard him shut the throttle and then out came the blue flames :cool:

[Wayluya]

ooooo a few years ago in the tanant valley in wales i heard a raptor 1000 with twin wolf carbon cans on and the sound still stands out in my mind even today! the owner said he had removed most of the internals and it sounded like a Lancaster bomber!

I went for a Test ride on a GSXR750 many moons ago (the proper ones - with the bent frame :D)....no idea what can it had on, but it sounded like an F15 on afterburner - it broke my heart not buying that......but even I realised that the joy wasn't going to last long!

[kwak zzr]

our mate has a gixer6 k2 me thinks? it has a mongoose carbon can on that sounds ace too.

[ThEGr33k]

My mates SV thou with oval Evo Blue flames sounds NICE to follow. Sounds well Like a spitfire when he gives it stick. Its MUCH louder than my old SV650.

I remember hearing a RSV-R of a mates pull away and he gave it some hammer (has blue flame exhaust, why I have) and JEEEZUZ ive never heard ANYthing as nice in my life! When he hit the limiter it made a MASSIVE BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM. WOW is all I can say to the noise.

I also heard a few at the TT last year. When they hit the limiter they sound sooo good. :p

[yorkie_chris]

awww my sv1000s dont pop or bang on the over run like my 650 used to:( i miss that, i want mine to belch flames and pop and bang again, any ideas?

PAIR system causes it to do that, also the ignition and fuel map affects it.

[fizzwheel]

When we were on the North / South last years I followed one of Jelsters mates with a SV1000, I dont know what cans he had on that but it was f*cking loud and where they were high level every time he opened the throttle the exhaust blast was so strong it made the pinlock in my visor flex.

Took me ages to work out what was going on, it was funny though.

[ThEGr33k]

When we were on the North / South last years I followed one of Jelsters mates with a SV1000, I dont know what cans he had on that but it was f*cking loud and where they were high level every time he opened the throttle the exhaust blast was so strong it made the pinlock in my visor flex.

Took me ages to work out what was going on, it was funny though.


LOL.

Dug this up (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc5tVlfzCQw&feature=related). Interesting to show how the engines get used differently. Might be of interest. :rolleyes:

[KnightRider]

I went from a SV650 to a new CBR600rr after 3 months and 3000 miles. Yes it was a bit of a shock but the new 600s have so much low range and mid range power that it wasn't a problem.

I found the handling and breaks a million times better than the SV. The only negative is that you have to be careful when you get into the high rpms when the bike suddenly takes off, but that's half the fun!!:cool::cool::)

[lukemillar]

You see what you say is almost true. They do have similar power curves till the SV runs out of poof BUT. What you really want to look at is the drive force diagrams of each bike. Id be willing to put ?10 on the sv having better low down drive in any given gear. So this WILL make the SV feel like it has more grunt. :smt056

Id work them out but I cant be bothered :p


Why is it that it's always the twin owners putting down the IL4s. Nothing against you personally - just an observation - that's all!

At the end of the day a GSXR-1000 ridden by a monkey is going to be slower than Rossi on Honda Cub! :p Ok, that's an exaggeration, but the point is clear!

[ThEGr33k]

Why is it that it's always the twin owners putting down the IL4s. Nothing against you personally - just an observation - that's all!

At the end of the day a GSXR-1000 ridden by a monkey is going to be slower than Rossi on Honda Cub! :p Ok, that's an exaggeration, but the point is clear!

I wasn't putting them down. I was merely pointing out that if you want the top end rush go for a 600IL4. If you want power everywhere go for a 1000cc IL4, if you want usable mid range with a decent top end then go for a V-twin. A IL4 600 doesn't have the drive ability at mid range of V-twins mostly thanks to the gearing, it may have the same or more power but it still wont work as well at those med revs. :rolleyes:

At the end of the day if you like a IL4 your weird... I mean your entitled to have one :p

[gettin2dizzy]

8000rpm is mid range for a 600 ;)

[ThEGr33k]

8000rpm is mid range for a 600 ;)

I know... ^^ But in reality its 6-10k since they only rev at highest to 15k... R6 lies we all know...

I'm not chatting out of my ****. I have done extensive research into the subject before I got the Falco... I do have 12 hour shifts with nothing better to do most of the time... :rolleyes:

[neio79]

As has been shown before an IL600 does have power everywhere, just a lot more high up. And having ridden both I would argue against the “lack” of drive ability of a SS600 in the mid range, it can more than hammer a SV650 from low down, in most gears. As for if you want useable mid range, ha, I find my kwak has plenty of useable mid range, which really can only be counted from about 8K + , and it has enough for most things at above 6K, you are forgetting this is a bike that doesn’t even bother to count properly until it hits 3K.

The R6 was proven to lie about its rev ceiling and I think its cos they claimed 18K, not the 16K, and I would argue that all bikes are a bit in accurate on the revs including (I know this may shock you in your perfect V-twin world) V-twins!!! However I think the 16.5K red line on the kwak is pretty accurate, or put better no less accurate than your red line rev limit on that Falco of yours.

I personally prefer my Kwak to the SV, because I like to thrash it, which It can do happily all day, if the SV;s or most others V twin engines took the abuse SS600’s take they would give up. Don’t forget modern SS600’s are built more for the track than the road, hence the reason why all the power is in the upper ¼ of the limit.

[fizzwheel]

At the end of the day if you like a IL4 your weird...

I know :king:

[yorkie_chris]

if the SV;s or most others V twin engines took the abuse SS600?s take they would give up.

What brings you to this theory? I understand that trying to run an SV up to the redline of an SS600 would quickly result in something going pop, but I reckon a lot of us rag the SV's far more than you rag the ZX6 on the road, reason being you can actually put 60 odd bhp down and keep life/license etc. As for longivety on the track, see Blue SV650s' videos, hardly being gentle with it, and it still runs :-P

[neio79]

What brings you to this theory? I understand that trying to run an SV up to the redline of an SS600 would quickly result in something going pop, but I reckon a lot of us rag the SV's far more than you rag the ZX6 on the road, reason being you can actually put 60 odd bhp down and keep life/license etc. As for longivety on the track, see Blue SV650s' videos, hardly being gentle with it, and it still runs :-P
[/font]

I just mean that, i tend to bounce the limmiter a lot more especially in 1-3rd, the gear box gets a right hammering up and down all the time, just compared to how i rode the sv,

Also by the very nature of the engines there is no power left in the top end of the rev range on the SV, so no need to rev all the way. But the SS600 has nearly all its power made in the upper limits, n my case at 14K is peak power!

so if i want to go really fast i need to rev harder than the SV.

sorry if i implied the SV engine is weak, as both of us know its not. I meant ss600 engines get a harder higher reving life.

[ThEGr33k]

I just mean that, i tend to bounce the limmiter a lot more especially in 1-3rd, the gear box gets a right hammering up and down all the time, just compared to how i rode the sv,

Also by the very nature of the engines there is no power left in the top end of the rev range on the SV, so no need to rev all the way. But the SS600 has nearly all its power made in the upper limits, n my case at 14K is peak power!

so if i want to go really fast i need to rev harder than the SV.

sorry if i implied the SV engine is weak, as both of us know its not. I meant ss600 engines get a harder higher reving life.

This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1N4Z5UomJ6s) fella also likes his rev limiter :rolleyes:

[neio79]

This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1N4Z5UomJ6s) fella also likes his rev limiter :rolleyes:

Not saying V-twins dont, you clearly missed my point, on the whole SS600's are ridden a lot harder by 90% of people, and as i said there is no point taking a bike with its peak power 3/4 of the way up the limit to full limit as you are wasting the effort and straining the engine for no real gain.

fact is my kwack is designed and built to ride and perform on the limit more comfatbley that a V twin is.

your Falco 118BHP (Crank)@ 9,250 RPM

my Kwak 125 (crank) 109 (measured back wheel) @ 14, 100 RPM

hence designed and Built to produce more power higher up, the rev range and work harder to produce the power.

[yorkie_chris]

on the whole SS600's are ridden a lot harder by 90% of people,

More revs doesn't mean it's working harder, if the throttles only open 25% then the guy ragging the SV to within an inch of its life with it wide open is treating it harder ;-)

I doubt 90% of SS600 riders have the skill to put 109bhp on the floor

[neio79]

More revs doesn't mean it's working harder,

I doubt 90% of SS600 riders have the skill to put 109bhp on the floor

yes as the engine internals are spinning faster with more stress on them, agreed if they were to get there at 25% then its less than if they were to get there at 100% oppening.

well as soon as you get to 14K you are putting it all down on the tarmac. I can rag it in the first 3 to put it all dowm o nthe raod easily, after that i tend to run out of road to red line in 4th ;)

[mattSV]

Mattsv's sounds rather tasty, its loud, but it has a nice tone. It also has the added advantage that it spits blue flames out the cans on overun to.

He's got Remus' on his.

I've never heard a 1000 twin that I thought sounded rubbish, they all sound nice, its the extra CC gives you better tone IMHO.

:takeabow:

Twin remus revolution (60mm outlets), desnorkelled airbox & raised tank, remap from Steve Jordan Motorcycles = noise & flames

It is a bit on the loud side - Quiff refused to ride behind me on the first North South, as it was making him go deaf :D

Comes in handy when filtering though, and when stupid old bats pull out in front off you - one old dear nearly carved herself a new sunroof when I gave it a hand full right alongside her window after she pulled out without looking :smt043

[ThEGr33k]

Not saying V-twins dont, you clearly missed my point, on the whole SS600's are ridden a lot harder by 90% of people, and as i said there is no point taking a bike with its peak power 3/4 of the way up the limit to full limit as you are wasting the effort and straining the engine for no real gain.

fact is my kwack is designed and built to ride and perform on the limit more comfatbley that a V twin is.

your Falco 118BHP (Crank)@ 9,250 RPM

my Kwak 125 (crank) 109 (measured back wheel) @ 14, 100 RPM

hence designed and Built to produce more power higher up, the rev range and work harder to produce the power.

You do have to rev a 600 a lot more to get the Power you do from a 1000V-twin at fairly low RPM relatively speaking but...

I wouldn't say the 600 is working harder tbh. You think My V's bore and stroke is 97mmx 67.5 at 10,000rpm (10500 limiter) my cylinders are doing 40,500KPH. (WOW). At 14000RPM your pistons are travelling at (new 600 is bore 67mm x stroke 42.5mm) 35,700KPH and obviously your pistons are lighter.

There are many reasons why a 600 gets to make power now comparable with old V-twins and its mostly down to inertia of parts... with air flow mixed in allowing them to rev like mad things. I wouldnt be surprised if they soon ad gear driven cams to allow the revs to jump up a lot more as well. If they decide to chase the Revs some more. :rolleyes:

The only advantage a thou V-twin has over a 600 now since it's peak power is similar is the mid range...

Only hope for a high revving 1000V-twin is to make it oval cylinder's... That would be Amazing :D

There you go some g33k info for you lol.

Sorry for going sooo far off of subject... Its plowsies fault :smt075 :smt110

[injury_ian]

40 million KPH, are you sure you got the decimals right?

[ThEGr33k]

40 million KPH, are you sure you got the decimals right?

Actually no... ill look at that again LOL :rolleyes: I have just got off my 12 hour night shift... sorry :p

[yorkie_chris]

The thing that decides engine power isn't capacity, or number of cylinders;

The key is valve area, and flowing enough gas through those valves, obviously it's much easier to fit more valve area in more cylinders, and make use of that capacity for flow by making the engines short-stroke and strong enough to rev to very high rpm.

[Jasonr]

I made the jump from an SV 650 to a 636 A1 albeit this was 4.5 years so I may have hazy memories. I actually found that the power delivery was smoother with the Kwaker than the SV so it didn't feel like I was trying really hard. until 10k+ when things started getting really interesting. With the SV I felt like I was throttling it and using it to its full potential (I had my SV originally about 3 or 4 years so was well used to it and probably nowhere the real limits of the bike) this for me was a plus point and probably why I look back at the SV more favourably than the 636. Having said that I went a lot faster on the 636 cornered quicker and leaned the bike over a lot further than I did the SV. It did however take me ages to get used to the swith to 4 from 2. I loved the engine braking of the twin. Rolling off the throttle on the 636 didn't really do a lot

The SV I think personally is a stepping stone into the world of bigger bikes and is an excellent bike to cut your teeth on, do your riding apprenticeship as it were. It is reliable and cheap but not budget and why I chose to return after a lay off with an SV rather than straight back out on a ss600 which I am sure have moved on considerably since I last swung a leg over one.

As regards twin to IL 4 you cant really compare the difference is huge and you have to adapt your riding to suit each bike. Personally I got hooked by the noise and rumble and rawness of the twin. The 4 for me is more refined I'm not slating either I just think they are different maybe Triumph have the right idea as they offer the best of both !

[lukemillar]

You do have to rev a 600 a lot more to get the Power you do from a 1000V-twin at fairly low RPM relatively speaking but...

I wouldn't say the 600 is working harder tbh. You think My V's bore and stroke is 97mmx 67.5 at 10,000rpm (10500 limiter) my cylinders are doing 40,500KPH. (WOW). At 14000RPM your pistons are travelling at (new 600 is bore 67mm x stroke 42.5mm) 35,700KPH and obviously your pistons are lighter.

There are many reasons why a 600 gets to make power now comparable with old V-twins and its mostly down to inertia of parts... with air flow mixed in allowing them to rev like mad things. I wouldnt be surprised if they soon ad gear driven cams to allow the revs to jump up a lot more as well. If they decide to chase the Revs some more. :rolleyes:

The only advantage a thou V-twin has over a 600 now since it's peak power is similar is the mid range...

Only hope for a high revving 1000V-twin is to make it oval cylinder's... That would be Amazing :D

There you go some g33k info for you lol.

Sorry for going sooo far off of subject... Its plowsies fault :smt075 :smt110

You're forgetting one factor in this whole debate - weight. Your Falco's dry weight is 190kg! SV thou is 190kg. The average ss600 is around the 165kg. That's an extra 25kgs to lug about!

Of course, this doesn't take into account the lump of lard sitting on the back, but I weigh ~75kgs - so 25kg extra is 1/3 of my weight, again! One of the main things for me of a 600 over a 1L - IL4 or twin is corner speed and agility.

[ThEGr33k]

You're forgetting one factor in this whole debate - weight. Your Falco's dry weight is 190kg! SV thou is 190kg. The average ss600 is around the 165kg. That's an extra 25kgs to lug about!

Of course, this doesn't take into account the lump of lard sitting on the back, but I weigh ~75kgs - so 25kg extra is 1/3 of my weight, again! One of the main things for me of a 600 over a 1L - IL4 or twin is corner speed and agility.

Aye suppose thats true, but but but :p

Changing the exhaust's knocked off 10 KG. No kidding, the origionals are lead lined i think. I weigh 60KG so that makes rider + bike just about = in weight. :D Yay light weight.

[neio79]

:D Yay light weight.


still fat compared to a SS600 ;), thats before we do the same to our pipes!!
on top of that the center of gravity and geomatry set up is far better on the modern SS600s.

[Wayluya]

As regards twin to IL 4 you cant really compare the difference is huge and you have to adapt your riding to suit each bike. Personally I got hooked by the noise and rumble and rawness of the twin. The 4 for me is more refined I'm not slating either I just think they are different maybe Triumph have the right idea as they offer the best of both !

That is a pretty fair assessment - my first SV, but also returning to bikes from previous large IL4's.....and I knew it would be well down on power from what I was used to......actually still use the Scooter more :smt041.......although I do like the SV, but I am starting to remember what it is missing - not only lazy power, but suspension to go with it.......but then I remind myself why I did not buy 170mph+ :rolleyes:

Maybe a triple is the answer?!

[gettin2dizzy]

That is a pretty fair assessment - my first SV, but also returning to bikes from previous large IL4's.....and I knew it would be well down on power from what I was used to......actually still use the Scooter more :smt041.......although I do like the SV, but I am starting to remember what it is missing - not only lazy power, but suspension to go with it.......but then I remind myself why I did not buy 170mph+ :rolleyes:

Maybe a triple is the answer?!
:rolleyes: I'm a little lost by that ;)

[Alpinestarhero]

Theres a little talk about weight here, so I thought i'd add in some observations I've made

My SV is quite light, I suppose. But it feels heavy compared to my dads GSXR. I once returned home and when I rode the bike in the garage, had a sit on his GSXR750 (K6). Picked it off the sidestand...and at first, thought it had no petrol or any other fluids in it - felt very light in comparison to the SV.

But that was a stupid thought, I could hear petrol sloshing around in the tank!

SO i guess the weight on supersport bikes (i'll consider the 750 a supersport bike because I can't be bothered to invent a genre for it) is put around differently; I cant imagine the weight differance is that great between the GSXR and my SV, but it feels it

Matt

[gettin2dizzy]

The weight sits much lower than an SV so it's easier to throw around. Now that they make 1000s feel like 600s; I'd love them to make a 1200-1400 that feels like a 1000 ;)

[yorkie_chris]

still fat compared to a SS600 ;), thats before we do the same to our pipes!!
on top of that the center of gravity and geomatry set up is far better on the modern SS600s.

They're still UJM's :-P

[muffles]

The weight sits much lower than an SV so it's easier to throw around. Now that they make 1000s feel like 600s; I'd love them to make a 1200-1400 that feels like a 1000 ;)

RC8, 1098R ;) - hell, I am sure that the ZZR1400, Busa, are not too far off 1000's of yesteryear! Or do you mean a modern day 1200+ that feels like a modern day 1000, hence feels like an older 600....? Thas' jus' crazy talk! :D

[neio79]

They're still UJM's :-P

what??

[yorkie_chris]

Universal Japanese Motorcycles

[neio79]

Universal Japanese Motorcycles

true, very true. although i think there are more SV's about than ZX6r P7F's :wink:.

[gettin2dizzy]

You'd think SVs were disposable the way people drop them on here ;)

[thor]

Surely the difference in how they feel is due to how they respond on part throttle? Dyno charts shoing torque are fairly useless as they show torque at full throttle. See previous issues of BIKE for more details.