SV1000 engine

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by leemole

engine dont fit mate simple as sorry

Easy to say...

But it most definately ISNT simple as!


Not that I've done it, but it has been done, albeit with the more interesting TLengine.

My question is... Can the SV frame handle TL power?

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by neio79

not really, why would you want to put a better and faster engine in a less capable frame with inferior brakes and suspenders, oh and rear wheel to cope properly, bloody dangerous IMO.

a bit like me trying to put a ZX10 engine in my frame, suicidal given the differances stated above. 180PHP in 167KG bike ! banzai. hmmm now ou mention it!!!! LOL

Come on... if you're on about swapping engines, then you're waaaay past what's sensible modifications!

I think the only reason for doing these swaps is to have a unique bike. I don't believe there's any way to make a lighter-than-factory bike, if it were possible to just take a bigger engine and stick it in a lighter frame (safely) then the manufacturer would build the litre bikes like that already. They don't make them heavy on purpose

Originally Posted by mototech

What sort of power is yours sv750 puttin out dangerous dave?

In her last 'detuned for reliabilty' state (was used as a 600+ mile, 7 days a week commuter) she made 87bhp and 58ft. The motor has made 93bhp in the past and i am hoping to creep past that a bit as I have a almost standard Curvy 650 ito use as a commuter now. Hoping to get mid to late 90's for bhp and back to mid 60+ for torque.

The 750 is currently in a couple of cardboard boxes as I have completely striped her for a thorough service and will continue on the engine when a few parts arrive in the post. Having to get used to riding a cam and breathing modded Curvy SV again, I miss the torque and throttle wheelie antics!

[northwind]

Originally Posted by muffles

I think the only reason for doing these swaps is to have a unique bike. I don't believe there's any way to make a lighter-than-factory bike, if it were possible to just take a bigger engine and stick it in a lighter frame (safely) then the manufacturer would build the litre bikes like that already. They don't make them heavy on purpose

Light is expensive... You definately could make a lighter litre bike, no problem at all, just look at Thorsten Durbahn's ridiculous machines. Also, bikes come saddled with emissions crap, and wheels built to be so strong that idiots don't constantly bend them, and subframes built so you can bolt on a top box and carry a pillion, etc...

And the TL-S and TL-R are not light bikes. Claimed dry was 187kg for the S I think and even more for the R. You could rip weight out of that wholesale- though I gather the engine itself is pretty weighty. But then again, the SV isn't a light bike for what it is. Personally I kind of reckon that with the amount of work needed for this, if you want a TL motor in a different frame it makes more sense to go direct to a totally custom frame. Not that this makes any sense at all, but it's always an option. Or, alternatively, stick it in a Ducati frame

Originally Posted by northwind

Light is expensive... You definately could make a lighter litre bike, no problem at all, just look at Thorsten Durbahn's ridiculous machines. Also, bikes come saddled with emissions crap, and wheels built to be so strong that idiots don't constantly bend them, and subframes built so you can bolt on a top box and carry a pillion, etc...

And the TL-S and TL-R are not light bikes. Claimed dry was 187kg for the S I think and even more for the R. You could rip weight out of that wholesale- though I gather the engine itself is pretty weighty. But then again, the SV isn't a light bike for what it is. Personally I kind of reckon that with the amount of work needed for this, if you want a TL motor in a different frame it makes more sense to go direct to a totally custom frame. Not that this makes any sense at all, but it's always an option. Or, alternatively, stick it in a Ducati frame

Ok, with a money-no-limit option, you could make them lighter (look at moto gp, right?). My point is really aimed at those guys that want to play with standard parts as they're under the impression they can beat the factory (at the same cost) - e.g. on the CBR forum some guy started a thread about putting a blade engine (I forget which one) into a CBR600F under the guise of making a lighter, more powerful bike - I made a similar comment to this and that was the end of that thread, lol.

Bikes like the TLs are heavy, but when you say you can lighten them pretty significantly what do you mean? I am no expert, but there must be a purpose - I can't see a manufacturer turning round and saying "we've got a part that weighs 4kg, and one that weighs 2kg. They're in all respects identical except for the weight, let's use the 4kg one". I was just making the point you don't get something for nothing

[northwind]

Originally Posted by muffles

Bikes like the TLs are heavy, but when you say you can lighten them pretty significantly what do you mean? I am no expert, but there must be a purpose - I can't see a manufacturer turning round and saying "we've got a part that weighs 4kg, and one that weighs 2kg. They're in all respects identical except for the weight, let's use the 4kg one". I was just making the point you don't get something for nothing

Aye, but like I say they're also constrained in what they can and can't do. Standard exhausts are the easiest example of that of course, but you'll find redundancy and overengineering all over most bikes. Not as much now as you used to, mind.

With the TL-R... Take one look at it, it's got the daft 6-pot calipers and the same rear monster as on the SV. Exhausts you could kill with. Typical enormous subframes. Pretty oldschool wheels too. The TL's a bit tricky because the engine itself's pretty heavy. But sling on a set of half-decent slipons, the better 4-pot calipers off an S, lose the pillion pegs if you can... Then I'd be looking at every bracket and wart on the subframes to see what they do, and removing or replacing every one I can. If I couldn't knock 10 kilos off it without heroic effort I'd be very surprised, even retaining a fairing (losing the fairing makes weight loss dead easy!) Buy me one and put me to the test, if I can't save 10 kilos you can have it back.

Suzuki have to make the bike to do all sorts of different jobs, and to be incredible durable and resistant to idiots. We don't. So, take mine for instance. In its naked guise as it is just now it weighs 171 kilos, fully wet. (compared to the highly optimistic claimed 165 kilos dry) The only exotic lightweight part in it is the dymag wheel which only accounts for maybe a kilo and a half of that, the rest is mostly just graft and cumumlative savings. The biggest single weight loss is the exhaust, the second biggest is the single front disc, and that actually made me money (and works very well, not as strong as the GSXR twin disc setup but still better than stock)

I'm not saying all of this stuff as a good idea by the way- I've done it and would do again but mainly because it's interesting.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there; you can lose stuff (e.g. pillion ability) and get weight loss, but you can't really do it for nothing. I'm obviously taking into account that at the point the TL was made I'm guessing technology was pretty ancient in bike life terms (hence the heavier wheels, etc?).

Tbh, my comment was originally generated by my strange-but-strong dislike for the reasoning that goes "600s are lighter/better handling, I know bigger engine, that means I get 600 handling and more power". Would like to be proved wrong but if it really was the easy, why didn't the manufacturers do it

[northwind]

Well, they basically do, the 750 and 600 frames are almost identical in the GSXR frinstance, as are the suspension and shocks. Going back a wee bit further, the GSXR 7/11 really did work brilliantly, light and it handled and didn't bend too much. And the Hornet 6/9s are still better than the Hornet 900... R6/R1 and R7/R1 were reasonably succesful as well, and I'm sure I've seen Kwak Z750s with the full fat 900 motor in them. But those days are gone for the big sports bikes, I reckon, think you're right there. Partly because the manufacturers have finally caught up The 06 R6 weighed less than an RVF400.

You don't have to lose ability though, that's not what I said, the biggest single weight loss you'll ever do to a bike is the exhaust. The subframes almost certainly will be able to be reduced without any issues, mine would still carry a pillion if I wanted it to and it carries luggage despite the lightened frame. Likewise the front one and other general brackets, none of the weight loss I've done actually impairs the bike at all and the TL's probably very similiar. The TL starts out with an ally rear frame though if I recall correctly.

Originally Posted by northwind

Well, they basically do, the 750 and 600 frames are almost identical in the GSXR frinstance, as are the suspension and shocks. Going back a wee bit further, the GSXR 7/11 really did work brilliantly, light and it handled and didn't bend too much. And the Hornet 6/9s are still better than the Hornet 900... R6/R1 and R7/R1 were reasonably succesful as well, and I'm sure I've seen Kwak Z750s with the full fat 900 motor in them. But those days are gone for the big sports bikes, I reckon, think you're right there. Partly because the manufacturers have finally caught up The 06 R6 weighed less than an RVF400.

You don't have to lose ability though, that's not what I said, the biggest single weight loss you'll ever do to a bike is the exhaust. The subframes almost certainly will be able to be reduced without any issues, mine would still carry a pillion if I wanted it to and it carries luggage despite the lightened frame. Likewise the front one and other general brackets, none of the weight loss I've done actually impairs the bike at all and the TL's probably very similiar. The TL starts out with an ally rear frame though if I recall correctly.

I'm not actually familiar at all with common historical engine swaps so that was pretty useful info I am surprised that things like the Hornet 6/9 worked better than the 900 of the time - maybe it's that sort of thing that made the manufacturers catch up and ask themselves, if someone could make a better bike from the standard part lineup, why couldn't they do it in the first place.

I agree about the ability thing btw - I think I said that incorrectly. What I mean is, you'll lose *something* - whether it's something you care about (maybe you like the standard exhaust because it's quiet?), or even something you may never notice (less strength in the subframe - but it may never collapse or have strength problems related to the lightening?). I think these things are fairly separate to the engine swap thing though - a lot of the time it would involve aftermarket parts, meaning the manufacturer couldn't build it from the factory.