Blade Vs Sp1

Originally Posted by hovis

it is 30kg lighter

I think the 30KG's is a little OTT. The claimed dry weight of 168kg on a 954 imo is most likely utter rubbish. Especially when the R6's curb weight is 198kg inc fuel. 17L being about 12KG's, making a dry weight of about 185kg's...

Not that there is much point arguing about weight as on a well set up bike it wont make that much odd's on the road.

Originally Posted by Zombie Jesus

The blade would be faster in a straight line and on public roads. On the track would come down to rider preference, all things else being equal. Hard to tell what my preference would be, a trackday and a set of lap times for each bike would be the best way to tell.

I'd agree with this. Its pretty hard to say either way. All down to what each like I suppose.

at the end of the day its academic they are both great looking quick bikes who gives a stuff which is fastest? in the real world most would take the blade as its the better all rounder. and the motors a peach.

[yorkie_chris]

Even though they're both h*ndas I reckon both would be rapid enough. Basically the only thing able to leave you behind if totally committed to stupidity would be an equally committed rider on a GSXR of course...

Originally Posted by alpinestarhero

Anyway, 2001 SP-1 vs. 2003 blade....depends on the situation. Blade faster in town (smoother engine low down in the rev range I presume, less snatchy throttle, slightly better riding position) but I think an SP1 would be potentialy much faster on a sweeping country road where its torquey engine, lack of outright power (yes, lack off...less power to be scared of so more confident to use it) and much more lazier delivery encourage the rider to keep the bike in one gear for longer, concentrating on being smooth and stringing a set of corners together efficiently

Or perhaps there would be no incentive to get the bike in the right gear because of this.

If you keep any motor on the boil, you don't get that scary rush of power because you're already in the power and hence only get the power you ask for with the throttle.

Have a look at the power curve of the highly tuned V twins of the time, RC51, TLR etc. They're pretty comparable to IL4 power delivery anyway, rather than the huge bottom end of the milder tuned ones like the TLS.
It's not like big IL4s are short of torque.

I reckon the bl*de would have it.

Originally Posted by fizzwheel

So the blade is lighter and makes more power

The SP1 has a power delivery that allows you to get on the throttle earlier and drive the bike out the corner.

But this comes back to the rider i.e a twin has to be ridden differently to a 4. There is no rule which say you must exit the corner at 7k rpm.

The blade has a bigger top end, but depending on where you ride it, it may not matter. If we say ran the test at somewhere like Brands Indy, I doubt outright power would make a huge difference. Here in NZ club racing, they have 750s and 1L competing in the same class! I know that it isn't quite the same because the 750 is lighter, but just to illustarate that the 20 extra hp isn't the end of the discussion.

That said, I still think the blade would win, but I think it would be pretty close.

Originally Posted by fizzwheel

When they let Litre IL4's race Twins in Superbikes the 4's whooped the a*rse of the twin until Ducati squealed so much they got a capacity upgrade.

A well designed litre 4 will always produce more power than a well designed litre twin as it will have more available valve area, so can get more air/fuel in.

Is there an argument that the SP1 is to track focused to make a good roadbike ?

Yes, it is awful. The suspension is far too hard, the radiators cook you and the fueling is poor. Add to that the massive fuel consumption, tiny tank and distressing comfort levels that you expect with a race bike you have a huge compromise for a road bike. The Blade on pretty much any road would be faster and much much easier to ride. The SP1 might be quicker on a smooth track but I'd still be on the Blade.

MT

Originally Posted by G

Nobody on this forum will know that unless they have actually done it........which 99% wont have.

I have.

See here: http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.p...ighlight=blade

[ophic]

Originally Posted by ThEGr33k

Not that there is much point arguing about weight as on a well set up bike it wont make that much odd's on the road.

Yeah it will. Weight is inversely proportional to acceleration. It also has the same effect on the deceleration, ie you can brake quicker on a lighter bike.

Originally Posted by empty

A well designed litre 4 will always produce more power than a well designed litre twin as it will have more available valve area, so can get more air/fuel in.

Much as I love twins, this is true. Quite simply a superior engine design if peak power is your goal.

sp1 for the chassis, but the fireblade engine is the better (as standard)

Originally Posted by empty

A well designed litre 4 will always produce more power than a well designed litre twin as it will have more available valve area, so can get more air/fuel in.

Indeed... Though the 999R wasen't that far off tbh. Massive bore tiny stroke and a true 140bhp at the wheel on the road. Not that far behind the 150-160 of the IL4's.

Originally Posted by ophic

Yeah it will. Weight is inversely proportional to acceleration. It also has the same effect on the deceleration, ie you can brake quicker on a lighter bike.

I didnt say it wouldn't be noticed, I said it wouldn't make much odd's. Look at Motogp for instance, Pedro vs any othere rider... many KG's in it, but not much of a help quite often.

[G]

Originally Posted by zsv650

actually it's highly relevant round the corner's unless you just go on motorway's

Do you stop at every corner very odd