Re: Super sport test.
 

Are we talking about MCN facts and figures here?
Nuff said.

Re: Super sport test.
 

Exactly....

:---)

Re: Super sport test.
 

Like I said it wasnt MCN doing the testing... besides what reason do they have to lie? It was the second fastest bike out there so its not slow. :rolleyes:

Best way might be for someone on here to go get their D675 weighed in.

Re: Super sport test.
 

It was MCN that wrote and printed the article.

As to why should they lie, who knows, but I think you will find that there fact based storys tend to come by what they have been told by a friend of a friend of a friend who is a mole in Ford who knows a mole in Audi who had a drink with a guy that could be a mole in Honda and works for Yamaha Musical Supllies Plc.

Re: Super sport test...
 

If the dry weight is taken with no liquids or batteries, then there can't only be 10kgs difference between the CBR's dry and wet weight. MCN has quoted the figures wrong, simple as.

A battery must weight 5kgs and 16-17 litres of fuel has got to be about 15kgs. Add on the brake fluid, oil, coolant etc and there should be getting on for 25kg's difference.

Don't trust MCN!

There's no way a D675 dry weight is 200kg's, that WILL be the wet weight.

Cheers,
Matt

Re: Super sport test...
 

My sig, of course. 129kg dry (allegedly), so 155 wet is positively barge-like!

Re: Super sport test...
 

Erm... sigh.

MCN's numbers was with the battery in and the oil in, a real world Dry weight... if you run with no brake oil or engine oil or a battery then fair enough you might want to know how much weight you save.

The only difference was the dry was with and empty tank and the wet was with a full tank. 10KG for 17Litre of fuel is about right...

Feel free to believe what you will I dont really care, I just try to show people what the factories claim and what the truth is. Why on earth MCN would lie or how they could get it wrong is beyond me. Like I said it wasnt the MCN people actually doing the test they just wrote about it.

Re: Super sport test...
 

Dude I wasn't having a go at you! Your post on the first page didn't make it clear that the MCN dry weight included the battery and fluids :p

I still don't believe an unfuelled D675 is 200kg's - MCN are notorious for getting things incorrect in print! ;)

Re: Super sport test...
 

I have no worries about MCN's ability to do a test, if they felt so inclined.

Writing about anything, otoh, is where they tend to go wrong.

Re: Super sport test.
 

Fair enough. I agree it sounds high... but tbh I thought hey it might not be wrong... I mean people do still believe that bikes do what the manufacturers say, which 99% of the time is RUBBISH! they make numbers look better to sell a product.

Power at the crank is impossible to test for a start so wtf, tell us power at the wheel, what we can use. Tell us what the real rev limiters are, tell us what the real wet weight is, why do we want to know how light you can get the bike when its unridable in that state. Give is a curb side weight ready to ride.

So what if the D675 does weigh 210KG wet, it still goes like stink and out handles 99% of riders (IE people cant get anywhere near the limit) so who cares? I mean really?

Here is an interesting thread from the 675 forums (I was trying to see if anyone had had the weight measured but found this, cnt find a measured weight :(). the 2nd post down in the interesting bit. (have a look at page 1 as well if you fancy a bit more of a read...) http://www.triumph675.net/forum/show...+weight&page=2

The most recent lie is the rev limit... 600's now can rev to about 15,500RPM 16,000 tops tested, max power around 13,500RPM. Yet some manufacturers have STUPID clocks which go forever and claim that the bikes rev forever and people believe it. :( The obvious one is the R6... was a big thing about that. The best one asin closest to right is the told 675. So fair play there. :D