Gear ratios and HP/TQ

Shop deals on ebay
Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
VMAX Forum

Help Support VMAX Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Heretic

Heretic

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2006
Messages
616
Reaction score
3
Location
Omaha
The Europe site has a little more tech info than the US site does.

http://www.new-vmax.com/technology/technical_specs.jsp


Primary ratio:1.509
Secondary ratio:3.082
Gear ratio-1st gear2.375
Gear ratio-2nd gear1.810
Gear ratio-3rd gear1.400
Gear ratio-4th gear1.115
Gear ratio-5th gear0.935

Maximum power:147.2 kW (200 PS) @ 9,000 rpm = 197HP
Maximum torque:166.8 Nm (17.0 kg-m) @ 6,500 rpm = 123TQ

Anyone care to do the math for approx top speed and 1/4 mile times compared to the 'Busa, ZX-14 and the B-King?
 
with a 200lb rider the estimated time with 195 flywheel HP is approx 10.18

Sean
 
Given these numbers; and due to the fact I'm too lazy to figure it out, has anyone figured out what kind of RPM's we're gonna be seeing at 80mph on this new bike....?????
 
Not sure on the match but looks like it will be significantly lower. 5th gear isn't all that much different but the primary and secondary ratios are both lower by a good margin.

Sean
 
10.18? thats sad for "the fastest production bike" as claimed by Yamaha and your paying $20.000 for what? for Suzuki to still laugh in your face!
 
Hercules said:
10.18? thats sad for "the fastest production bike" as claimed by Yamaha and your paying $20.000 for what? for Suzuki to still laugh in your face!
Click to expand...

if that what it is...sure....but were doing computer estimates that don't take launch characteristics into consideration of weight balance front rear or torque curves etc..... i actually found that comforting to know because they are usually not as good as the real number at the end....
 
I was kind of hoping someone else would do this...

Max speed at redline per gear:

NEW
1st 63mph
2nd 83mph
3rd 107mph
4th 135mph
5th 161mph

OLD
1st 58mph
2nd 83mph
3rd 110mph
4th 137mph
5th 159mph

This of course is sans air/wind resistance and other real world factors. Even if the top speed limiter is removed I wonder how much more in reality this new bike will be able to do.

The gear ratios are fairly close between the old and new.

NEW
Primary ratio:1.509
Secondary ratio:3.082
Gear ratio-1st gear 2.375
Gear ratio-2nd gear 1.810
Gear ratio-3rd gear 1.400
Gear ratio-4th gear 1.115
Gear ratio-5th gear 0.935

OLD
Primary ratio:1.775
Secondary ratio: 2.851
Gear ratio-1st gear 2.529
Gear ratio-2nd gear 1.772
Gear ratio-3rd gear 1.347
Gear ratio-4th gear 1.076
Gear ratio-5th gear 0.928

If 10.18 is really it Yamaha won't re-take the crown for 'Fastest Production' as Motorcyclist mag has gotten into the 9's with the new 'Busa. Yamaha will probably be providing a 'ringer' bike for the mags to test though.
 
thats interesting.....thanks for doing that...

Observations:

The zero to 60 time will improve due to not having to shift...

The gearing in the old bike was pretty good drag stip stuff for its day... the new tire sizes may be the main reason for adjustment..

The engine has a better top end charge and quite a bit more torque..... if we assume this same gearing in a old vmax with a 200hp hot rod motor then what? just for comparison....

The weight thing still bugs me...i cannot see how all the changes they have made equates to little to no weight reduction.... no sence...
 

​
hayabusa ratios:

1.596
2.615
1.937
1.526
1.285
1.136
1.043
2.388

135 Kph
185 Kph
230 Kph
275 Kph
305 Kph
??? Kph
 
Summary of Performance Stats
Stock 1/4 mile times and top speed times
With thanks from Andy. 1. CYCLEWORLD [June 2000]
Top Speeds
------------------------------------------
Suzuki GSX1300R Hayabusa 191 mph
Kawasaki ZX-12R 187 mph
Quarter Mile
--------------------------------------------
Suzuki GSX1300R 9.86 sec @ 145.80 mph [Performed by CycleWorld magazine rider]
Kawasaki ZX-12R 10.06 sec @ 142 mph [Performed by Ricky Gadson - Top Kawasaki Pro Drag racer]

2. PERFORMANCE BIKES [June 2000]
Top Speeds
------------------------------------------
Suzuki GSX1300R Hayabusa 190.3 mph
Kawasaki ZX-12R 188.9 mph
Quarter Mile
--------------------------------------------
Suzuki GSX1300R 10.3s @ 143.9
Kawasaki ZX-12R 10.4s @ 146.3

3. SPORTBIKE MAGAZINE [June 2000]
Top Speeds
------------------------------------------
Suzuki GSX1300R Hayabusa 191 mph
Kawasaki ZX-12R 187 mph
Quarter Mile
--------------------------------------------
Suzuki GSX1300R 9.93 sec @ 143.4 mph
Kawasaki ZX-12R 10.04 sec @ 143.8 mph
4. MOTORCYCLIST MAGAZINE [June 2000]
Top Speeds
------------------------------------------
Suzuki GSX1300R Hayabusa 184.2 mph
Kawasaki ZX-12R 183 mph
[Elevation 2400 feet above sea level]
Quarter Mile
--------------------------------------------
Suzuki GSX1300R 9.86 sec @ ~ 140.3 mph
Kawasaki ZX-12R 9.96 sec @ 142.3 mph

5. BIKENET Online <http://www.bikenet-racing.com/>
Top Speeds
------------------------------------------
Suzuki GSX1300R Hayabusa 196 mph
Kawasaki ZX-12R 194 mph
Quarter Mile - NA

6. BIKE MAGAZINE - UK [May 2000]
Top Speeds
------------------------------------------
Suzuki GSX1300R Hayabusa 189 mph
Kawasaki ZX-12R 180 mph
Quarter Mile
--------------------------------------------
Suzuki GSX1300R 10.31 sec
Kawasaki ZX-12R 10.04 sec
7. AMCN - AUSTRALIAN MOTORCYCLE NEWS
Top speed.
Hayabusa = 302 kph
Zx-12R = 297 kph
400m (1/4 mile).
Hayabusa = 10.5 sec.
Zx12R = 10.7 sec.
400m top speed.
Hayabusa = 228.2km/h.
Zx12R = 223km/h.
0-100km/h.
Hayabusa = 3.17 sec
Zx12R = 3.49 sec
0-160km/h (0-100mph).
Hayabusa = 5.7 sec.
Zx12 = 6.02 sec.
20-180kmh.
Hayabusa = 6.17 seconds
Zx12 = 6.43 seconds
8. BIKE MAGAZINE - Sweden [Not Bike mag from the UK]
Top speed
-----------------------------------------------
Hayabusa = 297.8 km/hr
ZX-12R = 293.7 km/hr
Quarter Mile
-----------------------------------------------
Busa - [email protected] km/hr
ZX-12 - [email protected] km/hr
CBR - 11.0@210 km/hr

9. SUPERWHEELS [Italy]
Busa - 191.6 mph
ZX-12 190.4 mph

10. MCN [Motorcycle News UK]
Busa - 189 mph
ZX-12R - 182 mph
1 PS :
1 HP :
1 kW :
1 PS :
1 kg/m :
1 ft/lb :
1 Nm :
1 Nm :​
0.98 HP
1.014 PS
1.36 HP
0.735 kW
7.23 ft/lb
1.138 kg/m
0.737 ft/lb
0.102 kg/m
 
interesting opinions here:

http://www.bikeland.org/board/viewthread.php?FID=27&TID=39393&pagenumber=5

It's a good thing peak hp isn't everything, or the current literbikes would demote the Busa/14 to touring bikes.

Where did you come up with the weight figures? A stock 14 is about 560, 120 more than that would be 680 pounds, almost 700 lbs!!! And it looks to have an aluminum frame, not the old stock steel job. 700 is a bit much, more than some current all steel cruisers.

If it has more torque, a broad torque curve(1800cc V-Four, hello!?), a broad hp curve of fat midrange leading up to 210 hp, a looong wheelbase, a very low center of gravity, optimum gearing(I don't see them putting on 220mph gearing) and enough tire to put the torque to the ground of course it could be faster than the current Busa/14/Literbikes to 60mph, 100 mph, and through the 1/4 mile. If they designed it to accelerate then I'm pretty sure they have the resources to make it accelerate.

The current (stock)Busa/14/Literbikes are held back by a high center of gravity and short wheelbase, this obviously isn't.

Why all the doubt before it even hits the road? Automatically dismissing something new just because it's not a sportbike is a bit close minded(Harley riders?).​


ZXAdam, i'm with you on this, i'm actually looking forward to this bike and considering getting one..............everything you said i agree with, i've said very similar stuff on previous posts..........as for my weight estimates, i assumed the ZX 14 weighed 505 dont ask me where i got that figure, but thats the estimate i used, i also assumed that the i remember the old VMAX weighing in at 620, and i assumed the new one would weigh about the same.

Bottom line i think the VMAX will weigh around 80-120 pounds more than the ZX 14 if the 14 weighs 560 then probably closer to 80...........i also think it will take roughly 15-20 horsepower to make up for that weight and around 10 or so for the shaft...........that said the stock 14 with flys in, stock wheelbase and gearing would probably be very close to a stock VMAX............when the mods come in is where the VMAX has more problems in my opinion, it is very easy to pull the flies, change the gearing, put on a full exhaust and cut 3o pounds on the 14 (which most people do) and extend the wheelbase and then the 14 is probably close to a 1/2 second to a full second quicker for some people.

Stock for stock the VMAX will certainly be competitive, possibly even quicker, with simple mods, dollar for dollar I think the 14 will be tough to beat unless the Max has 20-30 more horsepower than it is rated at.
 
Heretic said:
683 lbs is the spec from Yamaha, not a guess. Its also NOT 1800cc its 1679cc. US specs at http://www.starmotorcycles.com/star/msite/micro_v1.aspx
Click to expand...


oh ya i know.....i know....

Take a bike...change the frame from steel to aluminum, add "light weight" parts all over it.... even use magnesium engine covers (lighter than aluminum) and come up heavier than the old bike........ somethings is wrong with these specs dudes...... there have been lots of bikes that have done the transition from carbs one year to injection the next...and the R1 has the same set up as the vmax so...what the hell.... somethin aint right here..... either the weight number is just plain wrong from yamaha..... or this was the weight with full tank of gas and extra mustard on top.......

I mean come on this CANT be correct..... lets ask outselves.

1)do the wheels look lighter than the originals? yes or no

2) do you think the frame is lighter? (its aluminum and half the size..why else do it?) yes or no

3) the engine is all new with new casting tech including NO IRON LINERS!!!...it freaking HAS to weigh less!!!! plus magnesium covers etc... lighter than original??? yes or no

4) tank is PLASTIC NOW...not steel....same size as before...lighter????? yes or no

5) original exahust system is 30pounds!!!! Add a cat (5 pounds???) ok

6) DONT tell me fuel injectors and harness added 50 pounds to the bike....there is no way addin a computer box or even two added anymore than a pound....and carbs weigh same or more than throttle bodies so com on......

This sounds like some kind of ploy to meet a weight class or something...i dont know...its absurd!!!! is there a big lead plate under the seat ??? put their to fake weight? i mean what the hell????? makes no sence how you brag about all the weigh you have saves in design and development then end up with more weight!!!!
 
The 683 lbs was with all fluids according to Paul Czernics. He talked to the techies in San Diego.

The old Vmax was about 620 lbs wet so it gained 63 lbs. I'm curious to know how much the new final drive weighs compared to the old version.
 
Yes, the Yamaha site states 683 wet. The increase in weight makes sense (it still is a pig). The engine is obviously bigger, and the bike itself is bigger all around (especially wheelbase). The exhaust I bet weighs a ton with that cat on the back. Ever pick up a cat. from a car? The forks are bigger, the tail section is bigger, two radiators (and probably more coolant), two cooling fans, substantial, working intake scoops. The drive shaft and diff are sturdier (read as heavier). Looks a lot more 'cosmetic' pieces are used to fill in gaps. It all adds up.

Yamaha could have saved some by making a smaller, but higher revving engine, and chain drive. Maybe for the 2030 V-Max.
 
Heretic said:
working intake scoops.
Click to expand...

Huh?? I thought they were going to be used with the original talks of advancing the timing for more power on the 1800cc?? Are the scoops really functional or just for show like the original?
 
Heretic said:
Yes, the Yamaha site states 683 wet. The increase in weight makes sense (it still is a pig). The engine is obviously bigger, and the bike itself is bigger all around (especially wheelbase). The exhaust I bet weighs a ton with that cat on the back. Ever pick up a cat. from a car? The forks are bigger, the tail section is bigger, two radiators (and probably more coolant), two cooling fans, substantial, working intake scoops. The drive shaft and diff are sturdier (read as heavier). Looks a lot more 'cosmetic' pieces are used to fill in gaps. It all adds up.

Yamaha could have saved some by making a smaller, but higher revving engine, and chain drive. Maybe for the 2030 V-Max.
Click to expand...

Im sorry but it does not add up....
Engine is bigger so it weighs more? how does that work?? when was the last time a bigger hole in a donut made it more to eat? What about the points i made earlier? they are using a cylinder liner technology that was developed to reduce engine weight.... NONE of this makes ANY sense friends..... At the very least you would expect the SAME WEIGHT with improved strength thats all!!! Im sorry guys but come on..the thing has scoops before!! its not like its new add weight...making then functional did little...."Ever pick up a cat from a car?" ya...many times.....they are no where near as big as the ones on my bikes dude....they are the size of a can of soup and weigh about as much....and im talk 180 hp ducati 1098R ...im sure that the ones on the gixxer and R1 are not tipping any big scales either....

For every extra rad (i have one in my lap as i type and its what....3 pounds? ) there is a plastic tank or lighter wheels or magnesium or some other claimed weight savings.... so no it dont add up ...this is totally absurd (not you, i mean the whole situation) .... athe the very very least alll these things should have equated to the same weight with better rigidity....

another case in point.... I have an R6 swing arm, and vmax, an fj1300 and a honda (damn police bike from europe) swing arm....all except the R6 are shaft drive models..... man they are ALL heavier than the vmax one.....even the much talked about chain drive arm..... but if the arm was 20 pounds more than the previous version so what? something would have compensated for that in the laundry list of stuff they have specified as weight reducers...

Either it don't really weigh that much.....there is some engineered in weight specifically for some sneaky purpose, or.....somethings is very very wrong here....
 
maleko89 said:
The 683 lbs was with all fluids according to Paul Czernics. He talked to the techies in San Diego.

The old Vmax was about 620 lbs wet so it gained 63 lbs. I'm curious to know how much the new final drive weighs compared to the old version.
Click to expand...

wait a sec.....do you mean 620lbs dry and 683 wet? that would make a bit more sence to me....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top