maybe the next great upgrade?
#1
maybe the next great upgrade?
Just reading sport rider mag. The new R1 is using a cool system for its forks. One fork is for compression and the other for rebound. We'll have to get Greg on this one.
they also did something to the engine to give it significant torque and sound unlike any in-line four. More like a twin or V-4.
I love those Japs!
they also did something to the engine to give it significant torque and sound unlike any in-line four. More like a twin or V-4.
I love those Japs!
#2
Nothing new in separating the damping functions (for example, the FZ1 has been doing this since 2005).
The new crank phasing used on the R1 (and initially developed for the M1) is interesting though. In essence, it makes the R1`s inline engine behave much a 90 degree V4 with a 180 degree crank phasing.
The new crank phasing used on the R1 (and initially developed for the M1) is interesting though. In essence, it makes the R1`s inline engine behave much a 90 degree V4 with a 180 degree crank phasing.
#7
Honestly, I don't really like this idea. It kind of unbalances the front end. There was some testing done some years back concerning spring rates in the forks. I think is Max McAllister of Traxxion (I hope I don't scare anyone off with that) who used a rider that didn't know what the changes were - he just gave feedback on the results. They tried different spring rates in each fork using the theory of Rate1 + Rate2 = TotalRate. They also tried putting a spring (double the rate) in one fork only. All of these should have theoretically been identical. The problem was that it didn't work out that way. The rider didn't care for the different rate setup and absolutely could not ride the one-spring version. From a strictly free body diagram point of view looking at just the forces splitting up the damping does the same thing. My guess is that it's just for cost purposes only. If you look at the Yamaha race bikes I'd guess you'd find a setup using balanced damping in each fork.
#8
Honestly, I don't really like this idea. It kind of unbalances the front end. There was some testing done some years back concerning spring rates in the forks. I think is Max McAllister of Traxxion (I hope I don't scare anyone off with that) who used a rider that didn't know what the changes were - he just gave feedback on the results. They tried different spring rates in each fork using the theory of Rate1 + Rate2 = TotalRate. They also tried putting a spring (double the rate) in one fork only. All of these should have theoretically been identical. The problem was that it didn't work out that way. The rider didn't care for the different rate setup and absolutely could not ride the one-spring version. From a strictly free body diagram point of view looking at just the forces splitting up the damping does the same thing. My guess is that it's just for cost purposes only. If you look at the Yamaha race bikes I'd guess you'd find a setup using balanced damping in each fork.
thanks, nathan
Last edited by nath981; 03-26-2009 at 12:18 PM.
#9
you may be right Jamie. Time will tell. according to the article the front felt very good. they also acknowledged that they were skeptical because earlier versions were based on economic factors, but they were pleasantly suprised with the excellent wheel control and feedback. i can't imagine that yamaha would do anything half-assed relative to the R1. Of course their not infallible but they're much closed to it than to the other end of the spectrum. like I said, history will answer the question more definitively.
thanks, nathan
thanks, nathan
Actually, the R1 has never been known for being a great track bike in stock form. They are ok, don't get me wrong, just not the kind of bike you'd want to pattern your setup after. I've known Yamaha to be half-assed so I'm kind of biased when it comes to stuff like this. From what I've seen out of them over the years (and recently) I'm not very quick to throw many compliments their way!
#11
Actually, the R1 has never been known for being a great track bike in stock form. They are ok, don't get me wrong, just not the kind of bike you'd want to pattern your setup after. I've known Yamaha to be half-assed so I'm kind of biased when it comes to stuff like this. From what I've seen out of them over the years (and recently) I'm not very quick to throw many compliments their way!
Everyone is not the same, and there are indeed quality manufacturers here, but there seems to be a preponderance of high priced low quality products being marketed here. Like I said, they're not perfect but comparatively, I love toyota, honda, yamaha, sony, subaru, etc.
#14
Actually, the R1 has never been known for being a great track bike in stock form. They are ok, don't get me wrong, just not the kind of bike you'd want to pattern your setup after. I've known Yamaha to be half-assed so I'm kind of biased when it comes to stuff like this. From what I've seen out of them over the years (and recently) I'm not very quick to throw many compliments their way!
I think it was motorcycle.com that took to the track with all the 09' 1k models- cbr1k, gsxr,zx-10, R1, and even the 1198 duc. The R1 finished first according to them.
#16
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
vasaq
General Discussion
1
09-05-2007 06:59 PM