Weight Reductions!
11-22-2009, 02:50 AM
#1
Its A fire, Its A Storm!
Squid
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 36
Weight Reductions!
Ok did a search and not much came up for what i have planned.... Looking to put the storm on a diet and was wondering what people have done to trim a few kg's off the machine that you have done yourself in the shed..
So far i have basic plans like removing a couple of bits like the little things under the foot pegs and i have trimmed the numberplate bracket. It all adds up i guess big or small...
Has any one stripped the bike down to drop some weight on? If so, any tips will help... Cheers, Tony.
*Could be cosmetic of performance so not sure what section... Mods can move if need be*
So far i have basic plans like removing a couple of bits like the little things under the foot pegs and i have trimmed the numberplate bracket. It all adds up i guess big or small...
Has any one stripped the bike down to drop some weight on? If so, any tips will help... Cheers, Tony.
*Could be cosmetic of performance so not sure what section... Mods can move if need be*
Last edited by Storm; 11-22-2009 at 03:02 AM. Reason: *** Wrong section ??
11-22-2009, 04:57 AM
#2
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 243
it all depends how much money you wanna spend and how different you want the hawk to look
i think the biggest drop in weight without a lot of money is chopping one of the exhaust cans off and having a single sided system. this would probably drop 30 lbs.
run it as a street fighter with no fairings
single radiator conversion
remove the steel tail subframe and replace with aluminium one off
run pig spotters instead of actual mirrors
smaller battery? lighter wheels? titanium exhaust system? at that point you are looking at big $$
i think the biggest drop in weight without a lot of money is chopping one of the exhaust cans off and having a single sided system. this would probably drop 30 lbs.
run it as a street fighter with no fairings
single radiator conversion
remove the steel tail subframe and replace with aluminium one off
run pig spotters instead of actual mirrors
smaller battery? lighter wheels? titanium exhaust system? at that point you are looking at big $$
11-22-2009, 06:37 AM
#4
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: In a van down by the river (I wish!)
Posts: 617
Dymag rims. JMC swingarm. CF tank. Get weight in the 440lbs mark and chuck one caliper (after a F4 upgrade). As Red_Liner740 says, get a one-off AL subframe. The clock (and carrier) are said to be pretty heavy. Toss the bodywork and get a lightweight under-seat rad built. Seems like 425-430lbs is possible. That's about SV650 territory.
Remember, it's like 477lbs stock. Switching out the cans alone will get you at 460-465lbs. After that it's mostly about money and verve.
Remember, it's like 477lbs stock. Switching out the cans alone will get you at 460-465lbs. After that it's mostly about money and verve.
11-22-2009, 06:42 AM
#5
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: In a van down by the river (I wish!)
Posts: 617
Ah, but Hawkrider says he got 430lbs with basic mods and a half tank:
https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...ht=weight+race
So with more extreme stuff like Dymag rims, Al subframe, etc... I'd imagine you could get it close to 400lbs...? That would be pretty incredible.
https://www.superhawkforum.com/forum...ht=weight+race
So with more extreme stuff like Dymag rims, Al subframe, etc... I'd imagine you could get it close to 400lbs...? That would be pretty incredible.
11-22-2009, 07:09 AM
#6
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: thorold ontario
Posts: 1,978
you can do little things, every pound helps right, 520 chain conversion is a little lighter then a 530, my gixxer tail sits on a gixxer rear frame which is aluminum vs the steel of the hawks ***, couple more pounds right there. and then you can really sart getting into more expensive things, depends ow much you wanna spends. if youre feeling saucy you cn get carbon fiber wheels for like 6 grand and shave alot of weight that way.
11-22-2009, 07:59 AM
#7
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: altoona, pa
Posts: 2,934
thinking about weight reduction, it seems that exhaust cans are obviously way heavy and away from center of mass, so a good place to start. And with these go the PAIRS. But after this, it gets more costly fast, so to me weight reduction pays more dividends in areas close to and/or specific to unsprung spinning weight. Wheels, tires, sprockets, rotors do not yield serious lbs., but have the most beneficial effects in terms of acceleration, handling, smoothness and deceleration, not only because of gyroscopic and centrifugal forces, but because of the degree to which road surfaces/imperfections are transmitted to the rider, i.e., feel.
if you could ride two bikes back to back, one with light spinning/unsprung parts and one with OEM parts, you'd be amazed at the benefits of weight reductions in these areas, and this is understated IMO.
Light tires, being on the outermost part gyro/centrifugal, pay significant benefits, but it's been difficult for me to get weight info comparisons unless the tires you're looking for happen to be included in a current mag test.
i know overall weight reduction is significant and of coarse I'd love to be closer to 300 than 500lbs, but it's financially impractical.
if you could ride two bikes back to back, one with light spinning/unsprung parts and one with OEM parts, you'd be amazed at the benefits of weight reductions in these areas, and this is understated IMO.
Light tires, being on the outermost part gyro/centrifugal, pay significant benefits, but it's been difficult for me to get weight info comparisons unless the tires you're looking for happen to be included in a current mag test.
i know overall weight reduction is significant and of coarse I'd love to be closer to 300 than 500lbs, but it's financially impractical.
11-22-2009, 08:12 AM
#8
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: In a van down by the river (I wish!)
Posts: 617
What's your feeling on USD forks, Nath? They do help with unsprung weight and are certainly stiffer, but they have to weigh a lot more overall. I also wonder if anyone has taken a page out of Buell's playbook and cut the SH header off and mounted an under-slung can.
11-22-2009, 08:36 AM
#9
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: MN
Posts: 1,548
mine is about 430 with gas - the weight change especially wheels is dramatically noticeable. you have to decide how long you are keeping the bike and how much work/time you have to spend on it - try to think long term to plan upgrades the improve performance and save weight. By far the biggest easiest loss is the cans, full exhaust even better. then the wheels. and if you are going to do the wheels, do the front swap to USD (more modern and really can weigh less) and you can upgrade brakes calipers suspension and wheels all at once - better performance and almost always less weight. then eliminate what you don't need - passenger pegs, smaller lights, rearsets in place of stock foot pegs. All these things reduce weight but also make the bike so much better (except the lights perhaps) and are fun things to do. If you use ebay and sell what you remove its not too expensive - exhaust mod aside.
11-22-2009, 09:35 AM
#10
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 243
another consideration is "how badly is this gonna cost me when and if i crash?"
replacing aftermarket wheels is hugely expensive...
finding another manufacturers wheels which are lighter and can be modified would be better IMO.
at some point you have to draw a line.
i'm almost at it, i'd like to do a tail swap to something less bulky and a single exhaust...
replacing aftermarket wheels is hugely expensive...
finding another manufacturers wheels which are lighter and can be modified would be better IMO.
at some point you have to draw a line.
i'm almost at it, i'd like to do a tail swap to something less bulky and a single exhaust...
11-22-2009, 03:26 PM
#14
pragmatic anarchist
Superstock
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 380
to me weight reduction pays more dividends in areas close to and/or specific to unsprung spinning weight. Wheels, tires, sprockets, rotors do not yield serious lbs., but have the most beneficial effects in terms of acceleration, handling, smoothness and deceleration, not only because of gyroscopic and centrifugal forces, but because of the degree to which road surfaces/imperfections are transmitted to the rider, i.e., feel.
if you could ride two bikes back to back, one with light spinning/unsprung parts and one with OEM parts, you'd be amazed at the benefits of weight reductions in these areas, and this is understated IMO.
.
if you could ride two bikes back to back, one with light spinning/unsprung parts and one with OEM parts, you'd be amazed at the benefits of weight reductions in these areas, and this is understated IMO.
.
11-22-2009, 05:25 PM
#15
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
Well, when I cracked into my heads this last summer I found a great deal of useless material. I know, I know...but really. Take for instance the bosses for the CCT's on an ambidextrous head. Inside the chase for the cam chain there is "extra" material. I would say that you could drop a pound or more there. Continuing on with with items like that could save tons of weight. You just have to find it and chop it.
11-22-2009, 05:30 PM
#16
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: MN
Posts: 1,548
I read in one mag the past year of a fanatic builder who did what bill is suggesting to every part on a ducati - one of the latest sport bikes. got it down to some ridiculous low weight - apparently made huge difference in every aspect - go, stop, turn. I also remember when I first got the SH there being some german site where a guy had done similar things to the superhawk and detailed how, how much etc, including all the major fasteners and lost a ton of weight.
11-22-2009, 06:03 PM
#17
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Thornwood, NY
Posts: 817
I read the same thing... I can't remember if it's this guy.... He's got some pretty hot Ducati stuff...
http://durbahn.de/
If you looking at taking weight off, wheels will help the handling.... a carbon tank, carbon exhaust, a lighter battery (speedcell) and then you'll be off an running... but I'd image you'll spend more than the bike is worth easily...
J.
http://durbahn.de/
If you looking at taking weight off, wheels will help the handling.... a carbon tank, carbon exhaust, a lighter battery (speedcell) and then you'll be off an running... but I'd image you'll spend more than the bike is worth easily...
J.
11-22-2009, 06:32 PM
#19
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Belgium, WI
Posts: 1,611
I honestly believe that you could drop 10lbs out of the engine without trying hard. Whether it be:
porting/polishing
port matching
switching to flatslide carbs
Trimming all the "extra" parts of the castings
Forged pistons
Drilled fasteners where appropriate
pair block offs (ditching reeds and all)
drilling the extra material on the cam gears to make it webbed
Those are a few. I am sure that you could get into a few other items that would cost some money, for the most part the ones above cost very little. Undercut gears, balanced crank for the lighter pistons, etc etc etc
On the topic of other posters:
The sub frame is not that heavy! I would bet that you would be hard pressed to save a pound. I get that everything counts, but this would only be rewarding in a monoposto. The problem lies in the fact that you have to create appropriate tabs for the seat to mount to. I don't see this working well. All the bikes that use AL subframes use a different method of mounting, typically screws into the subframe.
Wheels are a great answer to the problem of weight, period. The problem is that they are not free and easy. They do affect: weight, acceleration, deceleration, and turning.
Battery is a good item, but the serious weight loss occurs at $250 a battery.
I am not fully certain that an under tail radiator and the plumbing for it will decrease the amount of mass significantly. Although, I also thought that my exhaust creation would weigh less (than I picked it up when I had the bike apart, LIGHT). What would offer similar weight reductions would be to replace many of the hose sections with AL tubing and silicon hose elbows with shrink wrap hose clamps.
If you do the 520 chain, realize that AL sprockets are going to wear faster. There are Ti sprockets available, but it is all money.
The freebies are always good ones. Start there. Do every free one that doesn't cost you. Like a poster said above, decide how long you are going to keep it. I am into the Hawk for life. If you want a lighter bike and will replace it in a year or two, go buy one and save the hassle. The guys here that are dropping the weight and making true one off bikes are dedicated to the cause and most have skills in the shop that others do not. Good luck, and always consider all the pros and cons of the work you do.
Oh yeah, there are some mods that add weight that fix issues:
fork brace or inverted forks
inner frame bracing (need welding skills to do)
swingarm brace
And, if you find the moriwaki bike pictures, swingarm mount bracing.
porting/polishing
port matching
switching to flatslide carbs
Trimming all the "extra" parts of the castings
Forged pistons
Drilled fasteners where appropriate
pair block offs (ditching reeds and all)
drilling the extra material on the cam gears to make it webbed
Those are a few. I am sure that you could get into a few other items that would cost some money, for the most part the ones above cost very little. Undercut gears, balanced crank for the lighter pistons, etc etc etc
On the topic of other posters:
The sub frame is not that heavy! I would bet that you would be hard pressed to save a pound. I get that everything counts, but this would only be rewarding in a monoposto. The problem lies in the fact that you have to create appropriate tabs for the seat to mount to. I don't see this working well. All the bikes that use AL subframes use a different method of mounting, typically screws into the subframe.
Wheels are a great answer to the problem of weight, period. The problem is that they are not free and easy. They do affect: weight, acceleration, deceleration, and turning.
Battery is a good item, but the serious weight loss occurs at $250 a battery.
I am not fully certain that an under tail radiator and the plumbing for it will decrease the amount of mass significantly. Although, I also thought that my exhaust creation would weigh less (than I picked it up when I had the bike apart, LIGHT). What would offer similar weight reductions would be to replace many of the hose sections with AL tubing and silicon hose elbows with shrink wrap hose clamps.
If you do the 520 chain, realize that AL sprockets are going to wear faster. There are Ti sprockets available, but it is all money.
The freebies are always good ones. Start there. Do every free one that doesn't cost you. Like a poster said above, decide how long you are going to keep it. I am into the Hawk for life. If you want a lighter bike and will replace it in a year or two, go buy one and save the hassle. The guys here that are dropping the weight and making true one off bikes are dedicated to the cause and most have skills in the shop that others do not. Good luck, and always consider all the pros and cons of the work you do.
Oh yeah, there are some mods that add weight that fix issues:
fork brace or inverted forks
inner frame bracing (need welding skills to do)
swingarm brace
And, if you find the moriwaki bike pictures, swingarm mount bracing.
11-22-2009, 08:09 PM
#21
Its A fire, Its A Storm!
Squid
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 36
All good points and some good information.. I can see it costing a fortune and like some one said, more then bike it self without even trying.. I will try and do all the basics i can do my self in the shed and take it from there.. At the end of the day i wont have the storm for more then 3 years so i don't want to get in too deep. I am 85kg and 190cm.
11-22-2009, 10:01 PM
#22
Who are you?
SuperSport
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 731
More things you can do to drop weight:
Swap the stock front fairing with a Sharkskinz fairing
Swap the seat and tail piece for a single-seater tail and foam pad.
Switch to a single, front-mounted radiator.
Block-off plates
Drill out the rear rotor
Lighter front rotors
Shorten stock brake and clutch levers.
Swap all bolts and screws with lighter ones.
Swap the stock front fairing with a Sharkskinz fairing
Swap the seat and tail piece for a single-seater tail and foam pad.
Switch to a single, front-mounted radiator.
Block-off plates
Drill out the rear rotor
Lighter front rotors
Shorten stock brake and clutch levers.
Swap all bolts and screws with lighter ones.
Last edited by Just_Nick; 11-22-2009 at 10:04 PM.
11-23-2009, 12:51 AM
#23
Junior Member
Squid
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: far east
Posts: 28
If I were you; I'd chuck the hawk for a blade or busa or zx14 if not a desmo! The hawk has only 100 horses or so, whereas those bikes has >170, thus their power to weight ratio is better than the hawk's, I suppose.
11-23-2009, 07:51 PM
#24
Its A fire, Its A Storm!
Squid
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 36
Loving the look of the blade.... Am i allowed to say that on here?? haha My storm is great for now and will keep me happy for a long time so we will see when the time comes for a change.
11-23-2009, 09:31 PM
#25
Squid Poacher
Back Marker
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Orange Park, Fl.
Posts: 116
I would look to increase the engine performance too. Increasing the power to weight ratio can be achieved in two directions. I always like to attack both. A full exhaust system and the accompanying carb rejetting could drop several pounds off the bike while increasing the output. If you're going to go into the head to shave off extra material you might as well source some performance cams while you're in there.
I don't know about carbon wheels and tanks. Carbon wheels have a life expectancy, and don't tend to hold up to potholes well. As far as carbon tanks, I'd rather have a dented tank than a leaking one. Later model CBR wheels may be found to weigh less and can be had on E-bay for a song. You could be really **** and start replacing all fasteners with aluminum or titanium while shaving every bit of extra metal you can find but I don't really see more than a 40-45lb drop being realistic. The largest portion of that would be in the exhaust/emissions equipment.
You could always source fiberglass race bodywork and install a projector beam light in the front, that would eliminate the weight of the plastics and the large front headlight assembly.
As far as a single sided swingarm being lighter. . . .I've never seen anyone install one for weight savings, it's usually cosmetic. Single sided swingers are usually twice as thick as regular swingarms, it's a moot point.
You could save a small amount by installing a monoposto tail.
Ultimately the hardest part of your quest would be getting accurate weights for the parts you are considering and the parts that are on the bike already.
I don't know about carbon wheels and tanks. Carbon wheels have a life expectancy, and don't tend to hold up to potholes well. As far as carbon tanks, I'd rather have a dented tank than a leaking one. Later model CBR wheels may be found to weigh less and can be had on E-bay for a song. You could be really **** and start replacing all fasteners with aluminum or titanium while shaving every bit of extra metal you can find but I don't really see more than a 40-45lb drop being realistic. The largest portion of that would be in the exhaust/emissions equipment.
You could always source fiberglass race bodywork and install a projector beam light in the front, that would eliminate the weight of the plastics and the large front headlight assembly.
As far as a single sided swingarm being lighter. . . .I've never seen anyone install one for weight savings, it's usually cosmetic. Single sided swingers are usually twice as thick as regular swingarms, it's a moot point.
You could save a small amount by installing a monoposto tail.
Ultimately the hardest part of your quest would be getting accurate weights for the parts you are considering and the parts that are on the bike already.
11-23-2009, 11:27 PM
#26
Who are you?
SuperSport
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 731
A full exhaust system is extra money into the wind. A slip-on will be just as good.
And also, a SS swingarm is heavier than a stock swingarm. Anyone adding one as weight-savings is in for a rude-awakening.
And also, a SS swingarm is heavier than a stock swingarm. Anyone adding one as weight-savings is in for a rude-awakening.
11-24-2009, 05:32 AM
#27
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: In a van down by the river (I wish!)
Posts: 617
I think a 100HP 400lb twin with a modern frame, forks and a shock would compete against almost anything on the road. I've read that the VTR is an old design lots here, but when I had my little Hawk GT (and earlier my GB500) I was able to keep up with many faster, technically better bikes on these Western NC roads.
It's not that I'm a better rider -- I'm not -- but that in the really tight stuff, lightweight is your best advantage. Even mildly modified DP bikes riding on weedy forks and thin tires run fast down here... This is probably not the case on the track, but I don't ride on a track.
These bikes are WAY undervalued. Dumping 2k into a 2.5k bike to get something that just isn't made (or something that's BETTER in most respects to what's out there) makes sense -- if you're really going to keep it. You never make your money back on mods if you sell within two years.
I like this for a lot of reasons:
http://www.eti-fuelcel.com/VTR.HTML
Anyone seen one mounted?
It's not that I'm a better rider -- I'm not -- but that in the really tight stuff, lightweight is your best advantage. Even mildly modified DP bikes riding on weedy forks and thin tires run fast down here... This is probably not the case on the track, but I don't ride on a track.
These bikes are WAY undervalued. Dumping 2k into a 2.5k bike to get something that just isn't made (or something that's BETTER in most respects to what's out there) makes sense -- if you're really going to keep it. You never make your money back on mods if you sell within two years.
I like this for a lot of reasons:
http://www.eti-fuelcel.com/VTR.HTML
Anyone seen one mounted?
11-24-2009, 05:43 AM
#28
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: In a van down by the river (I wish!)
Posts: 617
BTW: As some folks have mentioned here, the mfg weight claims are WAY off. Magazines don't even bother to report the actual weight of bikes in reviews anymore, but they do keep track. Sportbike is probably the best, but check out the Motorcyclist Performance Data to compare something like Bill's 430lb SH compares to modern machines:
http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/pe...lts/index.html
http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/pe...lts/index.html
11-24-2009, 06:41 AM
#29
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Henderson, NV
Posts: 115
Please don't take this the wrong way, I'm not trying to slam anyone. But If you want to make the Hawk perform better, invest in your riding skills. Take a track day class or something. Not saying anyone's skills suck, just saying the bike will actually perform just fine bone stock. As proof I submit my countless weekend rides out to Lake Mead with a variety of local Vegas riders. Once we hit the twistys, I routinely make bikes like Gixer 1000s, R1s and CBRs turn into little specs in my mirror. They have less weight and more power but the lump of flesh sitting on top gets in the way. Not bragging, just saying for a bike that's as cheap as a SH your better off taking a class. If your intent on more power and less weight just buy an RC51 or a Duc or something. A used one will typically have more money into mods than the bike is actually selling for.
11-24-2009, 07:14 AM
#30
Senior Member
SuperBike
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: MN
Posts: 1,548
Please don't take this the wrong way, I'm not trying to slam anyone. But If you want to make the Hawk perform better, invest in your riding skills. Take a track day class or something. Not saying anyone's skills suck, just saying the bike will actually perform just fine bone stock. As proof I submit my countless weekend rides out to Lake Mead with a variety of local Vegas riders. Once we hit the twistys, I routinely make bikes like Gixer 1000s, R1s and CBRs turn into little specs in my mirror. They have less weight and more power but the lump of flesh sitting on top gets in the way. Not bragging, just saying for a bike that's as cheap as a SH your better off taking a class. If your intent on more power and less weight just buy an RC51 or a Duc or something. A used one will typically have more money into mods than the bike is actually selling for.
plus its a lot easier to swallow putting $500 a year into a bike then $4000 every 3-4 years when the latest greatest comes out. you learn about how to work on it, improve it etc and by sticking with one bike you actually do emphasize your own riding skills more over the long haul. I don't think anyone mods them just to try to recreate the latest race replica performance. And as far as performing 'just fine' bone stock? it depends on how you ride and what else you've ridden.
