I read the latest Fast Bikes mag today and they chose ZX-6R as their pick for the best middleweight of 2003. The CBR 600RR was the second best. No reak surprises then [8D]. What did surprise me a bit was that in dyno testing both CBR600RR and R6 gave higher peak power than 6R which gave "only" 102bhp...
Fast Bikes: ZX-6R -03 is the best of the best
- Status
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Joined
·
3,106 Posts
Yeah, the calendars are great. They make the subscription worth every penny.[
]
]If that was the 6RR I would believe that but it seems a little down for a 636. I have not had any 600 leave me behind on a straight at a track day yet & that includes a GSXR600 & a CBR600rr both of which were track bikes with full systems & race glass & my bike was std. I went past both of these bikes on a 750m straight, the only bikes I had a drama with were a 929, R1's & Gixer 1000's! The CBR600rr rider was smaller than me while the Gixer600 rider was about the same size.
Joined
·
1,025 Posts
The horsepower is correct. The figures will very from one dyno to the next. But the 636 is right with the others. The thing is is that the other 600s have no low end power and do not make as much torque as the 636. kawa could of made the bike have more horsepower at the top but they rather would of tranfered the power to the low end where 600s are lacking.
My friends 03 R6 has more bottom end than the my 636, better throttle responce etc however midrange up the 636 pulls harder & although I didn't have a drag with him I'm pretty sure the 636 would kick ass! BTW the 03 R6 is a really nice bike to ride way more comfortable as a commuter/street bike however as a track bike I prefer the 636.
Really? Interesting, I've heard a lot of people (including motojournalists) complaining about the R6's lack of low-end power and torque. The ZX6R, on the other hand, surprised the hell out of many test riders - especially when pulling out of corners.
R6 beats 6R in torque on the rpm range 2500-3000. That sure is an _impressive_ show of R6's low end GRUNT!
Only other place where R6 is equal or marginally better than 6R is in the rmp range 4500-7500 and then the 6R takes off. And even then the difference is quite academic. At least I'm quite sure that I wouldn't be able to feel the difference...
Dyno charts from www.motorcycle.com:
How about horsepower? Well it's exactly the same story here:
Sorry but I'm not very convinced about the R6's supremacy in low end and midrange grunt.
I've spent time on an '03 R6 and the low end pull to the real meat of the powerband is much better on the Kawasaki. The R6 is very clean down low, but it certainly doesn't stretch your arms like the 636 does. I've also run them side by side, and that's the reason the Kawi can stretch a real good early lead until they're both wound out. Up top, not a lot between them, but up to that point, Kawi rules...
Must be the gearing ratio for the ZX6R making it easier for the track journalists to whip out of corners.
What's the dry-weight on the GSX-R 750? I went on Suzuki's website but their site doesn't work for me. I don't see any pictures or anything when I click on the links. However, it does work for me when I'm at my work computer - except I can't spend all that time on the internet.
What's the dry-weight on the GSX-R 750? I went on Suzuki's website but their site doesn't work for me. I don't see any pictures or anything when I click on the links. However, it does work for me when I'm at my work computer - except I can't spend all that time on the internet.
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
- Status
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!