Kawasaki Ninja 1000 Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
293 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Anyone ever look at the site zeroto60times? If you type in the brand you want to know about it brings up a bunch of different models and years and shows supposed 0-60 times and quarter mile times.

Not sure how accurate the times are but if they are accurate there are some real sleepers out there that'll surprise you.

The site initially brings up cars but if you click the menu button you can type a motorcycle manufacturer into the search and it'll bring it up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
I was wondering how accurate those numbers are. According to that site, a 2014 Kawasaki Ninja 1000 ABS does 0-60 in 2.6 seconds. This is the same time as a 2012 Kawasaki Ninja ZX-14R and a 2015 Kawasaki Ninja H2. Can this really be true?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,268 Posts
It really could be true because this is a poor acceleration test. Not poor, really, but it's not a great way to measure, anymore, with cars or motorcycles.

The reason being is the zero part. To take a high output engine from 0-10 mph takes a lot of skill and talent if you are trying to do it rapidly. A good clutch is important. Especially with a short wheelbase. Even at that, the tires are the same. It takes way less horsepower than a nina 1000 has to spin the rear tire. Once the tire spins, there goes your time...to a point. A tiny amount of spin is ok, but most traction control systems wont allow that, or they start backing off power and that hurts the time, too.

A 10-60 test might be a little better as it would eliminate the start.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,268 Posts
I know my personal 0-60 times were faster with the original clutch. This assist/slipper design wants to force itself closed. The old one was easier to slip.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
288 Posts
I believe the 0-60 time remains a good indicator of performance, but that is conditional and meaning this is best testing vehicles in similar conditions but preferably at the same time and with the same driver or rider.

I was comparing the N1000 0-60 to the ZX14 and it seemed to average 3.0 and 2.5 and that seems realistic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
288 Posts
Here is a good example of both 0-60 and 1/4 mile times might be completely different if the riders switched bikes or the ZX14 rider piloted the H2.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,268 Posts
That is a good example. Notice how the zx14 has been lowered and has an extended swingarm. The h2 is never at a point where he can use the power that he has.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
950 Posts
I would prefer to see stock bikes race. Who knows what has been done to those bikes and there engines. RC already mentioned the swing arm. I also noticed the ZX only had one pipe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
I completely agree with RC. Maybe somebody who drag races bikes for a living and can make at least 20 runs on each bike would have meaning. But even then it does not tell the whole story. You can only put so much power to the rear wheel launching a fast bike. And that number is way less than the peak number the bike puts out.

Let’s say you can only put 100 hp to the ground for x number of feet without flipping your bike over. That means that for some distance, two bikes with identical specs except horsepower are being drag raced. Ones peak power is 100 hp and the other is 175 hp. To the speed that the one with 175 hp can go full throttle, they are about even.

The only acceleration time that means anything on a bike is the quarter. And even then the trap speed is the main thing I pay attention to.

I was researching the CBR1000rr before I bought mine. Cycle world compared an R1, CBR, GSX-R, and Aprilia. Despite the difference in horsepower, the bikes were extremely close in 1/4 mile time and trap speed. All tested by the same rider, same track, same day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
288 Posts
I think ya'll missed the point of the video, I understand stock vs modded vehicles but the same rider piloting both helps even the score. I would have really like to see the riders in that vid swap bikes.

Stock bikes run by the same rider makes 0-60 times relevant...and the 1/4 mile of course.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Anyone ever look at the site zeroto60times? If you type in the brand you want to know about it brings up a bunch of different models and years and shows supposed 0-60 times and quarter mile times.

Not sure how accurate the times are but if they are accurate there are some real sleepers out there that'll surprise you.

The site initially brings up cars but if you click the menu button you can type a motorcycle manufacturer into the search and it'll bring it up.
AFAIK those numbers are just taken from magazine tested times. Sure, they are all under ideal conditions etc but it's a good comparison either way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
It really could be true because this is a poor acceleration test. Not poor, really, but it's not a great way to measure, anymore, with cars or motorcycles.

The reason being is the zero part. To take a high output engine from 0-10 mph takes a lot of skill and talent if you are trying to do it rapidly. A good clutch is important. Especially with a short wheelbase. Even at that, the tires are the same. It takes way less horsepower than a nina 1000 has to spin the rear tire. Once the tire spins, there goes your time...to a point. A tiny amount of spin is ok, but most traction control systems wont allow that, or they start backing off power and that hurts the time, too.

A 10-60 test might be a little better as it would eliminate the start.
Accurate statements. I raced a Honda CBR 1000RR a d the techniques to launch that bike for me was max RPM (on the rev limiter) and then release and feather the clutch to limit front wheel lift. Only a lunatic would attempt this on the street. Launching a motorcycle really fast is 80% skill and 20% balls and who wins has little to do with the bike itself. I have seen guys bog down litre bikes and get eaten by 600’s many times.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
422 Posts
Launching a bike really fast is not hard. But yes it requires skill. But it also requires a good, progressive clutch with good feel at the lever. It also requires a good engine with strong low end torque that doesn't require big revs to get off the line easier. The higher the revs at launch, the more skill the rider has to have to balance clutch, wheelspin, and throttle. Perhaps this is why very powerful bikes and cars now have launch control.

My '12 N1k is extremely easy to launch at low revs. It has no slipper clutch (heavier clutch pull) but it has great clutch feel at the lever. Coupled to that a torque-rich engine at low revs, and good 1st gear ratio, means I can launch that thing below 2k RPM in what feels like a bat of an eye. My '18 with the slipper clutch and some factory ECU softening of the power isn't as easy to launch. Clutch feel is not as good as the '12...feels artificially light to me.

The worst one I've experienced was my CBR600rr. The main problem I had with that bike was poor torque off idle and a super light clutch with not a lot of engagement feel. It took too much brain power for me to launch that bike quickly. In order to launch it quickly without revving the motor to the Moon, I needed to feed in power proportional to the release of the clutch and time both properly. Otherwise a quick launch easily turns to a stall. Or the ridiculous sounding high revs at launch, with a long clutch engagement...which makes for a bad launch anyway.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top