C14 Top speed vs Fjr1300 Top speed

[Wicked Webby]

Ok all you performance compare folks,

I know some riders could give 2 craps about top speed. I found this information on Motorcycle news (MCN) and thought I would share it. These tests are on stock bikes with bags on.

The GTR1400 (C14) Top speed = 151 mph

https://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/bikerevi...0-2007-current/

The FJR1300 (Gen II AE) Top speed = 154 mph

https://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/bikerevi...?&R=EPI-247

Now it is important to note that in the above tests the gtr1400 had a better 1/4 mi time by 3/10ths of a second because the FJR1300 was the AE model. I have read in other mags how the AE is a little heavier and not as fast in 0-60 and 1/4 mi times because of the in ability to shift it as fast as a true manual shift.

I LOVE MY FJR!! Bring it C14!!

WW

 

[Toecutter]

Wow! All that and less range to boot. What's not to love about the Connie?

 

[UFO]

Something don't seem right. They show the C14 having less bhp than the FJR, which I know isn't right. Are these estimates or actual measured top speeds.

 

[painman]

I read in one of the mag reports that the Connie had a much smoother power band on the dyno and the top speed was opposite of what Wicked Webbie put up. But really I could care less about top speeds for one thing I don't usually go that fast, mainly because where I live it is really quite difficult to find the place to crank it up without getting caught or really just because of too many other drivers and the quality of the roads suck which make it unsafe anyway. Now if I lived out in Nevada or the country or such that's another ball game. For me I could add the positive and the negatives together for the two bikes and I still would have to pick the FJR, besides just sitting on the FJR feels better. But those sudden bursts of bliss is enough to make me glad I have the right bike for me that keeps a smile on my face around home and if I really want to top it out, I have the ride to take me out to Nevada to pure nirvana with not much effort. PM. <><

 

[Wicked Webby]

UFO,

I AM NOT SURE ABOUT ANY MISPRINTS. I THINK IT SOUNDS RIGHT. IT APPEARS LIKE THEY WERE QUOTING THE FJR'S CLAIM AT THE CRANK AND THE C14'S CLAIM AT THE TIRE.... JUST MY IMPRESSION.

PAINMAN,

I PURPOSELY PUT THE LINKS UP FOR YOU ALL TO HAVE THE STRAIGHT INFO YOURSELVES. SO YOU CAN QUOTE MCN NOT ME.

But if it is hear say you prefer(this was really posted)....FYI... I did read some reports (posts) from some apparently honest C14 guys (on concours14.com)that the fastest top speed they could attain (on gps)was 149mph. So I have read more than one report of the 150mph ball park.

WW

 

[wallypiper]

Top speed is rwhp vs aero drag. Nothing else matters at 150.

 

[MKO]

Top speed is rwhp vs aero drag. Nothing else matters at 150.

Weight matters, but they are close enough that aerodynamic drag seems to be what is limiting the C14's top speed. It's rwhp is definitely 6-12 hp higher than the FJR's, depending on which dyno you quote.

 

[ngarider]

I'll never understand top speed debate on a touring bike. Busa vs. ZX14? Sure. Here? Who cares.

 

[MKO]

I'll never understand top speed debate on a touring bike. Busa vs. ZX14? Sure. Here? Who cares.

I think it is just another way comparing bikes. When it comes to Sport tourers, it's a relevant performance measure and one small way of bringing some objectivity to the endless debate on which one is better. We all obviously thought the FJR was the best bike on the market when we made our buying decision and now there is a new challenger on the block. Comparisons are inevitable even if the majority of the riders will never test the limits of their bikes. (see cornering clearance thread)

 

[BrunDog]

There is no way on earth the C14 is only 0.3 sec faster than an AE in the 1/4 mile. Than the A, I would say OK, but the AE has been proven in multiple reviews to be much slower.

-BD

 

[v65]

I guess it's my mission to say this in every one of these threads: Kawi had plenty of development time, that the two bikes can be compared is huge disappointment and a victory for Yamaha. It seems less likely now, than when the new Connie was first introduced, that Yamaha will make dramatic improvements to the line.

 

[ionbeam]

Cycle World performed both these tests, so hopefully there is some consistency in results because the same testing methods were used.

C14 Numbers:

Price........................ $13,799

Weight, wet............. 693 lbs

Fuel Capacity........... 5.8 gallons

GVWR...................... 1118 lb.

Load Capacity, wet. 425 lb.

RW HP, corrected.... 136.9 @ 9.2k RPM

RW TQ, corrected.... 92.1 @ 7.3k RPM

Electrical Power ...... 581W

Top Speed.............. 160 mph Measured

1/4 Mile.................. 10.91 sec @ 126.54

Top Gear Roll On

40-60 mph.............. 5.0 sec

60-80 mph.............. 4.7 sec

(I would like to have seen 5th gear roll-on also, these numbers really tell you what it will be like on the road!)

Engine RPM @ 60.... 2755 RPM

Braking 60-0........... 133 feet

Warranty................ 12 mo; 36k miles

November 2005 test numbers for the FJR1300A Numbers:

Price (as tested)........ $13,199

Dry weight................. 609 lbs.

Fuel mileage.............. 38.2 mpg

0-60........................... 2.8 sec.

1/4-mile..................... 10.93 sec. @ 123.48 mph

Horsepower............... 124.7 hp @ 7850 rpm

Torque....................... 88.3 ft.-lbs. @ 7025 rpm

Top speed................. 154 mph Measured

Data tables from this topic:

C14 data table.

FJR data table.

As noted in another posting, top speed is HP, aerodynamics and enough room to achieve maximum possible RPM.

 

[SkooterG]

Top speed is rwhp vs aero drag. Nothing else matters at 150.

Weight matters, but they are close enough that aerodynamic drag seems to be what is limiting the C14's top speed. It's rwhp is definitely 6-12 hp higher than the FJR's, depending on which dyno you quote.

Weight has nothing to do with top speed. Acceleration, yes, but not top speed. As already stated, HP and aero drag are the two factors that matter.

 

[charismaticmegafauna]

Weight has nothing to do with top speed.

"All, other, things being equal."

As already stated, HP and aero drag are the two factors that matter.

And...aerodynamics is made-up of two elements: drag coefficient and frontal area -- the latter, a factor in which motorcycles are not usually very complimentary.

 

[2WheelTiger]

Why do you guys even care? All these C14 threads smack of ***** envy. We have FJRs and they're good bikes. It's obvious the C14 isn't the wonderbike Kaw might have built if they'd intended to conquer the market, but then, neither is the FJR.

Seems to me the bikes are roughly similar, and if a C14 shows up in your riding group, are you just gonna start dissing it like you do on here?

 

[Wicked Webby]

Ionbeam,

It doesn't surprise me how some mags. will go out there and contradict each one another and/or some will print bold face lies to help their share holders with bike sales. Isn't cycleworld the one that said that the C14's valve adjustment intervals were 26,000 miles too!! Guess that is the Gospel truth because it is printed in their magazine. I have always found cycleworld to be opportunistic with their performance numbers and dyno runs regarding Kawasaki and Suzuki... And I love my Kawasaki But it has never even come close to putting up the dyno numbers that they say it did. BUT I guess you can't bit Either hand that feeds ya. Do some research on who holds their purse.

Andre,

Its like MKO said above.

WW

 

[FJRMGM]

well, that does it - I will certainly base my next bike purchase on whether or not it will top 150 mph.

I mean shoot, look at the time I can save on my commute if I can go that fast..

 

[Leartech]

Seems to me the bikes are roughly similar, and if a C14 shows up in your riding group, are you just gonna start dissing it like you do on here?

Uh, yes, yes I will.........................

 

[Randy]

Top speed is a horseshit useless spec when you're talking about a few MPH. A slight tweak in the gearing ratio would have given them a few more MPH. But, a tweak in the opposite direction will get you a bit more performance in the lower/mid range where most people do their riding.

4 or 5 mph difference doesn't make one bike better than another.