Concourse 14 owners to be...

[mike25]

HEY ALL,
DONT LOOK TO THE C14 AS BEING A OUT PERFORMER OF THE FJR.

COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES..

A 07 FJR WITH ABS(NOT AE MODEL) WET WEIGHT IS 669LBS WITH ALMOST 7 GALLONS OF FUEL.

THE CLAIMED WET WEIGHT OF THE NON ABS 08 C14 IS 679 WITH A LITTLE LESS THAN 6 GALLONS OF FUEL.

HOW MUCH WIEGHT WILL THE ABS ADD TO THE C14??

KAWASAKI IS CLAIMING 153HP AND 100LB-FT AT THE CRANK. DYNO RESULTS WILL SHOW AT LEAST A 10% LOSS THROUGH THE DRIVE TRAIN.

YAMAHA CLAIMS 145HP AND 100LB-FT AT THE CRANK. DYNO RESULTS DO SHOW THE 10% LOSS THROUGH THE DRIVE TRAIN.

SO WHAT IS ALL THE TALK ABOUT?? EQUAL TORQUE NUMBERS AND 7 MORE HP AT THE TIRE FOR THE C14. THE C14 WOULD BE A LOT BETTER PERFORMER AGAINST THE FJR IF IT WASNT HEAVIER.

My money says the KAW will smoke the FJR!!!!!!

 

[Flyguy]

The picture of the Kaw is the original fairing not the new one. It was much smoother. Kaw added on the vent deflectors so they could still use the original mold and just called them "removeable", like it was a feature instead of a fu_ _ up.

Here is the final version.

It's not terrible, but it sure isn't great either.

What IS terrible is the bag treatment -

Compared to the nice tight design on the Feejer.

Also for the sport riders out there, the FJR looks great without bags which will peel off another 22lbs. The GTR on the other hand is not going to be seen sans luggage if the reaction to their removal at the show during bikeweek was any indication. The wet weight on the FJR appears to be 20 - 25lbs less than the GTR with ABS. The GTR may have 8-9 more hp but you have to spin it to 8,800 rpms to use it and it is only a 2.8% difference in HP/weight ratio anyway! A PCIII and a K&N filter will buy you that.

On the positive side the GTR offers more rubber on the rear, a six speed tranny, which means something to some, a silky smooth engine (may be even smoother than the FJR) and optional tire pressure monitor (very cool) and lets not forget VVT.

If they could have made it more attractive I would have given it more thought but they didn't and so I don't. The difference in performance between these 2 bikes is going to be rider ability, not mechanical advantage. But like the golfer that tries to buy his score lower with a new set of clubs every year, there will be those that perceive an edge in swapping rides when they could acheive much more with practice and instruction, or even farkles.

 

[Wicked Webby]

Flyguy,

You said it...and so have I in this and other threads..... Up 20-30 lbs and Up 7-8hp EQUALS ONE THING.............Equal performance specs!!.

Mike,

You should be careful with your money. The C14 isn't gonna smoke the FJR...Check your power to weight ratio math. If anything they will be neck and neck. The C14 will surely smoke the FJR in dealer service fees for valve adjustments. No offense to any hardcore Kawi folks(I have owned many and still have one). :boredom:

 

[teerex51]

Flyguy,
You said it...and so have I in this and other threads..... Up 20-30 lbs and Up 7-8hp EQUALS ONE THING.............Equal performance specs!!.

Mike,

You should be careful with your money. The C14 isn't gonna smoke the FJR...Check your power to weight ratio math. If anything they will be neck and neck. The C14 will surely smoke the FJR in dealer service fees for valve adjustments. No offense to any hardcore Kawi folks(I have owned many and still have one). :boredom:

I concur with WW and Flyguy here.

The new entry looks good enough to eat but I just can't see it smoking the "old" FJR.

I was seriously interested in buying the GTR1400 but, after that rigmarole on the delivery dates and the big hush on the weight, I've instead decided to upgrade from a 2003ABS FJR to a 2005ABS (Euro specs).

In my view, the RP11 is still the best there is on the market. :fan_1:

Stef

 

[Randy]

Flyguy,
You said it...and so have I in this and other threads..... Up 20-30 lbs and Up 7-8hp EQUALS ONE THING.............Equal performance specs!!.

Mike,

You should be careful with your money. The C14 isn't gonna smoke the FJR...Check your power to weight ratio math. If anything they will be neck and neck. The C14 will surely smoke the FJR in dealer service fees for valve adjustments. No offense to any hardcore Kawi folks(I have owned many and still have one). :boredom:

Where is the figure of 20-30 lbs coming from?

The GTR may have 8-9 more hp but you have to spin it to 8,800 rpms to use it and it is only a 2.8% difference in HP/weight ratio anyway!

Unlike traditional valve timing, won't the VVT smooth it out resulting in a much smoother and flatter torque curve?

 

[Flyguy]

Randy asked:

Where is the figure of 20-30 lbs coming from?

GTR (wet) 679 + 5 (.8 gal gas) + 11 (ABS) = 795 ....... FJR (wet) 667

Unlike traditional valve timing, won't the VVT smooth it out resulting in a much smoother and flatter torque curve?

That is what it is supposed to do and I'm sure will but against what? That motor in the ZX was a bit peaky in order to achieve the ultimate power Kaw was looking for and that would marry well in a 560lb projectile ridden mostly 1 up. (along with a 6 speed) It pulls like a demon from 5.5k up but is a bit enemic from 2 - 5. Ex: @ 3000 it produces 28hp while the FJR musters up 42. Torque is 42 and 71 respectively (huge difference). The FJR has a very flat curve (see graph) by virtue of it's 66mm stroke and tuning. While that's not a problem when you can rev up and dump the clutch, when you load it up with 100lbs of touring plastic, shaft drive and mix in 300 lbs of riders and 30lbs of gear (light) and launch normally and all of a sudden you're begging for more low end. That is what the VVT is supposed to help with. To try and produce a curve much more like the Feejers even though it has only a 60mm stroke AND compression was dropped to 10.7 to 1. Only a dyno run will show how close they were able to come.

Red = FJR ...note:blue line is the ZX with 12.7:1 compression

 

[Wicked Webby]

Good point Flyguy. My Zx-10r doesn't have much till around 6g and then WATCHOUT!!!!!!!!!! Works fine for a track bike BUT never really thought of the implications of it while TOURING....... :drinks:

 

[Flyguy]

From the Kawasaki website talking about the new KLR650 -

Five-speed Transmission- Designed to handle the engine’s unique power characteristics

- The engine’s broad torque curve only requires five speeds for off-road and relaxed highway cruising

- O-ring drive chain reduces maintenance and increases chain service life

Interesting that even Kaw sees the value in 5 speeds given a flat enough torque curve. And at only 37hp!

 

[Randy]

Randy asked:

Where is the figure of 20-30 lbs coming from?

GTR (wet) 679 + 5 (.8 gal gas) + 11 (ABS) = 795 ....... FJR (wet) 667

Unlike traditional valve timing, won't the VVT smooth it out resulting in a much smoother and flatter torque curve?

That is what it is supposed to do and I'm sure will but against what? That motor in the ZX was a bit peaky in order to achieve the ultimate power Kaw was looking for and that would marry well in a 560lb projectile ridden mostly 1 up. (along with a 6 speed) It pulls like a demon from 5.5k up but is a bit enemic from 2 - 5. Ex: @ 3000 it produces 28hp while the FJR musters up 42. Torque is 42 and 71 respectively (huge difference). The FJR has a very flat curve (see graph) by virtue of it's 66mm stroke and tuning. While that's not a problem when you can rev up and dump the clutch, when you load it up with 100lbs of touring plastic, shaft drive and mix in 300 lbs of riders and 30lbs of gear (light) and launch normally and all of a sudden you're begging for more low end. That is what the VVT is supposed to help with. To try and produce a curve much more like the Feejers even though it has only a 60mm stroke AND compression was dropped to 10.7 to 1. Only a dyno run will show how close they were able to come.

Red = FJR ...note:blue line is the ZX with 12.7:1 compression

You said "GTR (wet) 679 + 5 (.8 gal gas) + 11 (ABS) = 795 ....... FJR (wet) 667". When you have wet weight, you don't add for gas (gas is wet). Motorcyclist magazine lists the wet weight of the FJR at 687.

Using the numbers you provided, GTR 679 + 11 (ABS) = 688. Dead heat.

Regarding the motor and the power/torque curve, comparing it to the ZX is irrelevant. Sure it's BASED on the ZX14 motor, but, it isn't the ZX14 motor. Until we see some real graphs, it's all speculation.

 

[mmonroe]

Another thing work noting is that the ZX-14 has specific "tuning" to reduce its low-end power. There are all kinds of "hacks" to remove this tuning. The point being that the ZX-14 is not soft on the bottom because of radical cams and agressive race-track turning.

With 1400cc of displacment, VVT and the appropriate tuning, I would imagine that the C14 will be more than competitive with power and whatnot.

Mark

Harrisburg NC

07 FJR1300

 

[Flyguy]

mmonroe wrote:

With 1400cc of displacment, VVT and the appropriate tuning, I would imagine that the C14 will be more than competitive with power and whatnot.

I believe that also. If It wasn't going to be competetive Kaw would not have bothered. As far as the "more than" only time will tell. They are certainly serious about motivating the extra weight as they are using a 3.333 1st gear to move things along as opposed to the 2.626 in the 100lb lighter ZX, which is actually very close to 2nd (2.529) in the C-14. The focus of most of my posts in this area are to showcase how well Yamaha did hitting the mark 7 years ago as evidenced by how difficult it is to leapfrog even with the latest technologies.