Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About level41

  • Birthday 05/26/1980

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The weight of both bikes are also very close.. I'm surprised, because Suzuki mostly makes heavy bikes. Even their gw250 is heavier than the FZ.
  2. @faffi you are correct. However the graph you showed, shows (I think) the Australian FZ's torque and HP curve? I know my FZ (us model) makes about 77hp at the wheel, which might have to do with the gear change, since it'll increase hp, but lower torque. As far as torque is concerned, if your graph is the right graph for my bike, 20% increase in gearing, results in 20% lower torque, which means my ~45 lb ft of torque, which is almost all available from 3 to 8k RPM, will become 36lb ft, which is what the gsx 600 only starts making at around 8k RPM. Since both bikes are stock (save for my gearing change, which didn't really matter since I could easily downshift to 3rd or 4th), I did have a slight edge, though I can see if he had gone past the 10k RPM mark it would have been a total loss to me (which I didn't know at the time). To be fair, I did accelerate to 8.5k Rpm on a few occasions since 6 or even 6.6k (where my bike starts running stoic, and thus, a power bump) didn't cut it to stick with him.
  3. @stickshift not every track you can take the bike out to maximum performance. It's just not safe with a stock bike and tires. @afatrat yes, I can see why people like the thrill of speed, and in a controlled environment it's quite safe to do (unlike on the streets). However, I still decided to go back to my sub 4k Rpm range, and enjoy sipping 80mpg, instead of the average 29 to 32 I was seeing on the track. I can also see why many people have a hard time going back to enjoying a relaxing ride, and see nature, knowing they can travel cross state on pocket change. So I decided not to do tracks too much anymore, and go smaller. I started riding because I enjoyed the economic side of things, and for adventure reasons, seeing places. Not for going on one wheel from one stoplight to the next...
  4. The FZ has more torque than the GSX up until about 10k RPM. The HP of the GSX is a little higher after 10k rpm, which he didn't do. So both bikes were quite even. The Suzuki shines above 10k rpm.
  5. Had the opportunity to race my FZ against a GSX R600 yesterday. I do have about 100cc more, and it made sticking with the 600 so much easier. The guy had more experience on the tracks than me, and my aim was not to lead, but follow. And following it did just fine. On the straights, I easily caught up, once the needle passed 6K Rpm, but to give him a fair advantage, and not to wet my own pants, I actually stayed mostly under 6k RPM, as my bike would accelerate about as fast as that Gixxer doing 10k RPM. In all fairness, we both didn't go all out, but had a blast anyway!
  6. level41

    Selling my FZ

    Lol! I know full well what Honda does, and how engines work. And I'm sure that you can get almost the same mpg out of a high rev engine. But can you imagine the difference, if that high rev engine was the same cc as the Honda? To be fair, the Honda nc750 doesn't have all that much of HP. So if top speed is what you want, you'd have to compare it to a 550-600cc high rev engine. The smaller size works in your benefit, yet on average they have the same HP. If you want to compete against the NC700, you'd probably have to run the engine at 6-7k RPM, vs 3-4k on the NC. Yet if you're cruising, there's no rule that you have to cruise at 6k RPM, for just traveling. You can regear to 4k Rpm, and gain substantial MPG in the process. If you think long enough, it all makes perfect sense...
  7. level41

    Selling my FZ

    Actually, 400cc is mine (and many other's) sweet spot; I actually prefer it! And a high-rev engine too, which means sufficient hp for just about anyting. @afatrat: A high-rev engine can be tuned much more efficiently than a low rev engine for MPG and HP. 1- Because high-rev engines can generally be smaller in size, and lighter in weight, for the same amount of power as low rev engines. 2- Because low rev, turbo powered engine is much more costly to maintain and manufacture, and turbos become very inefficient past their boost state (at the opening of the wategate) 3- Because you can almost get the same acceleration you get from a turbo powered engine, and the same MPG from a low-rev engine, at a price very similar to the low rev NA engine. A high rev engine has a high compression ratio and PSI at low revs, but a lower one at high revs, which means it'll run most optimally at low revs; while at the same time, if you need the power, just shift down one or two gears, to get into the bike's powerband. It's like an instrument that can be made to sound dull, and sharp at the same time, depending on how you handle or play it! While a low-rev NA engine would be compared to a dull instrument (doesn't have the power, but has the MPG), and a larger CC engine with the same HP can be compared to a bright instrument (has the power, but lacks MPG). Not even to mention, hi-rev engines last a lot longer when ran at RPM ranges of 3000-7000RPM, compared to 7-12k rpm; while still offering sufficient acceleration in that RPM range. If someone rides his car, he knows it has more power at 4k RPM than at 2k RPM. Yet only drives it mostly at 2-4k. Now, you'd say, most bikes out there have between 50-66MPG. But I think it would surprise some, that most of my bikes have 80-120MPG US, all the while it's perfectly rideable on the streets.
  8. level41

    Selling my FZ

    Seems like Kawasaki is trying to jump the gun with their Ninja 400. A 399cc would be a nice fuel sipper, but I'm not too fond of the ergos of a sports bike. It also doesn't make any sense at all, to get a 400cc sports bike. For a sports bike, you get a 600cc minimum, 700 or 900cc preferred. So I'm hoping once they see no one buys the 400cc sports bike, they will build the engine in a naked/touring bike. It's also a hi-rev engine, which is excellent for better fuel mileage (at low revs) while still having the ability to have the top speed needed on most roads (110-120MPH). I prefer hi-rev engines on wide spaced gears.
  9. So, I'm moving, and the new place has no space for motorcycles. However somehow I've been able to secure 2 'spaces' for bikes there (one in the hallway). So I'm going to have to sell one of them, which is going to be the FZ. The reason is pretty simple. The FZ gets about the same gas mileage as the CBR300R I have, but is heavier. About 50LBS heavier. It also is too much power for what I need. The FZ starts to shine at 80+MPH, where gas mileage starts suffering. However, riding at 80+ MPH is less fun, and I don't often do it. That, and, if I would ride on a big bike, I would do longer trips, which, I would mostly end up in a rain storm somewhere in the state. So I decided to keep on riding smaller bikes for local rides only, and the longer rides use an Elio (a 3 wheeled car, that's covered, is great on gas, and low on insurance cost; if it ever comes out). But for now, I will put up my FZ for sale. It's been a pleasure, to have been part of the FZ community. Cheerz!
  10. level41

    Oil consumption?

    Never had this issue, but then again, my 600 mile oil changes usually are within the first 3 weeks. Not enough time to be losing anything. From 2k to 5-6k miles my oil glass showed from full to about 3/4 of the glass full (I didn't lose 1/4th of my oil, I just lost 1/4th of the looking glass on oil, so it probably translates into a few oz of oil, in 4k miles).
  11. level41

    FZ-07 Engine Braking

    Because I prefer more gentle engine braking, I swapped my sprockets out. It'll allow the engine to rev lower. If you're not fond of engine braking, I would recommend to not shift up until you're between the 1500-2000RPM range, where engine braking is more gentle.
  12. Anywhere between 60 avg, and 70MPG US. I did a sprocket swap, and as long as I keep it below 75MPH, I can last about 200 miles before I hit the 'F' mark on the dash. If I ride it spirited, I only get ~140 miles
  13. Remember we have IMP MPGs and US MPG. 66 MPG IMP = 55 US MPG. I can get an average of about 60-70MPG US if I'm careful (with sprocket mod), but 60-70MPG IMP is easily gotten.
  14. A 125 will always have enough acceleration; even with super tall gears, you can make it accelerate just like the average traffic does, without feeling like you're in the way of the car behind you. The Grom is not a bike you will want to dragrace with anyway. Just accelerate it more in the torque/hp band (6-8k rpm) before shifting. If you want fast acceleration, nothing below a 900cc will satisfy. But for a commuter, 125cc is excellent, and also has excellent fuel mileage!
  15. For me mostly the reverse is true. The FZ gives me nice acceleration, while my 250cc bike gives me nice fuel mileage! I was thinking of getting the grom for commuting, and perhaps in the long run, trade in my FZ.

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.