Gilles Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 Hi everybody ! Just got the bike and everyone seem to say that it's quite fast on the quarter mile.Can someone give me an idea or where to find the info...Is it faster than my old ZRX 1100 ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member norcal616 Posted April 4, 2018 Premium Member Share Posted April 4, 2018 7.90s in the 1/8th 12.40s in the 1/4 its quicker in the 1/8th than the full 1/4mile...needs aftermarket airbox and exhaust to let it breathe... 2015 fz-07- Hordpower Edition...2015 fj-09- 120whp- Graves Exhaust w/Woolich Race Kit- tuned by 2WDW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gilles Posted April 4, 2018 Author Share Posted April 4, 2018 THANKS !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member norcal616 Posted April 4, 2018 Premium Member Share Posted April 4, 2018 no problem... one small note: I skip 1st gear as 1st and 2nd gear are really close in mph by like 5mph and its got plenty of TQ to go in 2nd gear... 2015 fz-07- Hordpower Edition...2015 fj-09- 120whp- Graves Exhaust w/Woolich Race Kit- tuned by 2WDW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faffi Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 What is surprising to me is that the MT07 doesn't turn elevens. The old XJ750 Seca, with power robbing shaft drive and a wet weight of 530 lb vs chain final drive and 400 lb for the MT07, did a 12.41 in Cycle World's test. Claimed hp was 81. Pee Wee Gleason did an 11.99 on the XJ. If you rode the two, you would swear the MT was a rocket compared to the old XJ, the latter not coming alive until 6,000 rpm. The ZRX1100, for comparison, is good for about 11 seconds flat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stickshift Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 Cycle World got a 12.16 quarter mile out of a standard fz07. I'm yet to see any modified bikes break into the 11's, though I'm sure some are capable. https://www.cycleworld.com/2014/11/10/2015-yamaha-fz-07-affordable-and-best-value-motorcycles-cw-bargain-blasters#page-2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r1limited Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 I can do 198 MPH on my FZ, I use 92 Octane and 4 chili verde boooritos, the crowd goes nutz “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.” --Thomas Jefferson quoting Cesare Beccaria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shinyribs Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 1/4 mile times are hugely imprecise. There's too many chances for human error to interfere with the results, but mph has proven to be a fairly decent indicator . No matter how bad you botch the launch or miss a shift, a certain vehicle going down a certain drag strip will always turn in a very consistent mph. So what was the mph difference in the FZ07 and the Seca? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FZ07R WaNaB Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 9 hours ago, faffi said: The old XJ750 Seca, with power robbing shaft drive and a wet weight of 530 lb vs chain final drive and 400 lb for the MT07, did a 12.41 in Cycle World's test. Claimed hp was 81. Pee Wee Gleason did an 11.99 on the XJ. If you rode the two, you would swear the MT was a rocket compared to the old XJ, the latter not coming alive until 6,000 rpm. It's interesting you used this comparison as I have owned two Seca 750s as well as a Maxim 750. The Seca's were when I was much younger as that was in the 80s. Back then I was into taking them to the drag strip. I would completely disagree with the idea that the MT is a rocket compared to the Seca. Yes, the MT's mid range torque hit is much stronger than the Seca, but when you do wind the Seca up and speed shift at redline through the gears, the Seca hauls butt and is easily comparable to a stock MT if not faster. When you drag start the Seca, you are bypassing the low end and mid-range and the Seca is hitting strong out of the gate. They were and still are a good running bike. They are versatile too as I did a 11 day, 2300 mile solo camping trip in New England on mine. For you East coasters, my old Seca climbed Mt. Washington. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faffi Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 It is probably a result of how I ride, preferring to keep revs as low as possible. Even in a hurry, it is rarely required to rev the MT above 5000 rpm in the lower gears, and I find there is little point to go past 7k, where power gain taper off. The Seca was the other way around; it would accelerate in top gear from 1100 rpm under full throttle if asked, but things happened slowly until 6k came and went. From there on, it was pretty fast, yes. Considering the weight differences, it seems likely that the Seca made more power. However, the top speed advantage of the MT suggest it makes the most power (weight have next to zero impact on top speed). Regardless of how, why and what, they are very different bikes, both with their own virtues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.