ned
|
| posted on 30/1/06 at 08:53 AM |
|
|
2006 r6?
A work colleague (biker) was telling me about the new r6 - I know 600cc bikes engines have been discussed before, but this one seems to take it up a
level and might be more usable and cost effective..
Well its 599cc, produces 130bhp and can rev to about 17500rpm!
Of course being only of a small capacity torque is well down at only approx 50 lb/ft but comparing this to an original xflow i recon it'd be
faster.
Obviously you'd have to build the car as light as possible but the engine itself must weigh nothing (well less than other 900c+ bike engines) so
400kg build wouldn't be too hard to achieve if you're sensible i'd recon.
What do you bec boys think?
Ned.
[Edited on 30/1/06 by ned]
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
|
|
fesycresy
|
| posted on 30/1/06 at 09:26 AM |
|
|
R1 weights 173kg, I would guess the R6 wouldn't be more than 10kg lighter.
The motor difference would only be about 4 to 6kg lighter.
Not worth it in my opinion, especially 130bhp at 17,500rpm !
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The sooner you fall behind, the more time you'll have to catch up.
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 30/1/06 at 09:44 AM |
|
|
68Nm is not a lot of torque but the high revs mean that you can gear it right down to make up for that.
with a 3.62 diff and 195/50/15 wheels you will get 57 MPH in 1st at 17000 RPM and 129 in 6th. 70 MPH in 6th would be 9200 RPM though .
If you geared it to reach 63 in 1st wht a car weighing 400kg then the 0-62 dash could be yours in 3.8 seconds. a quarter mile would take about 12.4
seconds.
If your car weight 500kg then it would be 4.6 seconds to 62.
for SVA, noise is measured at 3/4 of max power revs or 10,875 RPM so you might struggle with that.
And then there is the clutch. does the 2006 R6 have a small clutch?
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 30/1/06 at 10:20 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by fesycresy
Not worth it in my opinion, especially 130bhp at 17,500rpm !
I think the max power is at around 14,500rpm according to yamaha's website..
was also thinking that the 600's are normally a lot cheaper than the 900cc engines and 130bhp albeit with more revs is the same as some of the
older blades/zx9's and cbr1000's?!
[Edited on 30/1/06 by ned]
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 30/1/06 at 10:26 AM |
|
|
R6 peak torque = 68 Nm @11,000; peak power = 127 hp @14,500; red line = 17,000
R1 peak torque = 108Nm @ 9,500; peak power = 148 hp @ 10,500; red line = 11,750
I like the noise of a bike engine at full throttle at high revs so 17,000 will sound fantastic. High revs at cruising speeds don't sound so
good.
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 30/1/06 at 09:19 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
68Nm is not a lot of torque but the high revs mean that you can gear it right down to make up for that.
If anything you may well struggle to gear it HIGH enough for effective use because as a 600 its likely to be geared for less top speed than a larger
engine so will already have shorter ratios and a higher primary reduction ratio, and even if you can gear it to 110-120mph its going to be doing near
on 10-11k at motorway cruising speeds 
Ned, in all honesty with the weight difference of a 600 compared to a light 900/1000 engine (5-10kg tops), plus the fact you can pick up blades etc
for £500 now and CBR1000s for even less, it wouldnt save you any cash because you'd spend the difference (at least) on a custom made manifold
and sprocket adapter etc, which you can get much cheaper off the shelf with popular engines.
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 30/1/06 at 09:30 PM |
|
|
Just found the gear ratios and because it revs so high its not too bad, top speed would be about 130mph at 17k with a 3.6 diff and 185/60-13 wheels,
but even when geared like that it works out at 10krpm at 75mph, so rather frantic Id say.
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 30/1/06 at 10:14 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ChrisGamlin
Just found the gear ratios and because it revs so high its not too bad, top speed would be about 130mph at 17k with a 3.6 diff and 185/60-13 wheels,
but even when geared like that it works out at 10krpm at 75mph, so rather frantic Id say.
Did you read my first post before writing this? I'd already looked up the ratios and calculated the speeds in each gear.
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 31/1/06 at 12:54 PM |
|
|
Are you sure that was there when I originally posted? LOL
|
|
|
RallyHarry
|
| posted on 1/2/06 at 12:17 PM |
|
|
MMMM, twin R6 setup, full chat at 17KRPM, absolutly screaming through the corner - who needs to watch F1 on Sundays when you can get the soundtrack at
home ?
Cheers
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 1/2/06 at 01:01 PM |
|
|
MMMM, twin R6 setup, up on axle stands in the garage for the umpteenth time, absolutly screaming through the money in your wallet.............. 
|
|
|
RallyHarry
|
| posted on 1/2/06 at 03:10 PM |
|
|
MMMMM, was more thinking of one in front and one in the back, not on a common driveline ...
Cheers.
|
|
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 1/2/06 at 06:27 PM |
|
|
Unfortunately that configuration equals even more £££ if you want it to go round corners, Z Cars had to spend £10k on a Motec engine management system
to get their 4wd twin ZX12 car to handle even half reasonably, otherwise the power distribution between the axles is all over the place and it will
literally be only any good for going in straight lines.
|
|
|
.jpg){kind=avatar}
