Frosty
|
| posted on 9/5/10 at 10:45 PM |
|
|
Current 1000cc engines vs Busa and ZX14
Now that the BEC thing has really taken off and seems almost common in the kit car world, a lot more engines are being tried and successfully used.
Looking at the power of the current 1k engines, it has got me thinking though, is there any point to a Busa or ZX14 these days?
I have a Busa engine in my Westfield, and can definitely feel a big difference between that and my friend's 2003 R1 engine (180bhp vs 150bhp),
but the later GSXR1000 and R1 engines are putting out around 180bhp these days.
So my question is, how do these claimed (non-ram air) power figures translate in kit car terms?
The torque on a GSRX1000/R1 engine will be around 85lb/ft, so obviously the extra power will come from higher revs and an extended torque curve. A
Busa will make 180bhp at lower revs due to the extra torque (around 100lb/ft on the 2007 engine).
How does this translate in kit car terms though? Has anyone gone from an early 1000cc engine to a 2007/8 1000cc engine? If so was it noticeably
faster? Does the extra power actually translate to the road?
Can a modern 1000cc engine really match a Busa/ZX14 powered car, or does the extra torque make all the difference from the Busa?
Just discussion really. It's not to help me make an engine choice, but something I have been curious about.
I know how power and torque relate, but I just can't see a GSRX1000 being as fast as a Busa in a kit car!
|
|
|
|
|
hobbsy
|
| posted on 10/5/10 at 04:41 AM |
|
|
Not directly related to power but you've also got to remember that is Busa (plus the pretty much necessary dry sump kit) is maybe 20 or 30Kg(?)
heavier than a litre bike engine that can usually make do with just a baffle plate.
Also with regard to torque I guess gearing make a big difference. If you rev a lot further you can run lower gearing which increases the torque at
the wheels which is what matters. Possibly you can then make up for the lower torque figure at the engine?
I'm sure someone will be along in a bit who has gone a swap from a ~150 to ~180bhp litre bike engine.
[Edited on 10/5/10 by hobbsy]
|
|
|
franky
|
| posted on 10/5/10 at 05:24 AM |
|
|
going from a 2000 ish 1000cc bike to a 1000cc 2008+bike is a big change.
The one to avoid is the new big bang R1 engine as it makes upto 25bhp less than all the others, doesn't make any more torque either.
Some of the early 1000cc bikes from 2000ish make more torque at lower revs but a modern 1000cc bike is faster than a current zx14/hayabusa.
I'm sure the extra torque of the bigger engines would suit a BEC application slightly more though.
Out of interest has anyone weighed a zx14 engine?
|
|
|
Nick DV
|
| posted on 10/5/10 at 06:41 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by hobbsy
Not directly related to power but you've also got to remember that is Busa (plus the pretty much necessary dry sump kit) is maybe 20 or 30Kg(?)
heavier than a litre bike engine that can usually make do with just a baffle plate.
Also with regard to torque I guess gearing make a big difference. If you rev a lot further you can run lower gearing which increases the torque at
the wheels which is what matters. Possibly you can then make up for the lower torque figure at the engine?
I'm sure someone will be along in a bit who has gone a swap from a ~150 to ~180bhp litre bike engine.
[Edited on 10/5/10 by hobbsy]
I agree with the above, but reconsider the bit about the dry sump. There are arguments for and against, and looking at some previous postings on this
forum dry sumps seem to have caused a number of problems.
The standard sump is pretty deep as most know and this is what helps stop oil problems on road AND track. I know people that have successfully tracked
and raced cars with a standard sump, and last week I was talking to a bloke who was racing a Fury Busa at C/Combe and this was his fourth season with
the same wet sump engine! Just think about that bit.
Cheers, Nick 
P.S. Forgot to say, individuals driving skills may make a big difference too!! 
[Edited on 10/5/10 by Nick DV]
"The force will be with you, always!"
|
|
|
dazzx10r
|
| posted on 10/5/10 at 07:28 AM |
|
|
I'm building an MK Midi with a 2006 ZX10r motor, Kawasaki claim 178bhp (at the crank) but I know from my racing days that I can easily get
170-175bhp @ the wheel, ok thats dyno'd on a bike I'm not sure what it will tranlate to in a car yet but as soon as I get it finished and
custom mapped i'll let you all know. My 2008 GSXR1000 was 178bhp at the rear wheel, and thats on a std head and cams. The good thing in favour
of the 1000 motors is that most of them are fitted with a slipper clutch from the factory, and I know for fact that the Kawasaki one and the Suzuki
one are very good, in fact the Hawk Kawasaki BSB team leave the std Kawasaki slipper clutch in. I can't praise these new slipper clutches
enough, flat out in 6th hard on the brakes down 4 gears and let out the clutch and the slipper takes care of it! so it should be good in a car where
you are putting more strain on the engine on down shifts (I wrecked the top end of a 2001 R1 motor down shifting too fast).
|
|
|
matt_gsxr
|
| posted on 10/5/10 at 07:32 AM |
|
|
From what I have read, the details of the install can hurt some of the newer bike engines. In the quest for those extra BHP the manufacturers have
got pretty clever with the airboxes, secondary injectors, cool air inlets, etc. with those bits in place the peak power seems to be comparable (
Bob Mortimer dyno) even if at somewhat silly RPM that will make cruising a bit buzzy.
If you want to go litre bike, the zx10 is just tiny. That means you can keep the original airbox without massacring the bonnet. GSXR1000 had
problems in RGB without a drysump, but these problems might be better understood now or solved in later versions.
Matt
CBR1000rr from www.hoverd.org/Tim for comparison.
Edited to add figure
[Edited on 10/5/10 by matt_gsxr]
|
|
|
Frosty
|
| posted on 10/5/10 at 08:58 AM |
|
|
The fact the modern 1000cc engines are a good engine to fit has never been under question from me, and I know what they are capable of in bike terms,
but I'm not sure if a high revving 1k engine can deliver what a Busa/ZX14 would with all of the extra drivetrain components to content with.
If a Busa is putting out 180bhp, you would probably see around 150 at the wheels?
However, I think that a GSRX1000 making 180bhp would probably make more like 140bhp at the wheels.
This is just suspicion though, since the 1k engine would be revving 2,500 rpm higher, so transmission losses would be even more pronounced at the
higher revs?
I'm really keen to hear more about the latest breed of 1k engines though. And anyone who has ATW figures for them.
|
|
|
dean100yz
|
| posted on 10/5/10 at 05:51 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by franky
going from a 2000 ish 1000cc bike to a 1000cc 2008+bike is a big change.
The one to avoid is the new big bang R1 engine as it makes upto 25bhp less than all the others, doesn't make any more torque either.
Some of the early 1000cc bikes from 2000ish make more torque at lower revs but a modern 1000cc bike is faster than a current zx14/hayabusa.
I'm sure the extra torque of the bigger engines would suit a BEC application slightly more though.
Out of interest has anyone weighed a zx14 engine?
I didnt know this on the bigbang lump. I had a 06 R1 (screamer) and it was a lairy piece of kit on standard rubber!! 
|
|
|
bigrich
|
| posted on 10/5/10 at 06:28 PM |
|
|
This is my 06 ZX10R (ATW) dyno graph.
It is road legal silenced with an Aluminium airbox using the original trumpets etc and a 61mm intake hose, power commander is fitted and uses a stock
optimised bike map.
Flywheel figure was 170 bhp. torque is really good, almost like driving an automatic just leave it in 6th and use the throttle. will do 25 to 135
without changing down or any hesitation etc. I cant compare it to a busa or zx14 as i hav'nt driven one but i bet there isnt much in it.
Rich.jpg)
.JPG)
A pint for the gent and a white wine/fruit based drink for the lady. Those are the rules
|
|
|
skippad
|
| posted on 10/5/10 at 08:57 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by bigrich
This is my 06 ZX10R (ATW) dyno graph.
It is road legal silenced with an Aluminium airbox using the original trumpets etc and a 61mm intake hose, power commander is fitted and uses a stock
optimised bike map.
Flywheel figure was 170 bhp. torque is really good, almost like driving an automatic just leave it in 6th and use the throttle. will do 25 to 135
without changing down or any hesitation etc. I cant compare it to a busa or zx14 as i hav'nt driven one but i bet there isnt much in it.
Rich
I had a blade in my MK a few years ago which i replaced with zx14 and there's no comparison.
In a car that weighs twice as much as bike its the torque that counts.
In your graph, it shows just over 60lbs torque, zx14 is double that.
It makes a BIG difference.
|
|
|
Davegtst
|
| posted on 10/5/10 at 10:32 PM |
|
|
How would you compare a zzr14 to a zx12r? I know the zzr is more of a touring bike but are they worth getting over the zx12r which are apparently
getting quite rare now.
|
|
|
