Im thinking of an upgrade to bike engine, currently a 150bhp injected crossflow which is quick, i just fancy a change what are the reccomendations?

POWER, RELIABILITY, COST, EASE TO FIT.

The usual suspects:
R1
Fireblade
ZX-9R
ZX-10R
ZX-12R
'Busa
GSXR-1000

Most people seem to use the R1, personally ive got a '97 Fireblade engine, i dont think youd have many problems with any of them, of course they prices will range from 400ish for a zx9r to 3k for a Busa!

the fireblade has less power than the crossflow (135bhp) but is cheap fairly reliable

the r1 is becoming fairly cheap (1000ish) for the older engines (upto 01 for carbs and 03 for fuel injection) they have around 155 bhp, and are pretty much bulletproof. the newer (04+) engine are much more powerfull (175-180) but the price reflects this (1500-1900)

the gsxr is a bit more powerfull than the r1 but is expensive (£1700+) and requires dry sumoing which adds about a £1000. its abit unknown and not popular.

zx 9r: half way between a fireblade and a r1/gsxr

zx12r cheap powerfull may require dry sumping? a good busa alternative about 175bhp

hayabusa very expensive but amazing tuning potential. costs about £3000 plus another £1000 for dry sump, produces about 180bhp but can be tuned without turbo to 250ish bhp and with to 400ish bhp reliably.

zx14r not out yet but this might take over from the busa as it has more power (200bhp) and also might lower busa prices.

if you want something cheap and reliable go for the r1 (that was what i was told by Martin Bell at the kcw for my fury and they have made a very large number of becs.

id recommend yorkshire engines (hes on here) for good deals and excellent service for whatever you choose

Depends how much cash you want to spend and what sort of power you're after. Most of the big bike engines are about 125bhp upwards. For a 1,000cc engine (or thereabouts) you're looking at, in no particular order, ZX9R, CBR1000, R1, Fireblade, GSXR etc. Although a lot of people are currently going for the R1 engine and more recently the newer GSXRs, I reckon the Blade has still got to be the easiest install, although none are particularly difficult and the R1 has excellent power to weight.

Then there's the bigger bike engines; the Blackbird, Hayabusa, ZX12R etc, which produce around 170bhp but some will say require dry sumping. The Blackbird would need some additional protection in the form of a dry sump or at least an Accusump, if intended for track use. Others will argue that the Hayabusa and ZX12R also require dry sumping but there's other threads discussing these issues if you do some searching.

Most of the bike engines are reliable. Cost wise, there are bargains out there to be had and you might be able to pick a full engine up for around the £500 mark but as these are few and far between, realistically you'd be looking at £850 to £1,500 for the smaller engines, a bit more for the ZX12R and then a fairly big jump into Hayabusa territory.

All bike engines are quite easy to fit but will obviously require a few modifications to your existing chassis and replacement of a few bodywork parts.

edit: Must learn to type quicker

[Edited on 5-3-06 by Hellfire]

quote:

---

Originally posted by cossey


zx12r cheap powerfull may require dry sumping? a good busa alternative about 175bhp

hayabusa very expensive but amazing tuning potential. costs about £3000 plus another £1000 for dry sump, produces about 180bhp but can be tuned without turbo to 250ish bhp and with, to 400ish bhp reliably.

---

One reason I went for the R1 engine is that the output shaft is nearer the block if you see what I mean which means you can have more space for your feet on the drivers side.

Regards,

Mark

quote:

---

Originally posted by cossey
the fireblade has less power than the crossflow (135bhp) but is cheap fairly reliable

---

Just thought I would add the Tirumph to the listing

Daytona 150bhp I picked up an 03 engine for £550 and with tuneboy software you can map the ecu

Down side is they are not proven in locosts. but cheap hp


Lee

IIRC the Yoshimura EMS is/was a re-branded Power Commander with a few additional features and were quite temperamental.

Be aware that post 95 engine may need a Cat for SVA.

The thing is, although the blade has less power than the current xflow, it will still be quicker. From on following other cars on track I'd say you need at least 170-180bhp from a car engine'd car to give equivalent straight line performance, partially due to the weight and partially due to the gearbox.

Saying that though, having done the blade to R1 conversion the R1 is a useful boost in performance so unless you're on a really tight budget I would go for the Yam engine. Also don't be too scared of the 02/03 injected engines, there's a few more wires to work out what does what but Im certainly no wiring guru and I didnt find it any more taxing than the blade.

Chris

Steve, no SVA needed if he's converting his current car thats already road registered.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hellfire
IIRC the Yoshimura EMS is/was a re-branded Power Commander with a few additional features and were quite temperamental.

---

I seem to recall reading somewhere that Dynojet designed the original EMS for Yoshimura and would possibly explain why the maps are interchangeable.

Suppose it could have been the other way round as well though but who cares?

Phil

Chris, Ooooops having another thick moment there I must learn to read.
Steve.

[Edited on 5/3/06 by stevec]

Just a word on the GSXR-1000, a mate fitted one into an MK de-dion chassis and drove it round France last summer (about 2000 miles I think). He was happy with the performance, he kept the orginal sump - uncut, even though it's a tall engine - and no problems, although that's not tried on track.
The one problem he said he had was the close gearing - first was too tall and 6th too short - by the time he had a diff and wheel size to give him a decent cruising he found that his first was more like 2nd on a blade, making stalling even easier. Unless you lit her up of course
He's currently considering going with a modern car engine (zetec pehaps) for this, his 'touring' car.

the tall first closer gearing thing is common to all the new litre bikes. my r1 will when finished do over 75mph in first and 150mph in 6th whereas a car of similar top speed would do more like 45mph in first.

my aim when ive finished mine is for 500bhp/tonne with fluids plus half a tank of fuel and it should be possible to get my r1 to 213bhp n/a and get the weight to 425kg or atleast a good challenge.

saw this on e-bay

brand new yamaha R1 engine with carbs
Item number: 8042392286
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/brand-new-yamaha-R1-engine-with-carbs_W0QQitemZ8042392286QQcategoryZ25640QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

cossey, out of interest how come you are gearing it so high? Its going to be a right PITA to pull away with such a high first gear, and although with the enclosed Fury bodywork you've got a fair chance of reaching well past 140mph, I can't think of any UK circuit where you'll be able to get anywhere near 140-150mph.

Also, what gets done to an R1 engine to get it to 213bhp N/A, sounds like a very expensive engine to me?

quote:

---

Originally posted by cossey
the tall first closer gearing thing is common to all the new litre bikes. my r1 will when finished do over 75mph in first and 150mph in 6th whereas a car of similar top speed would do more like 45mph in first.

my aim when ive finished mine is for 500bhp/tonne with fluids plus half a tank of fuel and it should be possible to get my r1 to 213bhp n/a and get the weight to 425kg or atleast a good challenge.

---

gearing is to get a half decent cruising speed in top. by doing this 70mph gets to a more reasonable 6750rpm, also those speeds are at 14,000rpm so in reality the gearing isnt as high as it seems.

the engine is a 2006 so 175bhp as stock (although in reality it is a couple more) to that you need to add a decent exhaust, new inlet trumpets (the stock ones are too short), a thinner head gasket to raise the compression (yamaha racing part) and the head gets tidied up ( the domes a polished to reduce detonation, the inlet and exhaust runners are cleaned up to remove the casting marks, the valve seats hould be ok as they are 3 angle as stock)

all of that should net 200-205 bhp when properly mapped ( i have seen dyno plots from several people with similar specs on different dynos so im fairly confident the figures add up) also this will boost low down 2 with a bit of length tuning on the inlet and exhaust to improve the 6000-8000 dip the stock engine has. the dip is mostly due to the exup valve and the lower half of the fuel map being lean to pass emissions regs.

the last 10-15bhp will be a second stage after the car has been through sva and the engine has run in a bit (the engine came out of a less than 2 week old bike that had done under 100 miles), but itll probabily involve boring out to 1050cc with high compression pistons, new rods and cams. i might get away with just cams and rods with the stock bore and pistons but i havent had a chance to have a good look at them yet.

Ah, the mythical dyno plots... well they must be accurate right...

I have seen 2005/6 r1's with stock dyno readouts (on the same dyno) varying between 150 and 170bhp so you better hope your 100 miler is a goodun, otherwise you are gonna need a lot more mods than that, I have yet to see a stock R1 giving 175 at the crank (calculated) and thats on a newly calibrated dyno... not one thats used down your local dyno shop that hasnt seen a service for the last 5 years...

I have seen some putting out more than 180 on old junker dyno's tho...

i dont believe evervy dyno is right but i do believe that taking averages over enough plots and discarding any results that are too far from the norm in either direction should be reasonably accurate.

most dyno results show the stock bike putting down 150-155rwhp which is somewhere arond 170-175 at the crank.

if it doesnt make the power then i will try to cut the weight some more but im sure its possible to get it to atleast 210bhp.

fazer 1000 is a good all rounder, quicker in a bec than the r1 and blade as it has a reworked head giving it a lower power band and more tourque from lower down and is around a grand to buy

quote:

---

Originally posted by cossey
i dont believe evervy dyno is right but i do believe that taking averages over enough plots and discarding any results that are too far from the norm in either direction should be reasonably accurate.

most dyno results show the stock bike putting down 150-155rwhp which is somewhere arond 170-175 at the crank.

if it doesnt make the power then i will try to cut the weight some more but im sure its possible to get it to atleast 210bhp.

---

I was told by Chris that the spare R1 engine I bought from him was dyno'd at 161wrhp..... is this realistic and worth replacing the bent valves to get in?

what year and what has it had done to it?

The new Kwack ZZR1400 looks good, 190bhp (rumoured, I think, at present) @9500 rpm, so it would be more like a high-revving car engine and it's meant to have been tuned for torque. Only trouble is it's not out 'till next month so supplies of second-hand motors may be a little limited at present

sounds worth repairing is its only valvetrain damage.

Maybe worth doing then, guess I really need to strip it and check its only valves before I make a decision...... the list of things to do after the SVA is getting longer. (reverse gear, Race engine etc.)

i would take the head off and check the surface of the pistons, then take the cams out and check them for surface wear and delamination thn check the head for damage around the valve guides.

it should only take an hour if you read the service manual and should be well worth it.

an hour pmsl,it will take you 20 mins to get the old gasket off.
i dont suppose you write the service time limit for yamaha do you

[Edited on 8/3/06 by OX]