marka
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 07:45 AM |
|
|
Fireblade
Hi,
First post and I'll apologise now if what follows is a daft question...
I want to build a fireblade BEC and have been searching ebay etc for an engine kit.
Does anyone have any views on which engine represents best value for money / reliability
893, 918, 929, 954 or 998
and roughly what price I should be looking at paying
Many thanks
|
|
|
|
|
fesycresy
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 08:09 AM |
|
|
Stick with the later carb'd versions, later injected Blades have the HISS ignition system (avoid), I think the 918 would be the choice.
Try Mal at Yorkshire engines (do a search), then buy an R1 motor !
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The sooner you fall behind, the more time you'll have to catch up.
|
|
|
tom windmill
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 09:54 AM |
|
|
hi,
we had the 929 injection fireblade which went well with a dynojet system mapped by holeshot racing. we got the engine from ebay for £800 with all of
the ancillaries. For the price i would look at maybe an R1 engine as they have slightly more torque and there are plenty of them about so they are
'tried & tested' in my opinion the R1 choice seems better value for money as for if not the same just a little more money you get more
torque. Also the kawasaki ZX9 seems to be about on par with the blade engine. So in my opinion the R1 is best value for money but see what everyone
else says.
Tom
[Edited on 25/5/06 by tom windmill]
|
|
|
marka
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 12:04 PM |
|
|
Hello again and thanks for the replies
As you've mentioned the R1 is this the way to go? Do you think the fireblade will result in repeated stalling / spinning the wheels in an effort
to get away ?!?!
I'd like to think it won't be like that!
cheers
Mark
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 12:09 PM |
|
|
I have an R1 BEC and have no problem pulling away. You only spin the wheels if trying very hard. Stalling is not a problem if you have enough travel
on your pedal. I doub't the fireblade engine would be any worse.
R1s have more power than blades. This improves acceleration at the top end of road legal speeds. Perhaps only of real benefit on trackdays.
|
|
|
mark chandler
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 12:17 PM |
|
|
My two pennies worth.
Build it around an 893 blade engine, high emmisions allowed as a pre aug 93 engine so no CAT required.
This should cost £300 - £500 all in (get the headers and modify so limiting your spend on this lump.
Once SVA'd if you are unhappy with the performance upgrade and sell on the old lump.
Regards Mark
|
|
|
Lightning
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 12:30 PM |
|
|
Agree with you all. I have 893 RRS No problem with stalling etc and pulls well. R1 would be my choice too.
But the blade has one advantage if you break it you can get another engine less ancillaries for about £200 as I did off ebay. This gives great piece
of mind as you thrash the pants off it.
Steve
|
|
|
the_fbi
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 06:26 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
R1s have more power than blades. This improves acceleration at the top end of road legal speeds. Perhaps only of real benefit on trackdays.
954's are 149bhp (and 77ft/lb) as standard which is the same as an R1?
HISS system isn't a problem, actually surely its a benefit? A factory imobiliser, thats a good thing.
Just need to make sure you get all the parts you need, key and ignition barrel with the HISS around it (and perhaps the clocks too, although not
sure).
If you get one which is missing the HISS then there are a number of ways around it, USA loom and ECU for one.
I've got a 919 in the Megablade currently and a 1800 mile 954 which will go in if the 919 ever dies, the only problem being the exhaust
isn't a straight swap and I'd need a fuel return line putting in.
As has been said, great value for money engine.
What does an R1 put out bhp/lbft?
|
|
|
Hellfire
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 06:36 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mark chandler
My two pennies worth.
Build it around an 893 blade engine, high emmisions allowed as a pre aug 93 engine so no CAT required.
This should cost £300 - £500 all in (get the headers and modify so limiting your spend on this lump.
Once SVA'd if you are unhappy with the performance upgrade and sell on the old lump.
Regards Mark
Perhaps that should read pre- August 1995 I also very much doubt that you can get an 893cc Fireblade for £500 all in.
The 893cc Fireblade is a cracking engine and despite what most people will tell you, there isn't a great deal of difference between that and the
R1's.
Phil
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 07:22 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by the_fbi
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
R1s have more power than blades.
954's are 149bhp (and 77ft/lb) as standard which is the same as an R1?
carbed blades are about 135 and fuel injected are 149 as you say.
carbed R1s are about 150 and fuel injected are about 180.
Both are fast.
|
|
|
786evo8
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 07:47 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lightning
.....engine less ancillaries for about £200 as I did off ebay.......
sounds like a cracking deal but what are engine ancillaries? sump etc?
cheers
jav
-------------------------
jav ;-)
MLR evo forum (clicky)
|
|
|
the_fbi
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 08:20 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
quote:
Originally posted by the_fbi
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
R1s have more power than blades.
954's are 149bhp (and 77ft/lb) as standard which is the same as an R1?
carbed blades are about 135 and fuel injected are 149 as you say.
carbed R1s are about 150 and fuel injected are about 180.
Both are fast.
Not sure where your figures came from, the 2002 R1 is 152bhp. The latest and greatest may be 180 but the latest 2005 blade engine is 178bhp so they
are the same anyway.
|
|
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 08:23 PM |
|
|
you wont be disappointed with an 893 blade, I wasn't
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 08:27 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by the_fbi
Not sure where your figures came from, the 2002 R1 is 152bhp. The latest and greatest may be 180.
2004 onwards is 180 in round figures. There have been intermediate modles between the 1998 R1 and the latest 2006 version but it would be just nerdy
to quote them all, wouldn't it?
|
|
|
Lightning
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 08:38 PM |
|
|
quote:
sounds like a cracking deal but what are engine ancillaries? sump etc?
No carbs, wiring loom ECU etc but came with gearbox starter motor alternator clutch sump etc.
Steve
|
|
|
the_fbi
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 08:52 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
quote:
Originally posted by the_fbi
Not sure where your figures came from, the 2002 R1 is 152bhp. The latest and greatest may be 180.
2004 onwards is 180 in round figures. There have been intermediate modles between the 1998 R1 and the latest 2006 version but it would be just nerdy
to quote them all, wouldn't it?
Apart from the fact that its completely incorrect to quote the injected ones at 180 when it only applies to the very latest models.
And then quote the early blade engines as 149 in comparison.
May as well just say that blades are 178 and R1's are 180 which we (apart from the poor newbie who needs accurate advice) all know is
rubbish.
A newbie needs accurate advice else he may as well stick a finger in the air.
|
|
|
zxrlocost
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 09:12 PM |
|
|
my 2p worth as much as I love my r1 performance
the amount of hassle and on the edge of seat setting up which still hasnt got through SVA
stick a pre 95 engine in any mods can come after
so deff go for early blade which can easily be tweeked up
or replaced at a later date
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
ChrisGamlin
|
| posted on 25/5/06 at 09:16 PM |
|
|
Ive had both in my car, and they are both good reliable engines and you won't go wrong whatever you chose, but if you can stretch to the R1 then
I would recommend it. Apart from the extra ponies (it is noticable), the clutch is much bigger on the R1 which helps reliability and seems to make it
less prone to slipping when the plates start wearing a bit, compared to the blade, and the gearbox is far nicer too, much more precise and less prone
to false neutrals than the blade. Also unless you go for an injected (and far less proven in BEC circles) blade engine, the newest engine you're
going to get hold of is a '99 RRX. With the R1, you have the choice of anything up to 2003 injected R1s before the engine changes and again
becomes a little unproven.
As I said though, you wont be disapointed with either, and as others have mentioned the blade does give you the option of easy emissions at SVA with
the pre-95 engine which is a bonus if you can find a good engine.
|
|
|
.jpg){kind=avatar}
