Motorcyclist clocked at 245km/h

i think about 260 would be pushing it, maybe close 270 if you were very
small and aero dynamicly hugging the tank with no arms and legs..

I wish i had a race track around this place.

 

he'll die when he see's the $20,000 speeding ticket

 

I don't think so...

Top indicated speed is different to genuine speed - I think the top I
saw indicated (on a race track, clearly) wouldn't have been much more
than 250-255 IIRC

JL

 

I think you guys are confusing a late 80s early 90s ZZR11 with a current
model ZZR12 having considerably more HP...

JL
(they might have been the quickest thing on the road in their day, but
not genuine 280 quick)

 

I'm sorry, excuse me while I chortle. A CBR 600F1 with what 80-90HP and
200Kg is going to do 260-270 ? Yeah right.

I doubt the F4 is capable of more than 250-255 with an extra 25Hp and
about 25Kg less weight.

JL

 

A quick Google retrieves a transcript of a 1996 Performance Bikes
comparo between the 1100 and the Blackbird; Blackbird wins, 138bph to
the ZZ-R's 132. In the print copy of a shootout between the 'Busa, the
ZX-12R, the Blackbird and the ZZ-R1200, the ZZ-R1200 registered 134hp.

 

Well pah to you! Look here: (about 6 bikes down)
http://www.hyp4r.com/hayabusa/classic_cycles.htm
"It was THE fastest series bikes in the world for close to a decade. Top
speed of around 280kph."

There ABSOLUTELY INCONTRAVERTIBLE PROOF (and I'll killfile you if you
argue)!

 

(By the way "2y0" above was supposed to be "270" but my fingers came up
short)

I found a 1997 AMCN quick-test but it had no top speed however the 1995
"still numero uno" test says
"...the first ZZR-1100's 280kmh-plus oomph was hardly lacking..."
and the new (D) model has an estimated top speed of 290 kmh!

So it's not my fault it's the magazines I read!!

I know that everything in this magazine is 100% accurate because just a few
pages later is the news that Britten-engined "Indians" will be manufactured
in NZ now that John Britten has entered into an agreement with the brand
owners!!
Clem
(Funnily enough, half of page 112 of this very issue is missing because it
was the entry form for the upcoming Moto-Spectacular at Phillip Island....
I'll have to read the next issue to see if I had a good time or not!)

 

A freind has seen 267 on the speedo with a 2004 CBR600RR. Of course we
don't know what the speedo error is.

But on the subject of ZZR1100's I have personally done 295 (measured with
radar) on a ZZR1100 with big bore kit, pipes, head ported, carby's jetted.
My mate who isn't such a lard ass as me has done 307.

 

Which one's rear wheel wheel and which one's crank ? Apples with apples ?

I'd be betting the 11 was crank (that sounds about right) and the 12 was
RW, but I could be wrong, it's been known to happen, I'll be surprised
to hear they only managed to wring 2Hp more out of a 10 year newer
engine with an extra 100cc though

I could be wrong, it has happened before but while the Z11 was a
rocketship for it's day, my briefly owned R1 felt shitloads quicker, and
I sincerely doubt 280 indicated let alone real. IIRC the blackbird was
*just* good for 280, and that made it quicker than the Z11

JL
(look it's 15 years since I had the thing I'm starting to doubt my
memory now)

 

Please don't killfile me massah ! ANYTHING but that !!

JL
(alright, my dodgy memory is obviously dodgier than I thought it was, I
was wrong )

 

Yeah that'd be about what I'd expect, circa 10% optimistic speedo error
(the norm) would make that 245 real and about what I'd expect from the
hp/weight and aeros of the F4.

OK OK I was wrong

JL
(I musta had the Z11 with the spark plug missing

 

Both are dyno-recorded rear-wheel outputs. It's one thing PB's always
been fastidious about. For some reason, 147hp and 164hp sound about
right for the claimed crank power figures for the ZZ-R11 and the Blackbird.

It makes sense that the ZZ-R1200 wouldn't be much more powerful than the
1100. It's 100cc bigger, but, beyond that, it's practically the same
engine, running catalytic converters, and tuned for midrange instead of
top end. They weren't trying to wring big peak horsepower when they
built the 1200.

 

John said....

Didn't Robbie Phillis clock 280 km/h down PI's main straight back in
1990, when the ZZR11 was first released? I remember him wishing for that
sort of grunt for his then ZXR Superbike...

Anyway, mine pulled 258 km/h (according to the GPS). Mind you, the bike
had 100,000 km/h on the clock and it was a relatively short bit of road.
So, I don't know what it would've topped out at.

 

The bike engine builders must have peaked there in the late 80's and early
90's with the litre plus machines. My '93 GSXR1100 had an alleged 155HP and
10 years down the track the new generation GSXR1000s are only good for about
10hp more than that. I think they're invested their money in the development
of 600cc engines instead.

Nev..
'03 ZX12R

 

So you've actually owned and thrashed one and I've only Googled a page on a
foreign website but you're ceding to my greater knowlege?
Fark; you're a PUSHOVER!!
Clem

 

Look who I brought!!

I'm the hero!

Yaaaaa, Zoidberg!!

Hammo

 

Hurrah, a new nickname for Hammo! (the skin colour is about right too)

-----professor sharks

 

Errm that's not my recollection of what I read on it's release (although
of course I could be wrong again), I could have sworn the 12's engine
was new or a detuned version of the ZX12's - I'd be staggered if they
hadn't updated a 17 year old design.

Sure no argument, it's meant to back up against the blackbird so they
wanted a good mix of torque and HP, but there's a helluva lot of
difference between mid/late 80's engine tech and early 00's engine
tech... they should be squeezing a lot more HP out of it.

JL

 

It's funny because it's poisonous!

Hammo

Professor? I thought Zapp would be your inspiration!! (Kiff, point to the
medal I won!)