Wow, only a hp diff?? So what is the weight diff between the F2 and F3, and wher eis the F3 picken up the extra weight from??

 

F3 picked up about 6lbs. It came from the wider rear rim. The radiator was slightly larger and holds more fluid. Larger rotors which didn't improve braking. Tons of ram air tubes, valves & hoses which made the bike harder to tune and more stuff to go wrong. The airbox snorkle which gets in the way of a stem stand. Also the fuel pump & relays needed because of the ram air.

 

you've never used the brakes hard if you think that the F3 brakes werent an improvement from the F2 brakes.
there arent tons of ram air tubes, its 1 snorkle that like you say blocks the lower part of the steering stem, and all it really equates to is a 6" wide by 3" high addition to the F2 snorkles that make it so you're not sucking up the air behind the radiator.

really that just sounds like a bash on the F3 out of nothing more than dislike for the bike rather than actual fact...

 

Well, I've ridden several F3 and a bunch of F2's both on and off the track. Brakes felt about the same on both.

Go look at the solenoid valve parts diagram. There are also 2 side air tubes, 6 other hose, 5 connecter, 2 valve & a filter that are used to pressurize the float bowls on the F3 because of the ram air. F2 has none of that. Its complicated, it added weight, it was inconvenience and added little benefit.

It was all facts and I wasn't trying to bash F3's at all, they are great bikes. The only real world improvement they got was a better suspension over the early F2.

 

The 1994 F2 has a cartridge fork ICYDK.

 

good info here :-D

 

I recently purchased a supposedly well set up 94 F2 track bike that started life with California superbikes race school. Yesterday I got a pretty stock 96 F3 for the road with just a Scorpion can and centre stand removed. The F3 is superior everywhere although they are both pretty crap in tight turns, in fact the worst handling sports bikes I've owned for that. Hopefully I will be able to make adjustments to improve the speed of the steering but as stock bikes on stock settings they have no chance against decent riders on modern tackle. I'm fairly sure my 93 FZR600 would have beaten the F2 (it did when my mate had it but he isn't as fast as me) and although the F3 is considerably faster, the FZR would probably have reeled it back in on the tighter bends.
I had a 2002 F4i Sport for a while and I think the F3 was pretty much as quick but the F4 didn't have the irritating slight flat spot between 6 and 7500rpm that the both the F2 and F3 seem to have.
I also had a 1990 jellymould which was as quick as the FZR but the handling was hopeless so I never tried anything silly with it.
Brakes are good on both F2 & F3 but the floating discs give better feel, rolling stoppies are easy on the 3. Handing and suspension is the same on both (I have and F3 rear wheel on the F2). I've taken the fairing off the F2 for my next trackday as I don't think it is fast enough to need it, I wouldn't take the fairing off the F3. The F3 feels almost as quick as my R6 in a straight line.

 

holy old thread..

 

Too many variables to worry about small horsepower differences, unless you're talking about 20+ HP difference with similarly skilled riders. I'd rather be a skilled rider at 160 lbs on an F2 than an unskilled rider at 200 lbs on an F3. The establishment has brainwashed you into being preoccupied with horsepower when it's not overly important, but sounds good.

 

ok ..i guess all us F2 guys better not go to bed then