Older 600's vs newer 600's
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,026
Likes: 2
From: Dalton, GA
True, I know one such rider on a 250.
Still, rider aside the newer bikes aren't THAT much better if you have a properly setup F2. Granted stock for stock these bikes don't compare, but a moderately modified F2 will compare favorably to a semi-modern bike (early 2000's).
Still, rider aside the newer bikes aren't THAT much better if you have a properly setup F2. Granted stock for stock these bikes don't compare, but a moderately modified F2 will compare favorably to a semi-modern bike (early 2000's).
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 4,471
Likes: 4
From: West Philly, PA!
Don't think they blow away the older bikes in the top end. Getting to top speed... yeah, my F4i responds to fractions of throttle. Ripping it open, she's trying to rear up and roll me off the back end.
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,026
Likes: 2
From: Dalton, GA
Yea top speed they are all about the same, not that a give a rats **** about top speed lol
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 743
Likes: 4
From: Oregon / 503
Bah, that's a bunch of hogwash!
F2 STOCK 1/4 --> 11.30 @ 120.8 (Cycleword)
2006 F4i Stock 1/4 --> 11.28 @ 122.1 (Cycleword)
2003 600RR stock 1/4 --> 10.73 @ 129.7 (Cycleword)
The difference in 1/4 mile ***** out accelerating is roughly equivalent to that a slight hesitation between the F2 and an RR, and damn near identical against a stock F4i. If you can't work an F2 against a modern super sport and keep up, you should invest in some more tampons!
F2 STOCK 1/4 --> 11.30 @ 120.8 (Cycleword)
2006 F4i Stock 1/4 --> 11.28 @ 122.1 (Cycleword)
2003 600RR stock 1/4 --> 10.73 @ 129.7 (Cycleword)
The difference in 1/4 mile ***** out accelerating is roughly equivalent to that a slight hesitation between the F2 and an RR, and damn near identical against a stock F4i. If you can't work an F2 against a modern super sport and keep up, you should invest in some more tampons!
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,026
Likes: 2
From: Dalton, GA
Bah, that's a bunch of hogwash!
F2 STOCK 1/4 --> 11.30 @ 120.8 (Cycleword)
2006 F4i Stock 1/4 --> 11.28 @ 122.1 (Cycleword)
2003 600RR stock 1/4 --> 10.73 @ 129.7 (Cycleword)
The difference in 1/4 mile ***** out accelerating is roughly equivalent to that a slight hesitation between the F2 and an RR, and damn near identical against a stock F4i. If you can't work an F2 against a modern super sport and keep up, you should invest in some more tampons!
F2 STOCK 1/4 --> 11.30 @ 120.8 (Cycleword)
2006 F4i Stock 1/4 --> 11.28 @ 122.1 (Cycleword)
2003 600RR stock 1/4 --> 10.73 @ 129.7 (Cycleword)
The difference in 1/4 mile ***** out accelerating is roughly equivalent to that a slight hesitation between the F2 and an RR, and damn near identical against a stock F4i. If you can't work an F2 against a modern super sport and keep up, you should invest in some more tampons!
No one said a older 600 wouldnt 'keep up' with the newer breeds, just it wouldnt be leading the pack unless its rider was the better rider of the pack
until you ride a newer RR one cant appreciate the improvements in handling etc they offer, and too think that 15yo tech is on par with modern tech, is well delusional lol.
I love my old F4, but I know good n well its no match bike to bike with the newer breed.
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 743
Likes: 4
From: Oregon / 503
.02 is significant only to seasoned drag racers! To 95% of the riders who will ever straddle these bikes, .02 seconds is meaningless drivel.
If we're going to say the F2 doesn't compare to other bikes... it had better be because more than just a measly 5% of the riders on these bikes benefit notably from the differences in technology.
If it makes you feel better, sure 5% of the riders out there can destroy an F2 with an RR. The other 95% will largely be equal due to limitations incurred before the bikes limitations.
If we're going to say the F2 doesn't compare to other bikes... it had better be because more than just a measly 5% of the riders on these bikes benefit notably from the differences in technology.
If it makes you feel better, sure 5% of the riders out there can destroy an F2 with an RR. The other 95% will largely be equal due to limitations incurred before the bikes limitations.
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,026
Likes: 2
From: Dalton, GA
.02 is significant only to seasoned drag racers! To 95% of the riders who will ever straddle these bikes, .02 seconds is meaningless drivel.
If we're going to say the F2 doesn't compare to other bikes... it had better be because more than just a measly 5% of the riders on these bikes benefit notably from the differences in technology.
If it makes you feel better, sure 5% of the riders out there can destroy an F2 with an RR. The other 95% will largely be equal due to limitations incurred before the bikes limitations.
If we're going to say the F2 doesn't compare to other bikes... it had better be because more than just a measly 5% of the riders on these bikes benefit notably from the differences in technology.
If it makes you feel better, sure 5% of the riders out there can destroy an F2 with an RR. The other 95% will largely be equal due to limitations incurred before the bikes limitations.
Yea for the average rider riding from one bike night to the other wont notice much more than the older bikes being more comfy
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 743
Likes: 4
From: Oregon / 503
This person is trying to sell you on the concept that the F2 doesn't compare to modern fuel injected bikes on "getting to top speed". They're wrong
In the twisties is awhole new section. The stock suspension is subpar. With a bit of upgrading though (re-springing, F2/F3 forks, f3 rear shock) it compares quite favorably, and again you won't notice the difference until you're up against an experienced track rider really giving it their all. That's when this bike become lackluster. That number is again, a bit more like 5-10% of all riders and riding situations, depending on where you live. Portland seems to be full of track all stars...