F4i - Main Forum Main F4i discussion board

2001 F4i's the stronger ones?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 10, 2010 | 01:36 PM
  #1  
600F4inoober's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
From: Scottsdale Arizona
Default 2001 F4i's the stronger ones?

Hey everyone,

So I ran across quite a few posts stating that the first year F4i, 2001, is a bit stronger than 2002-2006 due to Honda not "dumbing" it down. Below is a statement off of this site

"Remember they tuned the f4i down in 2002 compare an 01 f4i to the RR"
(They were comparing an F4i to an RR)

Now I understand that in 2003 they may have dumbed the F4i down due to trying to make a differentiation between the release of the RR..so that makes some sense...but I was wondering if anyone has any concrete evidence that the 2001 F4i's are indeed not "dumbed" down or unaltered from the factory? If so, what things would Honda even dumb down? I would assume not hardware but rather just a more relaxed tune/ECU?
 

Last edited by 600F4inoober; Sep 10, 2010 at 01:38 PM.
Reply
Old Sep 10, 2010 | 02:10 PM
  #2  
PlayfulGod's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,026
Likes: 2
From: Dalton, GA
Default

they're on crack, emission devices were added to the bike
 
Reply
Old Sep 10, 2010 | 02:44 PM
  #3  
R Dub's Avatar
October 2011 ROTM
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,333
Likes: 0
From: Burbs of Chicago
Default

I have heard that the 04-06 were de-tuned compared to the 01-03. I think its all a bunch of BS. Even if it is de-tuned you'll never feel the difference especially on the street.
 
Reply
Old Sep 10, 2010 | 08:16 PM
  #4  
kilgoretrout's Avatar
Administrator - Retired
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,194
Likes: 6
From: PA, USA
Default

I'm wondering if the idea came from the following stats?
This was reported by MCN and it shows 6.5 less RWHP on the '06 vs. the '01. Less torque and 4lbs heavier, too.

CBR600F4i ’01 VS. '06
RWHP 96.6 VS. 90.1
RWTQ 43.6 VS. 40.3
WT 436 VS. 440
MPGAVG 40.7 VS. 36.7
TOPSPD 155 VS. 156
0-60MPH 2.89 VS. 3.52
0-100MPH 6.61 VS. 7.94
1/4mile 10.59 VS. 11.26
1/4SPD 128.23 VS. 121.56
60-0 (FT) 111.3 VS. 123.5
P:W 1:4.51 VS. 1:4.88

Not saying that anyone is gonna be able to tell the difference on the street.... or that the numbers are right.... or that they aren't just slightly different due to error, worldwide conspiracy, etc... but they appear to be reported differently.
Could be the root of the rumors.
 
Reply
Old Sep 10, 2010 | 09:51 PM
  #5  
halomatic's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Default

The extra weight must be that banana seat! Haha...
 
Reply
Old Sep 11, 2010 | 01:33 AM
  #6  
Zero1080's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,184
Likes: 2
Default

The weight wouldn't surprise me. The whole back end of the bike is different. Plus, a random bolt here or there can add up.

However, I could see a different ECU was probably used. I doubt they actually spent time and money to make the newer ones slower even if to compare to the RR. That's like Lamborghini making their cars slower now so in 3 years they can be "faster"
 
Reply
Old Sep 11, 2010 | 06:43 AM
  #7  
Timmy_Jones's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
From: Maine
Default

Running a 10.59 stock quarter mile??? Hot damn!
 
Reply
Old Sep 11, 2010 | 05:59 PM
  #8  
botlfed's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Timmy_Jones
Running a 10.59 stock quarter mile??? Hot damn!
That can't be right.
 
Reply
Old Sep 12, 2010 | 04:42 AM
  #9  
rd91si's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
From: Clackamas Oregon
Default

05 and 06 had cat installed in the exaust, and cali models have o2 senor,

and different ecu.
 
Reply
Old Sep 12, 2010 | 08:04 AM
  #10  
heyitsmelam's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Default

actually all 06's have o2 sensor, not just cali models.
 
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:19 PM.