I'm even more impressed then the time I saw the pic of you pointing that gun! Damn!

 

[sm=jawdrop.gif] damn, what year is that bike? that thing is clean....

and how do you like the 1098? my uncle is wanting to get a new bike and can't decide between the 1098 or an R1 (going mainly on looks i think).

 

So if weight is not as important as center of mass then I still dont understand why there is big difference. If we compare f4i to 1000RR - all main components are located on similar places, which means weight distribution is very similar. What makes the difference then?

Also, if the only thing that stops liter bikes frombeing as flickable as 600 is weight distribution, then why theyspending money on researching new light materials to shave off those 5 extra lbs from year to yearthat won't make any noticable differnce, if all they need to do is to take what they have and move around,to move center of mass to where it should be (higher?). Even if it will bejust someuseless ballast on the top, it should still be the winner?

 

weight distribution and balance are important, but a 450 pound bike with proper weight distribution should outperform a 400 pound bike with proper weight distribution. this is why research is done on lighter-weight materials. sure the difference from one year to the next might not be that significant, but consider the difference over a longer period of time. my '92 Katana 600 had a steel frame, and that thing was HEAVY. my '01 929 feels likea mountain bike compared to the Katana, both because of its lighter weight and better distribution/center-of-mass. unsprung weight (wheels, calipers, rotors, etc) should also be kept as light as possible because their load isn't distributed through the suspension. also a light weight exhaust can be beneficial, because most exhausts exit to one side, (slightly) upsetting the side-to-side balance of weight. if you ride primarily on the street, then these things won't really matter as much.. but if you're racing, they can be the difference between a podium finish and a middle-of-the-pack finish. i've never raced sportbikes but i used to race circle track cars and most of the same general principles apply... reduce unsprung weight as much as possible, make the car as light as possible, and then add balast (the cars have a minimum weight for each class at most circle track venues) to get the right distribution of weight along with the proper suspension setup, or you'll run consistently in the middle of the pack at best.

 

Well it's not as simple as weight to center mass. I was trying to say that all the little differences combine together to create a significantly different effect. Though I was also saying that the effect was not THAT significant. Now the Honda site is down for the 1000RR as I write this, but I do believe that the F4i has a slightly steeper rake (by a degree or less) and slightly less trail (by less than an inch) and slightly lower seat height (implying a lower center). The weight distribution (percent on front wheel vs rear wheel) is probably geared to support the greater rear wheel traction demands than on a less powerful bike. The wheelbase of the F4i is probably an inch or two shorter than the 1000RR. And then the F4i does indeed weigh a couple pounds less overall. So the F4i probably does handle abit better than the 1000RR. The 600RR is lighter still and designed to be even nimbler still. These little fractions of a degree and fractions of an inch differences in the geometries of the three bikes combine with the slight differences in weight to create differences in handling. The differences will be significant, with the 600RR being the lightest and nimblest, followed by the F4i, and then the 1000RR. However, to all but the world-class racers, the differences are not super great. And all 3 bikes will handle similarly when compared against Gold Wings, Cruisers, Sport Tourers, and bikes from other classes.

I agree with you that the F4i will probably handle closer to the 600RR than it will to the 1000RR even though its weight is closer to the 1000RR, seeing as the two 600s are likely to have more similarities in design. However, the 1000RR will be the most markedly different overall because of the overwhelming power. The 600RR has a noticeable edge over the F4i in terms of power, but both are comlpletely dwarfed by the literbike. That's why I said, if you need the speed, go for the 1000RR. It will handle close enough to your F4i.

Anyway, people seem to say that the 600RR is noticeably more flickable than the literbike. The 30-lb difference in weight factors into that along with the slight differences in geometries to create that effect. The F4i is probably somewhere between the two in handling. Not having ever ridden an F4i or a 1000RR, I am not the guy to critique exactly where it will fall.\

The bikes are indeed all similar in their specs, weight included. They will all handle similarly when compared to bikes of other genres. However, the little differences add up to noticeable effect.

 

I think you forgot to add a word or something in there because if both bikes had same engines and rider weights and had proper weight distribution, the lighter bike would beat the heavier one every time.

In any event, unless you are racing, 18lbs makes no difference in rideability. Also, you are looking at a lot of HP difference between those two bike and that 18lbs won't matter at all when on the gas.

I have an F2 and I can tell the difference between when the tank is full and when it is 3 gallons lighter. Turning is much easier when the bike is almost empty. Of course, this is because the weght is at the top of the bike. If the tank was at the bottom, you wouldn't be able to tell.

 

Another factor in the bike's flickability is tire profile. The 1000RR has a 190/50 rear tire, and the 600RR and F4i have a 180/55.

The liter bike needs more rubber to transfer all that power to the road without spinning out, but it comes at a cost in how easy it falls into a turn.

 

i guess i failed to elaborate on what i meant by "outperform"... i was mainly referring to the bike's ability to corner (not the bike's overall performance, which would include handling AND acceleration), which depends more on weight/geometry/suspension setup than power (of course you can manipulate the way it handles with the throttle as well, but you're not going to take a turn at full throttle very often).

i remember reading something not too long ago about tire profile and the bike's turn-in characteristics, but i wish i could find more tests and/or studies that have been done on this. i do remember reading that as rear tire profiles kept getting wider, they found that it was (slightly) more difficult to get the bikes to turn in, but like you said, the extra rubber is needed for the liter bike to transfer the power to the road without spinning out.

 

She is clean as a whistle in that pic...that was right after I put her back together after new paint and some other mods I made.

Its a 2002, I bought it with 11K miles on it. It was originally silver, but I painted it red, has an undertail, hugger, high mount renegade exhaust, custom decals, solos seat cowl (not in the pic), and chromed rims.

the 1098 is a fricken trip! just has a bottomless pit of torque. I love the ducati, but need to get an aftermarket exhaust. I have to install my new open clutch cover and new pressure plate on it, and then save up for the exhaust. (expensive!) If you want to see a full pic of the duc, I have one on my myspace page in my photos. Its not set to private anymore for the complainers...lol.

 

forgot to add, I black chromed the alternator and clutch covers. It looks sharp, kind of a blueish tone to it.