motorcycle news bullshit

S1000RR  FORUM

Help Support S1000RR FORUM:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

cally1066

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
785
Reaction score
0
I was just thinking do the team at mcn feel foolish now saying the r1 was a better track bike than the new bmw as so far in British superstock BMW first and second , world super stock BMW wins and guy martin wins on the stock BMW on the roads , I think we all made the best decision buying the bmw
 
I've never really cared about magazine group tests to be honest. I'm sure on that day with those riders, the R1 was the better bike for them, I doubt they wouldn't call it like they see it. A professional racer on a Superstock bike is a different package under different circumstances, and will see it differently.

Even if the R1 was twice the bike the BMW is, my RR still blows me away to exactly the same extent it did the day I got it. The fact it won a race doesn't really change anything either.

I wanted to be an early adopter of sportsbike active suspension (my car is fully active and I'm a total convert) and considered waiting for the R1 but 19K is too much, even if it were possible to get an R1M.

There's always something better round the corner, I just enjoy what I have.
 
Last edited:
I've never really cared about magazine group tests to be honest. I'm sure on that day with those riders, the R1 was the better bike for them, I doubt they wouldn't call it like they see it. A professional racer on a Superstock bike is a different package under different circumstances, and will see it differently.

Even if the R1 was twice the bike the BMW is, my RR still blows me away to exactly the same extent it did the day I got it. The fact it won a race doesn't really change anything either.

I wanted to be an early adopter of sportsbike active suspension (my car is fully active and I'm a total convert) and considered waiting for the R1 but 19K is too much, even if it were possible to get an R1M.

There's always something better round the corner, I just enjoy what I have.

+1
 
The electronics we all enjoy on the S1000RR are not allowed in WSBK and BSB
 
We've discussed the MCN test on another thread and everyone's got their own opinion. Personally I'm never going to use all the ability of my RR and wouldn't if I bought an R1 either. The great thing about the RR is not just its outrageous pace and handling, but in comparison with the R1 its superior versatility, useful tech and comfort as a road bike, which is why my ?15k went on another RR and not on what would have been my third R1
 
Last edited:
2003 (K3, K4)[edit]

Don't know how accurate Wikipedia is, but it has the K5 as 201kgs wet.

After the GSX-R1000 had been three years on the roads and race tracks, Suzuki put out a new version of the model in late September 2002. Suzuki engineers had been working on the three things that made a fast bike faster; weight, power and handling. The 2003 year's GSX-R1000 was improved in all three counts. It weighed less, had more power/torque and handled better.
The physical dimensions of the bike were almost identical with the previous year's model. The seat height and the overall height were somewhat lower but the geometry of the bike was exactly the same as before. The already rigid aluminum alloy frame was newly designed and enforced with internal ribs. The frame as well as the wheels were now coated black.
The front brakes were also new. Suzuki decided to drop the six-piston calipers. The new radially mounted four-piston calipers weigh 30 grams less and grip smaller 300 mm (12 in) discs that save another 300 g (0.66 lb). Though smaller, Suzuki claimed that the new brakes provide better stopping and turn-in performance.
The headlights of the 2003 year's GSX-R1000 were mounted vertically to enable the ram-air intakes in the front to be placed 20 mm (0.79 in) nearer the bike's center line. The new design was very much inspired by the look of the Hayabusa. The instruments were also redesigned.
The cylinder displacement of the engine remained the same 988 cc (60.3 cu in), but more power/torque and better throttle response had been achieved by adding four ventilation holes between the cylinders to equalize crankcase pressure beneath the pistons, moving the air intake nearer to the centerline and upgrading the engine management system from a 16-bit to a 32-bit ECU. The entire exhaust system was now made of titanium to save an additional 1.32 lb (0.60 kg) and the tail light was replaced with LEDs.
The 2003 model carried over to 2004 without any significant improvements.
2005 (K5, K6)[edit]

The 2005 model year GSX-R1000 had a redesigned engine and chassis. It had 4.4 lb (2.0 kg) lower weight than the previous model and the engine had an 11 cc (0.67 cu in) larger piston displacement. It had a totally new frame reducing the total length of the bike by 1.6 in (41 mm) but reducing its wheelbase only 0.02 in (0.51 mm). There were new brakes with radial mounted calipers and 310 mm (12 in) discs at the front. The new titanium silencer (catalytic in Europe) was said to be designed to reduce turbulence to minimum. This model weighs in at a mere 365 lbs dry, putting it towards the top of the power-to-weight ratio charts.
The 2005 model has a tested wet weight of 444 lb (201 kg).[SUP][4][/SUP] Power output is tested 162.1 hp (120.9 kW) at 11,500 rpm and peak torque is 79.9 ft?lbf (108.3 N?m) at 8,500 rpm.[SUP][4][/SUP]
The 2005 model carried over to 2006 without any significant improvements other than a few appearance changes.
2007 (K7, K8)[edit]

On September 22, 2006, Suzuki revealed a significantly updated GSX-R1000 for 2007 at the Paris motor show. The new bike gained 14 lb (6.4 kg) over the 2006 model which was due to its new exhaust system and new emissions regulations. To counter this weight increase, Suzuki claimed improved aerodynamics along with a faster revving engine and larger throttle body. Although not a completely new model, the engine and chassis have been updated. It also featured three different engine mapping configurations, selectable via two buttons located on the right handlebar. One up, and one down arrow to cycle between Mode A (unrestricted), Mode B (reduced power until 50% throttle is applied), and Mode C (reduced power throughout the rpm regardless of throttle application). It also received a hydraulic clutch.
The 2007 model carried over to 2008 without any significant improvements.
 
Last edited:
Had a K3 for ten years, then bought the S thou in 2013, but still had the Gixxer for a while so rode both and could compare. Biggest difference I noticed in the beginning was how much better the brakes were on the Beemer. Not just a bit better, way better. The other thing was the clip ons were much wider on the Beemer which gave you feeling of better control and balance at low speed. Another difference was a feeling of sitting higher on the Beemer. Plus points for the Suzuki were a silky smooth motor and gearbox, definitely a little more bottom end grunt, but nowhere near the same screaming rush from 7k like the Beemer has! Didn't notice much difference in weight, the Suzuki felt fractionally lighter. Much lighter throttle on the Suzuki. But the overriding difference? That the Suzuki was the past and the Beemer the future. A modern sports bike.
 
Back
Top