Yamaha FZ-09 Forum banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Power to Weight Ratio FZ09 vs. my previous ride

The bike that I replaced with the FZ09 was a 2009 Kawasaki Concours 14. When I was still considering the FZ, I researched the HP and Torque of both bikes just to see if/what I might be giving up in terms on performance.

The Concours weighs in at 693 lbs wet with a measured 133 HP at the wheel, 102 Ft. lbs. of torque. This equates to 5.21 lbs per HP and 6.79 lbs per ft. lb. of torque.
The FZ weighs in at 404 lbs wet with a measured 107 HP at the wheel, 64.5 ft. lbs. of torque (M4 exhaust). This equate to 3.78 lbs. per HP and 6.26 lbs per ft. lb. of torque.

I was a little concerned about downsizing and what might be lost in performance. I was pleasantly surprised that I would be going from a 1398 cc in-line 4 to a 847 cc triple, while gaining performance.

Wonder how other bikes match up?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,202 Posts
Power to Weight Ratio FZ09 vs. my previous ride

The bike that I replaced with the FZ09 was a 2009 Kawasaki Concours 14. When I was still considering the FZ, I researched the HP and Torque of both bikes just to see if/what I might be giving up in terms on performance.

The Concours weighs in at 693 lbs wet with a measured 133 HP at the wheel, 102 Ft. lbs. of torque. This equates to 5.21 lbs per HP and 6.79 lbs per ft. lb. of torque.
The FZ weighs in at 404 lbs wet with a measured 107 HP at the wheel, 64.5 ft. lbs. of torque (M4 exhaust). This equate to 3.78 lbs. per HP and 6.26 lbs per ft. lb. of torque.

I was a little concerned about downsizing and what might be lost in performance. I was pleasantly surprised that I would be going from a 1398 cc in-line 4 to a 847 cc triple, while gaining performance.

Wonder how other bikes match up?
Your analysis is a nice attempt, but you are missing some critical factors....it's not just PEAK hp and torque that needs to be considered...how often do you spend at redline anyway?....what's most important is torque over the rpm range that you usually ride in...which is lower rpm's...like 4-8k....the FZ has most of its peak torque available at those lower rpm's, unlike a 4 cylinder...this is why, in general, 0-60 times and 1/4 mile times are more telling than the peak hp/weight.

Very few bikes have as much acceleration from low rpm's as the FZ...the concourse is not one of them
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Yes I was pleasantly surprised that this bike feels more powerful than my 1000rr I traded in. That torque everywhere! That is what really matters. Even if there is less of it, where it becomes usable is the most important to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,202 Posts
OP, Just re-read your post...I realized you were comparing lbs/hp & lbs/ft-lb (not the inverse)....lol reading comprehension.
My statement is still correct...but even having better peak torque/weight and peak power/weight is also very telling.

One of these days one of us geeks will do some integration of dyno curves of various bikes, normalizing for weight...that is where its at.

If anyone has raw data for dynos of popular bikes, including the FZ, send them to me and I will go turbo-geek on it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
You should also add in rider weight on both when doing a comparison. No bike accelerates without a rider on it!

Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,008 Posts
What the others said. But I'm sure a 1398 cc in-line 4 making only 133 peak HP isn't lacking in low end torque either lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,155 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,842 Posts
You should also add in rider weight on both when doing a comparison. No bike accelerates without a rider on it!

Mike
Oh i beg to differ mike :)

<--- this is a repost but i laugh everytime
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,202 Posts
And producing more resale value...ride comfort...and storage too.
I don't get it, do you like the FZ09 or not?...I don't think the OP was asking about bikes matching up in the areas of: resale value, ride comfort, storage.

I think he was matching up in the area of: go-fast
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
When it comes to hp and tq ratings it's the area UNDER the graph that you want to look at. The more area under the better. For instance, many racing type cars have their numbers at a specific rpm range and never deviate from it. That is not good for dd. On the other hand, if the graph is relatively flat and peak power is not dramatic it is better overall

I'd rather have an engine with a flat100hp between 1000 and 5000 rpms than one that gets 200 hp at 9000 rpms , and nothing till then
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
651 Posts
When it comes to hp and tq ratings it's the area UNDER the graph that you want to look at. The more area under the better. For instance, many racing type cars have their numbers at a specific rpm range and never deviate from it. That is not good for dd. On the other hand, if the graph is relatively flat and peak power is not dramatic it is better overall

I'd rather have an engine with a flat100hp between 1000 and 5000 rpms than one that gets 200 hp at 9000 rpms , and nothing till then
You're the first person I've seen in any forum that has mentioned the importance of the area under the graph.
It is why the Bandit 1250 is a nicer real-world engine than the kawasaki 1400 and why the '09 is so impressive.
peak hp ain't worth s**t.
Drag racing is for drag queens
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,202 Posts
You're the first person I've seen in any forum that has mentioned the importance of the area under the graph.
It is why the Bandit 1250 is a nicer real-world engine than the kawasaki 1400 and why the '09 is so impressive.
peak hp ain't worth s**t.
Drag racing is for drag queens
*Cough Cough*....
http://www.fz09.org/forum/6-fz-09-g...have-fz8-give-me-reason-get-fz9-please-2.html
post 15:
...but at some point, one must make the calculation:
(Integral of [Torque/RPM]**) / (Wet Weight x Cost)
** this gives bias to higher torques at lower RPM ranges

Call this the kick-ass index # (KAI)
I think the FZ-09 has the highest KAI of any bike, period
One of these days one of us geeks will do some integration of dyno curves of various bikes, normalizing for weight...that is where its at.
If anyone has raw data for dynos of popular bikes, including the FZ, send them to me and I will go turbo-geek on it
Integral = Area under the curve ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,155 Posts
I don't get it, do you like the FZ09 or not?...I don't think the OP was asking about bikes matching up in the areas of: resale value, ride comfort, storage.

I think he was matching up in the area of: go-fast
The two bikes he was comparing...are as different as night and day. No one buys a Concours for dragracing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
734 Posts
0
When it comes to hp and tq ratings it's the area UNDER the graph that you want to look at. The more area under the better. For instance, many racing type cars have their numbers at a specific rpm range and never deviate from it. That is not good for dd. On the other hand, if the graph is relatively flat and peak power is not dramatic it is better overall

I'd rather have an engine with a flat100hp between 1000 and 5000 rpms than one that gets 200 hp at 9000 rpms , and nothing till then
Like my piped rd400 blah blah , hang on
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,155 Posts
Drag racing is for drag queens
One man's opinion.

Ride a fast drag bike well, and you will change your mind.[/QUOTE]

You kind of HAVE TO ride in a straight line in Florida don't ya?
 
  • Like
Reactions: v2Bob
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top