I had an opportunity to ride the latest Yamaha YZF-R1 last week. It was a 2010 model, done up in the Valentino Rossi/Fiat Yamaha MotoGP graphics, and making something like 184 horsepower (that's "only" around 150 horsepower at the rear wheel).
I've only ridden a handful of modern motorcycles over the past several years, and I haven't kept up with all the latest advancements in two-wheeled technology. I know modern bikes keep getting faster while employing more exotic material in everything from the frame to internal engine components. This shows in the R1's ability to deliver all that power in a relatively controlled manner, even for an old man used to riding Brit bikes with 1/3 the horsepower and 1/10 the technology.
But when I check the latest performance specs on a bike like the R1, and discover it's knocking out 1/4-mile times in 10 seconds flat, I have to wonder -- How Fast is Too Fast?
Coming from the guy with a slightly modified Ford GT that does zero-to-60 in 3.5 seconds and tops out around 210 mph that may sound like a hypocritical question. But I'm not asking with an agenda to put an end to time-warp machines like the R1. I'm honestly curious about what you think. Is there such a thing as too fast?
When I look at my personal history of operating old American muscle cars before I even had a driver's license I can't help think those cars probably were too fast. Yeah, they only did the 1/4-mile in around 14 seconds (or maybe as quick as high 12s for the 427 Cobras and Hemi 'Cudas), but those cars weighed between 3,000 and 4,000 pounds, rode on bias-ply tires and often had drum brakes -- in front! So it wasn't how fast they were, it was how controlled (and thus how safe) they were when going that fast.
With the R1, Yamaha has incorporated several technologies to turn those 180 horses into a usable, controllable force. Tricks like the cross-plane crankshaft and uneven firing order smooth out the bike's power delivery, making it feel (and even sound) a lot like my old 1990 Honda RC30. Both bikes have surprising torque at lower RPM (4,000-8000 rpm), along with a more baritone exhaust note. This is in contrast to the typical Japanese motorcycle inline four characteristics of weak off-peak power and a high-winding exhaust note.
BTW, if you're looking for an explanation of why a cross-plane crankshaft changes power delivery characteristics check out this R1 link that offers the best graphical and narrative explanation I've ever seen. Just mouse over the lowest hot-spot square on the R1's image.
But that usable low-end power doesn't diminish what happens if you rev the R1 to redline (13,500 rpm). I only did that once during my seat time, on an open stretch of road in Ventura county. At somewhere around 9,000 the bike transformed from a solid, civilized citizen into a screaming maniac. I managed to hang on and even grab second gear without backing off the throttle. That's when the steering went strangely light and I realized the front wheel wasn't touching pavement anymore.
We won't get into the speed I was hitting at two-thirds of the way through second gear before rolling off the throttle, but it's not one I'd want to be clocked at on radar. By a cop.
However, despite the unintentional wheelie and 2.44:1 power-to-weight ratio, the Yamaha R1 did not feel "too fast." Braking and handling, like the bike's low-rpm power delivery, were easily and confidently managed. And even the bike's high rpm behavior didn't strike me as unsafe (just unexpected from a guy who thinks an 84-horsepower RC30 is fast).
The same is true for most high-horsepower supercars of today. While they can rip off truly scary acceleration and top-speed numbers they also have the braking and suspension components to manage said power (unlike the first wave of muscle cars).
I would argue that as long as a machine's complete package lives up to the horsepower and acceleration spec, there is no such thing as "Too Fast."
What do you think?
By srlracing
on June 15, 2010
03:38 AM
Too fast only comes three varieties.
1. YOU run out of skill. This usually comes in the form of your rear end passing your front or you meeting an object you shouldn't.
2. The law catches up with you. One could argue you weren't fast enough.
3. The vehicle outruns itself, brakes, tires, suspension etc.
The issue with modern sport bikes is how easily attainable they are with the big dog R1 listing for something like $13,000 any numbskull, where I live they are generally Marines, that can qualify for the loan or save their milk money can have one. Quickly they run out of skill they find the exit to the afterlife. But sport bike manufacturers need not worry there are plenty more lined up who will be tempted by the cheap speed. Do I offer a solution? Hell no, I'm just telling it like it is.
By tonupboi
on June 15, 2010
06:59 AM
Remember Rule #1 regarding a motorcycle:
"It's better to go fast on a slow bike, than to go slow on a fast bike."
With a 35 year history of British Iron behind me ('69 BSA A50R through a '00 Triumph Tiger), I learned long ago that horsepower is not necessarily productive, especially if your personal skills can't match the engine output. I periodically remind myself of that by skunking some squid on a GSX-R600 with my '69 Bonneville cafe racer. Of course, I pick the road and I'm not about to give him any measurable straights.
No doubt I sound like an old fart, but I've never understood the need for over 100hp on a motorcycle. I currently work at a Honda/Yamaha agency, formerly was at a Ducati shop. I think you can easily imagine the idiocies I put up with on a daily basis (gotta get the CBR1000RR for my first bike, because a CBR600RR is a girl's bike).
You want the real scare? In Virginia, go pick up your motorcycle learner's permit, buy a Chinese 150cc automatic scooter, ride it for a few days and go to the DMV to take the motorcycle test in their lot. Pass it, and you're now legal for that CBR1000RR or R1. Can we say major disconnect in reality?
Just to keep things in perspective, I've been riding motorcycles for 34 years now. My '95 Trident has 102k on the clock. I've owned both a Ninja ZX-6R and a Triumph Speed Triple. They both had more power than I could realistically handle. They both got traded in for something less powerful and more useful.
Yeah, I'm not a normal motorcyclist.
By mtakahashi
on June 15, 2010
08:19 AM
My $0.02: If the power is manageable, there can never be too much. The R1 is smooth and very controllable, with no peaks or valleys in its powerband. It pulls hard all the way to redline. It's also quite tame when ridden as such.
Now take something like an Aprilia Tuono R - which I once rode. The throttle felt more like an on/off switch than a dimmer. Every time the light would turn green the front wheel would start coming off the pavement. Trying to get a smooth transition from trailbraking to throttle was like tring to diffuse a bomb on a rollercoaster.
Besides the R1's smooth power delivery, the chassis is as easy to direct as a 600cc bike. Man, now I feel like going for another ride. BRB.
By carlisimo
on June 15, 2010
09:06 AM
For specialized use, I agree that power simply has to be balanced by handling and braking. But if you’re buying a daily driver that you want to have fun in, speed limits, safety, and the guidelines of courteous driving impose a much lower limit on power. With 300hp or more, I’d probably get really frustrated at all the self-restraint necessary.
By chavis10
on June 15, 2010
09:33 AM
If you think the R1 is fast, try the BMW S1000RR with like 194hp at the crank! I'll stick with my '09 599cc Ninja ZX6R (with about 124hp at the crank)- they are boderline slow until you get around green zone of the tach (8k rpm) which is fine by me. You really have to push them for them to get you into trouble. In contrast, my friend has an '09 ZX10 and the difference is ridiculous. I don't know how you can ride a liter bike slow- they are just insane. (I think it's the additional low to mid range torque that make the larger engine sportbikes feel so much more powerful).
By cruiserhead1
on June 15, 2010
09:55 AM
No such thing as "too fast".
Speed is a by-product of racing innovation. This innovation brings with it a host of new technologies and processes.
The biggest innovation is changing the way a car (or bike) is made or thinking about a problem in a different way.
Paradigm shifts often happen with racing development. So, the speed by-product is necessary.
By timmy347
on June 16, 2010
05:11 PM
I'm sorry @srlracing that u feel that away about marines, the marines that serve our country;those marines probably boost the economy where they are stationed and most base towns wouldn't survive without them....Now to the R1, I own a 2008 R1 and it's an awesome machine. I have owned a couple a bikes, a 600cc katana and a sv1000s sport. The R1 kind of reminds me of a 600cc bike in low rpm's, but once It passes 7000 rpms it's a monster and the sound it emits from the ehaust is sweet music(once pass 7000 rpms). I love this bike because it handles like a 600 but possesses the raw power of a liter bike. In my opinion the R1 is a very manageable bike(of course not for a rookie)but an average rider can enjoy this bike BC of the split personalities it has. Moderate power in low rpms, insane power in high rpms, great handling and braking, sleek design, light weight. My only complaint is it gets really hot in traffic and when driven hard(not sure if they fixed this issue with the 09/10 models). I'm confident to say that my next bike will be a newer R1(no time soon of course), it clearly packs all the power I will ever need.
By estreka
on June 23, 2010
11:19 AM
I think Srl said it precisely. I'd use those limitations as well.