Suzuki SV650 Riders Forum banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm a college student at CSU Chico and after class I met a guy with a 2000 r6. Struck up a conversation and we went riding. Let me tell ya, I was not impressed.

The bike had after market intake, exhaust and jet kit so I am assuming it wasn't a slouch for an r6, but what they say about no power before 10,000 rpm is true!!! I can't believe that a bike could be low on power by 9K but it was. Don't get me wrong 10 to 15rpm the thing was a sling shot but give me a break. I was very disappointed.

The trouble now is that I realize if I want a torquey jet, I need a liter bike. My 2003 svs, a 2003 Kawasaki ZRX1200r, and the r6 are the sum of my street bike experience. My SVS felt tame after the ZRX but with twice the motor it should, but I nearly dumped his r6 accelerating out of a 90 deg stop sign because it had so little power.

So this may be just another anti i4 thread but I felt my story should be told. The SV is a real diamond in the rough and I am going to have a hard time parting with it someday.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,066 Posts
You almost dumped it in a corner because of the power, or not having the bike in the proper gear giving it the power it needed to pull through the corner?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
you have to be turning some rpm's for these bikes to perform. it takes a little practice, but they can be fun when running hard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I almost dumped it from a dead stop at a 90 deg turn because power pulls you out on upright, but I turned the gas and it didn't have "oomph" to get me going. With the SV you got the power all the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
You must have ridden a dud.


An I-4 builds power quickly, smoothly, and explosively.

I find my ninja is at least as fast as the 650 in almost all ranges of the powerband.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
the 636 is not exactly a "600"

it's more on par w/ a 750

most 600's are 100-110hp, the 636 has something like 130hp?

correct me if im wrong...i had a '03 zx-6rr...the only way to make it go was to rev the sh!t out of it
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,557 Posts
A 636 has more like 117hp - but if you lug an inline at 3 grand like you can an SV, it'll mope around.

The thing about 600's that people don't realize is that they don't put out any more torque than an SV. ~45 ft/lbs. is all they're worth. Yeah - they make silly horsepower, but it's not easily accessible.

I disagree that "An I-4 builds power quickly, smoothly, and explosively."

Quickly if you're at the correct RPM level. Below about 7 grand, they're relatively sluggish compared to their potential. Smoothly? Not compared to a twin.

Explosively? Dead on. Some are like 2 strokes in that regard. Light-switch explosive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,461 Posts
I rode a 750, it was fine under 7k. i was crusing around in 4-5k rpm. the only way it appears sluggish for me is when i compared it to the high end.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Chico rules btw A very good school to.

Anyway, I guess what I suming up is that I think liter bikes are the future for me. I'm a typical "fast food" generation baby, I want it now and the way I say.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
Nah, my 02 gixxer 600 is wayyy faster than my SV. Its got nearly 30HP on it. Either you aren't used to an I4 or the one you rode was running wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
Ruefus said:
I disagree that "An I-4 builds power quickly, smoothly, and explosively."

Quickly if you're at the correct RPM level.  Below about 7 grand, they're relatively sluggish compared to their potential.  Smoothly?  Not compared to a twin.

Explosively?  Dead on.  Some are like 2 strokes in that regard.  Light-switch explosive.
I think we have a different definition of "smooth". When I saw smooth, my zixxer builds RPM's very smoothly without any lugging feelings or unpredictable surges...just flawless injection and exponential acceleration. My SV, when you got on the throttle below 5K in the higher gears would feel like it was chugging up to a higher RPM. Not an unsettling feeling, but not an inspring, enjoyable sensation either.

I think comparing revs between a twin and i-4 is like comparing apples and oranges. Saying that your SV does one thing at 3K and an I-4 does another ignores the inherent properties of the engines. I pose the question what does your SV do above 10,250 RPM? That's midrange for an i-4. So it isn't a direct translation across the rev band but rather an adjusted comparison. The midrange of an SV is the low range of the zixxer....but I find...the zixxer pulls out of any rev range at least as well as the SV.

And yes...I believe it is smooth...building to an explosive climax. In short- I love it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
I rode my friend's '99 R6, and I liked the engine alot. I just couldn't get used to the ergos. After riding his bike, I seriously considered trading on an FZ6 for a while. I loved the power output of that engine. It had plenty of low rpm power, not as much as the SV, but enough for normal riding. And the power upstairs was crazy. And it was smooth as silk. None of that chugging and thumping like my SV. My next bike will definitely be an I-4. I don't like sportbike ergos, so it will either be a ZRX1200, a Bandit 1200, or a FZ1.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,209 Posts
Ben_JamminVFCC said:
  You must have ridden a dud.


  An I-4 builds power quickly, smoothly, and explosively.

  I find my ninja is at least as fast as the 650 in almost all ranges of the powerband.
actually... the R6 is has the weakest midrange of the 600's I-4 models...I think R1 is same... weak midrange and strong up top... its a Yamaha thing... Kaw's and Zook's have best midrange punch for I-4 engines ;)
 
K

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
I'm sure this has been preached on this board many times, but this is a good first post for me (or is it seond?). Modern 600 I-4's are more suited for the track where the power between 10k - 15k can be utilized effectively. However, that doesn't mean you can't ride it well on the street. Obviously the power between below 10k and above is night and day, but it's still pretty darn fast below 10k...way more than you need for the street.

The SV is fun because the power is instant and constant, but I-4 600's are fun because the power is progressive and explosive up top. It's just preference, but I am pretty impartial when it comes to this. I can appreciate both types.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
future2501 said:
I almost dumped it from a dead stop at a 90 deg turn because power pulls you out on upright, but I turned the gas and it didn't have "oomph" to get me going. With the SV you got the power all the time.
you have to slip clutch, takes practice
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
I wasn't knocking the guy for having an r6, just saying it really was not the rocket I thought it was. While I was riding it I knew I could go fast but in the real world, didn't. So I had a choice of slow or "holy shit" It was a restricing feeling, that didn't settle with me. The SV is cruising at 4-5k and you jet of with the speed of thought, not so with the i4.

To each his own. He got off my SV not being impressed and I got off his r6 not being impressed. Nothing wrong with that, the world is full of different people for good reasons.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,557 Posts
Regardless of what each of us think - the reality is that to truly 'use' the power inherent in an inline 600 or larger - you've got to rev the pee out of it.

Rolling around at 7k+ is loud, buzzy and busy. Riding North of 10k is like trying to ride a bomb about to go off. If that trips your trigger that's cool. I personally don't get it. That's not a dig - I'm just not trading the SV for any of it. But, for a track bike - I'm eyeing a late model 600 like a '99 R6/ Gixxer / Honda F4. Perfect place to rev the snot out of one.

Am I the only one who feels that the 600-1000 class sportbikes lack a certain amount of...uhm....well.....Soul?

It sounds corny, I know. On paper and in reality, they're technically AMAZING machines. I get that. But I've been on just about every single one of the current crop....and they're fun (a motor and two-wheels, by my own definition is fun), but none come remotely close to providing that spark that says "Let's go for a ride, dude!!"

I also wonder why I seem to rarely see original supersport/superbike owners with much past 7,000 miles on their current bikes. You couldn't pry my SV out of my dead hands - it's THAT much fun for me.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,209 Posts
Ruefus said:
I also wonder why I seem to rarely see original supersport/superbike owners with much past 7,000 miles on their current bikes.  You couldn't pry my SV out of my dead hands - it's THAT much fun for me.
Ruefus... that's because most of them don't rack up that many miles just cruising up and down Main St. ;D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
the older R6s are nothing like the newer F.I. ones. Really a different bike. Power delivery, handling, styling, COMFORT
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top