R6 Message Net banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
972 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Just kidding to some degree but it seems like the r6 gets shorted compared to the r1. R1 had inverted forks first, exup (like it or not), and FI before the 6. It also seems like the r1's are built better. They did have 2nd gear issues but they were fixed in 2002. I guess i hear less problems about them then the r6. Do r1's make more for yammi or are they just trying to keep the 6's price down? Any thoughts?
 

·
kaneda!
Joined
·
6,424 Posts
the r6 is a sweet bike. can't compare apples to pineapples. the r1 is a sweet bike too. two different categories.

now comparing to the gixer 600, 600rr, etc... then that is different.

when i had my 03.. i loved it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
972 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
tetsuo said:
the r6 is a sweet bike. can't compare apples to pineapples. the r1 is a sweet bike too. two different categories.

now comparing to the gixer 600, 600rr, etc... then that is different.

when i had my 03.. i loved it!
But why not. It isn't like you couldn't use a 600 as a test bed for inverted forks or fi or the exup.
 

·
#1 member
Joined
·
2,807 Posts
Im sorry but hasnt the R6 been the one with the New technology first in the last few years. things like the new fly by wire throttle, the way the frames are made and the slipper clutch
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
558 Posts
it's all about marketing. the litre bikes get more air time on tv and make for more popular (not necessarily better) racing. it still boils down to what wins on sunday sells on monday attitude by the manufacturers.
 

·
2008 Triumph 675
Joined
·
7,056 Posts
First off, you need to understand a few things.

Fuel Injection on 600's wasn't really possible until 2001. The technology wasn't available for such a small cc engine until that time (at least that's how it was explained in a write-up a few years back.) The larger displacement engines were easier for some reason.

Inverted forks. Manufacturers, including Yamaha, played with this in the past, but found that the suspension was too stiff for the street and the cost of USD forks is greater than RWU conventional forks. Honda contemplated it after the F4i, but stayed away from them as well.

And EXUP came about in 1987. The R1 may have gotten it first, but that probably had more to do with giving the new engine more grunt with the FI? But that's just a guess. The R6 was very stable on the carbs, with a pretty linear powerband, so they probably didn't want to deal with EXUP until they had to. And with a completely new engine this year, instead of rehashing the old one over the last few years, this was probably the perfect time to do it. Again, I'm just guessing, I don't work in the Yamaha R&D department. But EXUP alone, has been around long before the R1 was even a concept.

So, what are your points again about why the R6 sucks? Seems to me that you are clueless about the bike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
989 Posts
:thumbup ^^good post
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,715 Posts
drtymex said:
Withing the yamaha department, this is true.

So what other companies have fly-by-wire throttle and CF die casting?? Oh yeah... no one in the motorcycle industry. :)

In fact, if I remember, everyone was trying to figure out CF die casting, and no one could figure it out (including suzuki). :wink
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,134 Posts
^^^ The name of the thread was, "why does the r6 sucks?" Is it not safe to say in the yamaha department, the R6 has received the first in technological advances over the r1? :umm

And how I read serpents post was regarding the pro's of the r6 over the r1.Off the top of my head regarding the industry as a whole, weren't oem slipper clutches in zx-10r in 04'? FI on 2001 gsxr's?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,896 Posts
i dont think slipper clutches really are a factor in this conversation...

die casting, fuel-injection, ex-up are all things that are a part of a motorcycles design...


a slipper clutch is more or less an add-on feature like a damper or a set of tires that is nice to have but doesnt always come standard on one said bike... and should never be the main attraction toward the purchase of a bike... "yeah id like to buy that POS kawi zx-10 with all the bells and whistles, thanks"


IMO, the R1 was the best bike for me (AGAIN) this year. EVERYTHING about it I love. It was a little dissapointing that it didnt come standard with a slipper clutch, but i figure if i ever need one, its only about $700.00 away from an install. I just couldnt see myself buying a SUZUKI, when there are so many things about it that annoy me... or a KAWASAKI... i dont even need to start how i feel about that thing... and the HONDA, would prolly be the next best thign for me... but it just lacks over all performance and doesnt have the feel of the YAMAHA.

as far as the R6 goes... i still have my 04, wouldnt trade it for anything...


...oh and STFU because you know there is someone out there on a mid 90s 250 with an HJC helmet that can lap you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,715 Posts
drtymex said:
^^^ The name of the thread was, "why does the r6 sucks?" Is it not safe to say in the yamaha department, the R6 has received the first in technological advances over the r1? :umm

And how I read serpents post was regarding the pro's of the r6 over the r1.Off the top of my head regarding the industry as a whole, weren't oem slipper clutches in zx-10r in 04'? FI on 2001 gsxr's?

Sorry, I thought you were implying that within Yamaha it is like that, but they are still behind the rest of the industry.

The R1 had FI before the R6.

I dont count slipper clutches... thats why I didnt touch on it in my post. :wink
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,747 Posts
Funny my 92 FZR 600 had an exup valve. This technology has been around since the late eighties. The R1 does not have Ti valves in it but the R7 did. Racing is what drives the R&D along with customer wants and needs.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top