Freeway speeds on R3?

Yes, I'd say during 0-600 initial break-in period, you don't want to use the R3 on the freeway because unless you want to gun it and violate the break-in rules, you'd be hard pressed to get out of a sticky situation while staying in the break-in parameters. Outside of that, the R3 is more than capable in my opinion. I've heard guys say this about 600's. SMH. To each his own, but this type of "opinion" becomes sacrosanct fact through gossip, which just isn't true. I guess it is an opinion unless a universally accepted metric is used to measure what type of acceleration and speed you need to qualify as "freeway" capable. I think Yamaha making the R3 a parallel twin gave it better power than say an analogous bikes like the Honda CBR300R which is a fantastic bike that is only limited by its power.

o me, 600s and higher displacement bikes have a large ratio between their displacement but a much smaller ratio between times. A 600 might do 0-60 n 3.1 sec vs a Hayabusa or ZX-14R doing it in 2.6. The difference is negligible outside of top straight line speed or maneuverability, if you will. You're paying a lot more for 100% more displacement for what...10% more power? However, technology has evolved so much that engineers have extracted more and more power from the smaller displacement bikes which trimming fat and improving handling of the bigger 1000cc+ bikes IMAO. If people ride these bigger scooters, then these "lightweight supersports" are more than capable methinks. I have no problem on my R3 although I do miss my CBR600RR at times.

R0b0tN1nja_BKNY said:

Yes, I'd say during 0-600 initial break-in period, you don't want to use the R3 on the freeway because unless you want to gun it and violate the break-in rules, you'd be hard pressed to get out of a sticky situation while staying in the break-in parameters. Outside of that, the R3 is more than capable in my opinion. I've heard guys say this about 600's. SMH. To each his own, but this type of "opinion" becomes sacrosanct fact through gossip, which just isn't true. I guess it is an opinion unless a universally accepted metric is used to measure what type of acceleration and speed you need to qualify as "freeway" capable. I think Yamaha making the R3 a parallel twin gave it better power than say an analogous bikes like the Honda CBR300R which is a fantastic bike that is only limited by its power.

o me, 600s and higher displacement bikes have a large ratio between their displacement but a much smaller ratio between times. A 600 might do 0-60 n 3.1 sec vs a Hayabusa or ZX-14R doing it in 2.6. The difference is negligible outside of top straight line speed or maneuverability, if you will. You're paying a lot more for 100% more displacement for what...10% more power? However, technology has evolved so much that engineers have extracted more and more power from the smaller displacement bikes which trimming fat and improving handling of the bigger 1000cc+ bikes IMAO. If people ride these bigger scooters, then these "lightweight supersports" are more than capable methinks. I have no problem on my R3 although I do miss my CBR600RR at times.

Click to expand...

Your gratuitous use of big words lost me but I will try and play:

You dont need to follow the manual "break in" procedure" I have NOT followed it on 3 bikes and no ill effects. Go read up on "hard break ins". I am not the only one. Many people do this. Its my opinion that break in RPMs posted in the manual arent really to break in the engine, but rather, to get the new owner "broken in" to the bikes characteristics. Bikes are ran to red line from the factory, before being shipped out. There are many videos of factories doing this.

A Hayabusa puts down FAR more than just 10% power increase compared to a 600cc bike. My 09 ZXR makes around 103ish? A liter bike in that same year group is going to make somewhere around 160ish? The liter bikes now are making 180+HP from the factory, depending on what report you read. Then on top of that, you are making xx% more HP, all the while staying relatively within the same weight, so your power/weight ratio just sky rockets.

This HP talk is irrelevant. Ride the R3 for what it is. Ride a 600, 1000cc or liter+ bike for what it is.

Everytime I read one of your posts, it sounds like I am reading a FITREP. Lets talk in laymans terms from now on lol.

EDIT: A 1400cc bike isnt much more than a 600. The 10R actually costs more than the 14R

Using Kawi as an example, the 636 is priced at $12.7, the ZX14R $15k and the ZX10R $16k.

Kojiiro said:

Your gratuitous use of big words lost me but I will try and play:

You dont need to follow the manual "break in" procedure" I have NOT followed it on 3 bikes and no ill effects. Go read up on "hard break ins". I am not the only one. Many people do this. Its my opinion that break in RPMs posted in the manual arent really to break in the engine, but rather, to get the new owner "broken in" to the bikes characteristics. Bikes are ran to red line from the factory, before being shipped out. There are many videos of factories doing this.

A Hayabusa puts down FAR more than just 10% power increase compared to a 600cc bike. My 09 ZXR makes around 103ish? A liter bike in that same year group is going to make somewhere around 160ish? The liter bikes now are making 180+HP from the factory, depending on what report you read. Then on top of that, you are making xx% more HP, all the while staying relatively within the same weight, so your power/weight ratio just sky rockets.

This HP talk is irrelevant. Ride the R3 for what it is. Ride a 600, 1000cc or liter+ bike for what it is.

Everytime I read one of your posts, it sounds like I am reading a FITREP. Lets talk in laymans terms from now on lol.

EDIT: A 1400cc bike isnt much more than a 600. The 10R actually costs more than the 14R

Using Kawi as an example, the 636 is priced at $12.7, the ZX14R $15k and the ZX10R $16k.

Click to expand...

Yeah, there are two camps regarding "break-in." I try to follow it, but I am not a break-in Nazi. I'll pop it a bit. But I bought mine used. The previous owner said they followed it strictly from 0-600 but didn't know it went to "Stage 2" of the break-in from 600-1000, but said from 600-830 miles when I bought it, the bike was never rev'd hard, or used mainly outside of work commutes on backroads. But didn't matter to me. It could have been used a litter more for all I care.

You wonder why Yamaha, et al proffer a break-in and the rules. They be more like "guidelines" any how! I adhere to it because I am thinking they need some break in, the fresh parts need to "meld" and the fine metal shavings need to be purged. Most of my break-in was done for me, so I am not worried about it. I think what is more important and often overlooked are pre-checks and routine maintenance. Do you routine stuff and it should run till the wheels fall off! In my opinion anyway. I think I got rid of my 92 FZR 600 with 23,000 miles in 2004. To each his own. It's like that article I posted. Offer your advice and opinion but don't preach or proselytize.

Yes, there are big differences between middle weights and the big bikes, but technology has already brought them closer. Synthetic numbers and benchmarks tell one thing but real world experience also tells another. What I was trying to relate was that the ratio is not 1:1 and can be subjective.

My auto body shop guy who is a Hayabusa rider (which he took apart and got his framed gold plated), swears by 1000cc+ only bikes otherwise "it won't have enough escape juice." So he likes to chide me on my R3. I laugh it off, because some people us it as indicator of status or something like a car or ridiculously priced clothing like $500 jeans. It's like learn to master riding a little first before you get caught up in displacement like its your dick size!

I loved my 92 Yamaha FZR600 and 03 Honda CBR600RR, but the R3 might be my favorite.

Bird said:

There is no question you have to plan more carefully and be even more aware of your surroundings. Coming from an R1 I do have some reservations still about no longer being able to blip the throttle and be in a very different time and space almost instantly. Little bike is fast though. Way faster than any 250-350cc I have ever been on. It smokes them all. For what it is, its fast. Fuel controller added some nice extra pickup. Just a guess I picked up about 3hp with Power Commander V.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree with Marc and Bird. that is the biggest factor to consider when going to a light-middleweight bike like the R3. I have always been a Yamaha/Honda guy, and might have gone with the CBR if it wasn't a single cylinder and had more power. I originally was going to get a Ninja 300 given that it has been in the segment a while and their platform is mature and well hashed out. I haven't ridden a N300 or CBR3 but I would guess the extra cc's help the R3 in this regard.

And as far as juice, eeking out every little bit you can helps. A full exhaust, air filter, and PC5 or Bizaaz should provide a noticeable amount of increased power. Correct me if I am wrong engine guys, but parallels excel more across the power band and at the high end right? Hence the higher top speed of the R3 vs competition whereas a single cylinder like the KTM or Honda has more giddy up during the low end? Or have ECUs, various engineering tricks, etc mad this negligible between singles and parallels.

R0b0tN1nja_BKNY said:

Yeah, I agree with Marc and Bird. that is the biggest factor to consider when going to a light-middleweight bike like the R3. I have always been a Yamaha/Honda guy, and might have gone with the CBR if it wasn't a single cylinder and had more power. I originally was going to get a Ninja 300 given that it has been in the segment a while and their platform is mature and well hashed out. I haven't ridden a N300 or CBR3 but I would guess the extra cc's help the R3 in this regard.

And as far as juice, eeking out every little bit you can helps. A full exhaust, air filter, and PC5 or Bizaaz should provide a noticeable amount of increased power. Correct me if I am wrong engine guys, but parallels excel more across the power band and at the high end right? Hence the higher top speed of the R3 vs competition whereas a single cylinder like the KTM or Honda has more giddy up during the low end? Or have ECUs, various engineering tricks, etc mad this negligible between singles and parallels.

Click to expand...

I hope you actually can feel the difference in power on the bike. I had a full exhaust and Power Commander on my N650 which on paper added 4-5 HP? I didnt feel any more power than stock. What I did feel though was the PCV really made the bike smooth at lower revs. Cliff Randall, a custom builder, had a project 650 for his wife and when he was done, posted the details of the bike in the forums. He was kind enough to share his tune in the forums and I used that on my bike. You wold think being a lighter rider that I would have felt something from the few extra HP?

I wish your "parallels excel more across the power band and at the high end right" were true lol. For the same amount of CC's you cant have both "across the power band" and " "at the high end". In general, twins will make most of their power in the lower revs, while the 4 cylinders will make more power at the top end. I once read "Life begins at 14,000 RPM" and when I sold my 650 for a ZX6R, I tried this out. Everything was relatively smooth until I started going from 12k rpm to 14k. Even for a 600cc bike, that thing felt like a rocket lol.