Death of the 600cc Supersport

Wossack

hmm, are you implying you cant offroad on a sports bike?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqgEl53x7CM

galwaytt

Cienciano wrote: »

One of the great things about bikes is the loads of different styles out there. Something to suit everyone. From a vespa to a busa, I can see the appeal of everything. Except harleys

As someone with an Enduro, a Vespa, an RGV, an 800cc F GS, and who rides a Dullville blood bike then you'd wonder why I do most miles, winter & summer on......my Road King. If you've tried one and not liked it, great. If you haven't, well then, frankly my dear.........you are on the outside looking in.

Not into the chrome/polishing/leather tassles stuff either, but when I am on it I ride the berries of it. Given better service to me in 8+ years than all the BMW's i owned on the previous 20.......go figure.

galwaytt

Cienciano wrote: »

.... It has a massive tank so no worrying about fuel.

....indeed, and that's good. But my wife has an SV650 and one thing she never does is......fill the tank. She finds it noticeably nicer to drive on a half tank or less. The extra few gallons up high makes it uncomfortable.

The one criticism I'd have of many of the bigger adventure bike is that they maintain range by dint of big fuel tanks. What they should do is actually make them more economical, efficient in the first place.

The likes of Varadero are a great bike - but they are alcoholics. And many others too. Really we should be seeing bikes doing 60mpg+ with ease and then you'd have the range with less bulk, less weight......and cost less to run.

Look at what you get out of modern petrol turbo car now: mid 50's + mpg is achievable.................makes you wonder where bike manufacturers are gone astray....

Del2005

The problem is that the super sports bike can't be used anymore, to get the best out of it you need to wring it's neck and out of 1st gear that's too fast for our safety camera invested roads. The sports tourer, dual purpose and naked can be fun at licence friendly speed so that's what people are buying.

galwaytt

Del2005 wrote: »

The problem is that the super sports bike can't be used anymore, to get the best out of it you need to wring it's neck and out of 1st gear that's too fast for our safety camera invested roads. The sports tourer, dual purpose and naked can be fun at licence friendly speed so that's what people are buying.

Which is one reason smaller bikes are making a comeback ....300's etc.

CJhaughey

I can't understand how bikes are so inefficient compared to cars either, something is wrong somewhere.
The Honda NC7XX series have addressed this to a degree by using half a car engine, obviously the architecture of a standard I4 bike engine is the problem revs instead of torque must be part of it.
I always found twins and singles to be a lot more economical than I4's.

Wonda-Boy

Yeah even the triple I had was quite economical when I had it.

batman_oh

CJhaughey wrote: »

I can't understand how bikes are so inefficient compared to cars either, something is wrong somewhere.
The Honda NC7XX series have addressed this to a degree by using half a car engine, obviously the architecture of a standard I4 bike engine is the problem revs instead of torque must be part of it.
I always found twins and singles to be a lot more economical than I4's.

I have two twins and both are shockingly bad on petrol. But the ones in lower states of tune do better. It depends on the type of bike mostly - inline 4 engines are used relatively more in performance bikes so this will rarely give you good mpg.

On the original topic - it's a shame but they simply aren't selling any more. The fact is non sportsbikes are more useful/usable and most of the time more fun for almost everybody once you get over the whole 'weeeeee it's a sportsbike' phase

CJhaughey

batman_oh wrote: »

I have two twins and both are shockingly bad on petrol. But the ones in lower states of tune do better. It depends on the type of bike mostly - inline 4 engines are used relatively more in performance bikes so this will rarely give you good mpg.

On the original topic - it's a shame but they simply aren't selling any more. The fact is non sportsbikes are more useful/usable and most of the time more fun for almost everybody once you get over the whole 'weeeeee it's a sportsbike' phase

Yeah I can remember a friend getting a Firestorm and not being able to pass a petrol station:pac:
State of tune must affect economy, engines are just pumps so the bigger the flow rate the higher the flow of petrol into said pump.

Cienciano

galwaytt wrote: »

As someone with an Enduro, a Vespa, an RGV, an 800cc F GS, and who rides a Dullville blood bike then you'd wonder why I do most miles, winter & summer on......my Road King. If you've tried one and not liked it, great. If you haven't, well then, frankly my dear.........you are on the outside looking in.

Not into the chrome/polishing/leather tassles stuff either, but when I am on it I ride the berries of it. Given better service to me in 8+ years than all the BMW's i owned on the previous 20.......go figure.

I've driven one for a weekend, not for me. But I like taking the piss out of them, don't mind me. Strangely enough, if I did have one, first thing I'd get are tassels just to annoy people like me.

galwaytt

Cienciano wrote: »

I've driven one for a weekend, not for me. But I like taking the piss out of them, don't mind me. Strangely enough, if I did have one, first thing I'd get are tassels just to annoy people like me.

.....that's good, I ended up with the F800cc BMW after renting one in Germany for a long weekend, and was very impressed. It's a great way to actually try a bike - a 5 minute spin around the block isn't enough.

Tassles, lol. :pac::pac:

HardenendMan

CJhaughey wrote: »

I can't understand how bikes are so inefficient compared to cars either, something is wrong somewhere.
The Honda NC7XX series have addressed this to a degree by using half a car engine, obviously the architecture of a standard I4 bike engine is the problem revs instead of torque must be part of it.
I always found twins and singles to be a lot more economical than I4's.

Bike engines have poorer thermal efficiency due to the need to rev higher to produce the power. More revs = higher friction = more heat

Hotblack Desiato

Juliet Freezing Ponytail wrote: »

My last bike was a sports tourer (BMW R1100S)

A sports tourer has to have decent tank range, decent pillion seat, and luggage options, no way was that a sports tourer!

galwaytt wrote: »

The likes of Varadero are a great bike - but they are alcoholics. And many others too. Really we should be seeing bikes doing 60mpg+ with ease and then you'd have the range with less bulk, less weight......and cost less to run.

Look at what you get out of modern petrol turbo car now: mid 50's + mpg is achievable.................makes you wonder where bike manufacturers are gone astray....

Well as has been pointed out the Japanese manufacturers started the more revs = more power game decades ago, if you wanted economy they would have told you to buy a Honda 50!

Fuel consumption hasn't been a consideration for most riders for decades and it still isn't, really. (Tank range is, but that's not the same thing.) You could buy a diesel Enfield in the 90s. 120mpg but nobody wanted one. You could make a bike tyre which lasts 30,000 miles too, but nobody wants to give up that much grip to gain that much life.

Bikes have terrible aerodynamics compared to cars too, which becomes a big consideration at out of town speeds which is where cars tend to be the most economical.

The_Chap

Fuel efficiency is not something I've ever considered when choosing a bike, but then I've never used a bike just for commuting - defeats the reason for owning a bike in my mind, but horses for courses

Hotblack Desiato

You don't live in Dublin I take it, then.

The_Chap

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

You don't live in Dublin I take it, then.

County Dublin yes, but fortunate enough to have never needed to work in a city centre, in which case there would be 2 bikes in my household, one for the mundane and one for fun

The_Chap

Back on topic anyway, I was bitten by the bike bug after going pillion on a CBR600 over 20 years ago, it's a shame the next generation will not have this option, and hopefully the other sports 600's don't follow as flat twins just aren't the same, I remember coming from a gpz500 and getting my own cbr6 and thinking it was a rocket ship in comparison, had a grin for weeks

Hotblack Desiato

The_Chap wrote: »

County Dublin yes, but fortunate enough to have never needed to work in a city centre, in which case there would be 2 bikes in my household, one for the mundane and one for fun

Right, so why slag off people who do need a bike for commuting then? not everyone has the time or money to blow on weekend jollies even though they'd like to

The_Chap

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Right, so why slag off people who do need a bike for commuting then? not everyone has the time or money to blow on weekend jollies even though they'd like to

confused as to where you think I'm slagging anyone, no one allowed opinions around here anymore no?

Hotblack Desiato

The_Chap wrote: »

confused as to where you think I'm slagging anyone, no one allowed opinions around here anymore no?

You are yes, so here's mine - commuting does not defeat the reason for owning a bike in my mind. 1/3rd the time of bus or car with no parking worries. So what if that's all that some people do, it's still way better than another cage clogging up the roads.

Pugzilla

Takes longer for me to commute by bike than car.

In the time it takes for me to change into gear and prepare the bike, I have reached work by car.

This is why bikes are a weekend toy for me and why I will never own a dull 'practical' bike.

Hotblack Desiato

If it's that near you should be walking you lazy git I did say 'Dublin' earlier...

Pugzilla

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

If it's that near you should be walking you lazy git I did say 'Dublin' earlier...

I work 15 hours a day with sick people in a hospital so don't call me lazy. I need time to sleep and eat.

thehomeofDob

I drive from Greystones to Leixlip for work. If I keep it to 100km on the motorway I get 70mpg (on a Deauville). I wish there was a bike that had a bit more pep and would return similar economy. I think the next bike will be a DL650... but losing the shaft will be tough.

arybvtcw0eolkf

thehomeofDob wrote: »

I drive from Greystones to Leixlip for work. If I keep it to 100km on the motorway I get 70mpg (on a Deauville). I wish there was a bike that had a bit more pep and would return similar economy. I think the next bike will be a DL650... but losing the shaft will be tough.

Last week I got 410kms for €20 on the DL650 Vstrom riding a mix of city and M50/M1.

My last bike was BMW and tbh I mourn the loss of a shaft drive.

If I was using the bike purely for commuting I'm not sure I'd swap a Deauville for a Vstrom.

The 'strom IS very comfortable, handles beautifully but if you're looking for something with a bit more zip than your present bike I wouldn't be looking at a Vstrom.

Hotblack Desiato

Pugzilla wrote: »

I work 15 hours a day with sick people in a hospital so don't call me lazy. I need time to sleep and eat.

It was an attempt at humour, not to be taken seriously.

gctest50

Pugzilla wrote: »

I work 15 hours a day with sick people in a hospital so don't call me lazy. I need time to sleep and eat.

time to sleep ? you're lucky

.

Lads getting mad mpg here. My 600 get like 35mpg if I'm lucky usually less I think, I presume people getting high mpg are sticking in a very low rpm?

Wossack

doing my usual in and out of work commute (~10km each way), I get about 160km before the light comes on, on both my zx6r and street triple. But if Im out for a weekend spin, can get 250km handily enough. The ole stop start, traffic light gp is pretty fuel inefficient hah