Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

600 v 1000 (acceleration)

Discussion in 'Bike Reviews, Questions and Suggestions' started by bowden, Mar 14, 2009.

  1. just curious as to which bike is faster from 0-100 say a gsxr600 or gsxr1000?

    asking cause the salesmen said that the 600's are quicker to 100 because there alot lighter but then obviously the 1000 have a much higher top speed.

  2. Hmm, I find that hard to believe - the mass difference is not that great and the power difference is.

    To the Google-mobile, Robin!
  3. Figures I found suggest 2.98 s for the 600 and 2.56 s for the 1000...
  4. Salesman is on crack.
  5. 1000: 3-3.5secs
    600 : 4-4.5secs
  6. More numbers

    600 = 163 kg dry (k8 model)
    1000 = 170 kg dry

    So there's bugger all in it. Factor in fluids and a rider's weight and the weight difference is negligible compared to the power difference.

    I'm with termis.
  7. Those figures would be for a professional or highly experienced rider, right? What about for the average rider or someone new to supersports motorcycles (thinking of myself here). Would they have a better chance putting the power to the ground with a 600 (and preventing the front end from going vertical) or are modern 1000s as accessible as reputed?
  8. There is some truth to that. There's going to be less likely of a difference between the 600 and the 1000 for a less experienced rider, but I still say once you have the clutch out for first gear, the power/torque characteristics of the literclass bike pulls away from the 600.

    All this said, I wouldn't worry too much for .5 second here and there, especially if you're less experienced. An experienced rider on a 600 will EASILY dust a less-experienced rider on a 1000 once a few curves are thrown in.
  9. Joel's figures actually sound more plausible than those ones I quoted. I may have picked 0-60 figures thinking they were from America and therefore 0-60 mph which is close enough to 0-100 km/h, but they do sound unfeasibly low.

    But even Joel's figures would require some very skilled riding. Either bike will happily put you on your back with a bike on top of you if you don't handle it with respect.

    It might be a smidge easier to accelerate hard on the 600 without getting into trouble, but IMO not enough to overcome the power difference to the 1000 unless you're *really* not a very good rider... and if that's the case, why do you care about which is quicker at that very top level?

    Bottom line, the salesman was spinning a line of bullshit or didn't know what he was talking about.
  10. Yes, the 600 will be faster definitely. As long as its the salesperson riding the 1000.
  11. I read a thread on here not long ago about how people with litre+ sportsbikes were saying they could never use full throttle on the street and have never seen over 7000 rpm.

    If this is the case then wouldn't the 600 bike be a better option for the street if that's all you're ever going to do (no track days etc) ?

    I assume this wouldn't apply so much to bigger bikes so much that are less powerful, heavier, but with more torque such as the Bandit or GSX1400? e.g. A typical 600 sportsbike would have around 100hp? Which is similar to the 2 bikes I just mentioned, but they have tons more torque.
  12. Don't see why they cant use full throttle, sure you go past the speed limit pretty quick but isn't that half the fun? And things only get interesting after 7000rpm.

    If you dont like this style of riding a new 600 would actually be worse, as they need more revs to get into their powerbands. I'd think that a 600 trackie and a 1000 roadie is a much better combo. But everyone has their own preferences. But if you dont like high revving engines then a 600 supersport a bad idea.
  13. Full throttle on a 600 supersport machine in the streets will get you in to just as much legal trouble as a 1000.

    Motorcycle performance have come such long way in the past half-decade or so that to safely get anywhere near the performance limit of even quasi-sportbikes, you need to get on the track.
  14. Personally sports bikes aren't my thing, but I've been looking at the Suzuki GSR600 (same engine as GSXR - but which is supposedly "tuned for abundant low-and-mid-range torque befitting a middleweight street fighter"). It's on my list of bikes to ride once restrictions are over.
  15. Yeah, DrewBytes, you're probably right in saying that a 600 sportsbike is more practical on the streets than a 1000, although of course you'll get arguments here about that, as you will about anything. I certainly enjoy my 1200 Bandit for effortless power on the street.

    But the original question asked wasn't about practicality but about which has the greatest acceleration 0-100, and the answer to that seems pretty clear.
  16. this is along the lines of my beliefs.

    IMO 8k - 9k is plenty of revs for road use even if they dont make as much power as higher tuned 13k revving engines.

    the closer you are to the maximum powerband during ordinary cruising the better
  17. I have a Litrebike, and I use full throttle. Anyone who doesn't is a sissy.
  18. Yes, a 600cc is generally more practical. Bigger bikes have so much power that I struggle to go above 7000rpm most of the time. I would for sure be a faster rider on a 600 because its just less intimidating so its easier to push yourself a little more. That said I like the laziness that a big bike brings. Thats really where big bikes own, on longer, faster and more km days. I've done oxley weekends on my 250, 650 and 929 and its soo much easier on a big bike, I find I get less tired as the bike is just designed for it.
  19. No way, Phiz.
  20. thanks boys.....