Can anyone explain to me.....

[jimbothe]

The difference in ride between the inline four and a twin.

Some of you may already know that im in the market for a new bike and have found a few nice examples but they are all hundreds of miles away. The two main contenders are the Yamaha Thunderace and the Suzuki TL1000R.

From what I can tell the Thunderace is more powerful but is it faster? (I heard the TL has a tremendous amount of torque...)

I currently own two in line four 16v so I know what they ride like but didnt want to commit to a twin until I had some advice. Just my luck no garage has a TL in for me to try
____________________
Check out our tackle shop on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/#!/JklTackle

[G]

One has two cylinders in a v shape, the other has four in a line.

First off, people often say 'torque' when they mean 'range of torque'.

Secondly it's a bit of a myth that a v-twin has a wider range of torque than an inline 4.
Firstly, people often compare smaller capacity four cylinder bikes - for instance 750cc against 1000cc twins, or even 600cc fours against the big twins in some case (they often have similar peak power outputs).
Secondly people feel a large midrange but little top end and presume the bike has a more midrange torque. Often this isn't the case and the four cylinder bike makes a similar midrange, but has a load more go on top of that.

The TL-R will probably handle corners a bit better than the thunderace. The TL had one of the better twin engines of the time, but the R versions got the ones in a lower state of tune.
What current bikes do you own? If you haven't ridden a litre bike, you may find it's a fair bit different even if you get a four.

I should add that v-twins have a 'big bang' firing order, which gives the possibility of very slightly more grip exiting corners. Personally, I think the extra it offers probably isn't usable by anyone but a top superclub racer or better, if that.
Oh and they sound like wet farts .

[jimbothe]

Hi G,

I own a Ninja zx10 b3 and a FJ1200, both inline fours. Would the TL feel or be faster than these? (speed isnt a great issue, more torque and acceleration)

Is there any particular riding styles you have to adapt going from a inline fours to v twins?

I know both the TL and Thunderace will benefit from being newer and probably better tuned but will it be an impressive difference over my existing two?
____________________
Check out our tackle shop on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/#!/JklTackle

[G]

I expect either bike would feel faster and handle better than those you are used to. I don't have experience with either bike personally.

Although it may not feel like it, I suspect the 'ace will probably have a wider range of usable power.

Some people claim you 'should' ride a twin by using the midrange, however it will always be fastest by using peak power, which is usually at the top of the rebs.

I expect the straight line speed won't be that much faster on the newer bikes, however I suspect they will feel like they've got a bit more 'sparkle'.

[jimbothe]

Ok G, thanks for that, it was very helpful.

I just hope I get the chance to try both when a garage near me finally gets one or both in.

Any other ideas for bikes in that range or power with a bit more sparkle?
____________________
Check out our tackle shop on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/#!/JklTackle

[G]

Fireblades, ZX9s, early R1s, GSXR750s (y or early k model).
I'm basing that on a budget topping out at around £2k and doing a bit of bargain hunting.

Probably looking to pay a bit more for a twin that matches up to the TL engine.

[Kickstart]

[jimbothe]

Im a big lad G

the FJ and ZX size is suited to me making the ZX9 and R1 way too small
budget around 2k - 2.5k

Strangely enough the fireblade doesnt look too small as ive sat on one. The R1 is definately out as they are tiny on me
____________________
Check out our tackle shop on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/#!/JklTackle

[BorderHooner]

The ZX10 is probably much of a muchness against the thunderace and the TL, and is much of a muchness against a similair powered blade.

But at the end of the day you can have a superbly handling bike and not use it properly, you can have a mediocre performing bike and thrash it's tits off in the twisties keeping up with sports riders.

Personally I would swap CC's for track and road instruction anyday.

A litre twin will be spanking out of corners and will hoff along the straights, but yeah they run out of puff in gears and top end(obviously the sportier the more puff) whereas a IL4 will keep on pulling and has more revs.

I don't understand why you dont stick with the ZX10? new suspension?
____________________
Benelli. Happy as a pig in cacky.

[G]

Carlos; I believe he's talking about the old ZX10 - the forerunner to the ZZR1100.

[killa]

Yeah i was wondering that, a more modern ZX10 would kill a TLR.
____________________
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult.
Bike:- Yamaha TRX850 | Killas Biking History | Killas Gaming History | Killas autmotive history

[MarJay]

As a person who prefers twins to fours, I feel compelled to comment here.

Its not just about peak power, or peak torque, but its about how the bike 'feels'.

I prefer twins because for the 70% of my riding which isn't full on mental blasting they are much much better. The midrange on a twin is still a few thousand revs fewer than the midrange on a four (most twins rev 6-10k and most fours rev 12 - 15k).

I personally dislike the power delivery of a four, it feels like its not doing anything, and to me that means that you end up riding faster than you intended. With a twin (particularly a V twin) you get to feel like the engine is actually expending some effort in getting you to a high speed when you thrash it. This means that you are probably travelling at the speed you think you are travelling at, rather than some function of the whine coming out of the exhaust. I suppose it is that you can 'feel' the engine, rather than a four where you have to look at the rev counter or listen to the noise it makes.

I would say the main disadvantage of a TL1000R is that they are very long, and have a very long wheelbase, and so aren't the fastest turning of bikes. Also, they rev to 10,000rpm and do so very smoothly, which means that they are almost like a four in their power delivery.

Personally, If I was looking at a big sportsbike of around 125bhp that weighs around 200kg dry then I'd be looking for a Triumph Daytona 955i.

Has the revs and the smoothness of a lower revving four, with the midrange and the feel of a twin. Makes around 120bhp ish and weighs 199kg dry. It probably won't be as comfy as the ace, but will probably be on a par with the TL. Also They are very well built and rock solid mechanically. A friend of mine still has my old one, and it looks like it just rolled out of the showroom, despite having done 30k miles plus. And they are very cheap at the moment.

a long link

The bike above is newer and lower mileage than the Thunderraces I searched for on AutoTrader. And the closest TLR I could find had done 12000 miles and was £2500.

For some reason, the 'trader seems to insist on calling them all T595 Daytonas, when Triumph actually changed the name as it was confusing. I think the 1997 ones were called T595, and the 1998 on were called 955i, but they are effectively the same bike. Personally I'd go for a '98 onwards as they have a slightly better frame and a slightly better exhaust routing which means the pipes don't deck out under hard cornering. Mine handled really nicely, and although it wasnt super quick on turn in, it had rock solid stability and felt great. I had to sell mine as it was physically a bit too big for me, and I was concerned about my license. But as I said, if I wanted that type of bike again, I wouldn't hesitiate to buy another 955i.

Another option, of course, if you're looking for more comfort is the Sprint RS:

a long link

This one seems a particular bargain, with a bulletproof engine and great comfort. They don't handle quite as well as the 955i, but are probably a good match for the Thunderrace for sports touring ability.
____________________
British beauty: Triumph Street Triple R; Loony stroker: KR1S; Track fun: GSXR750 L1; Commuter Missile: GSX-S1000F; Cheap project: CBR900RR FireBlade
Remember kids, bikes aren't like lego. You can't easily take a part from one bike and then fit it to another.

[G]

I’m feeling the need to get out my infamous R1 vs SP graph .

Often rev-for-rev the twin will have less torque in the midrange than a four. Even less if you compare it on a mph basis with two gears that have the same top speed.

So, presuming you’re comparing a bike of similar cc rather than similar peak power (which we are in this case), this leads me back to a major factor in this ‘feel’ to be the sound – something which as I’ve said before, I think is remarkably like smell in relation to taste. While it may not directly effect what forces are dragging your body along (or your tounge tastes), it does seem to make a fair bit of difference on how your body interprets those forces.

I would suggest that the feeling that the twin is ‘expending some effort’ is more down to a twin having less power, than it being a twin it’s self.
Riding a twin and a four with similar peak power (say ZX6 and firestorm, which I’ve done a few times back-to-back); to most people it feels like you’ve got to work the four a lot more.
A bike with more power overall will mean you have to work the bike less, so on a twin and a four of the same cc, I would expect to have to work the twin more for the same effect. Precisely the reason I bought myself a bike with 37hp, so I could feel like I was making the bike do something .

I’ve found the TL-R to be a bit lumpy low down, as most sports twins seem to be. ‘Commuter twins’ like the SV650 tend to be a fair bit smoother, as do commuter fours and the like .
Most litre sports twins rev to around 10k rpm from what I remember (the 1098 is 10700rpm, for instance, I believe).
Personally I’ve found I have to pay much more attention to ‘feeling’ what a twin engined bike is doing, while the sound of a four along with it’s top end rush means it’s much easier for my body to work out when it’s on song or not without thought.

[jimbothe]

[G]

What exactly is the focus of the bike going to be?

Were it me, I'd use one of your current bikes for commuting, especially over winter and get a newer bike for funner stuff.

[jimbothe]

[MarJay]

[Kickstart]

[G]

[colin1]

[G]

[colin1]

ive ridden an sv650

but i also like the narrow weight distribution that you get on singles like dirt bikes, which i think is part of the same thing

i think having the weight in a narrow line helps the handling

so when i say handling, i mean flickability, and how controllable a bike is at changing lean angle
____________________
colin1 is officially faster than god

[G]

The SV is quite a light bike compared to all but the very newest sports 600s, so personally I suspect you're considering twins to be 'flickable' from this.
The big twins are usually at best described as 'stable' handling and tend to be slower turning in than their in-line counterparts.

An interesting thing to note is that in the dirt bike world, it's often considered that 2 strokes can turn faster because they have less rotational momentum to drag around a corner.

[Kickstart]

[Pete.]