Kawasaki Ninja ZX Forum banner
1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was looking well on the exhaust of GTR 1400 on just passed IMOT 2007 Exibition in Munchen.

One thing which also doesn't "goes under my hat" is that big ONE pipe exhaust.



I don't have anything against big things, they're allright 'cause they makes things bigger and more impressive. But I thing that Kawasaki could rather make two big exhaust pipes, one on each side, because it is much more attractive and also ensures bike in case of fall.

I know it is not so easy because of cardan-tranmission and because of touring-needs (exhaust makes side-bags smaller), but if they're lifted a little bit up in the air, that can be solved without any problem.

Suzuki also made that change on GSX 1400, from two pipes till 2005 on only one pipe from 2006, and that is not nice (my opinion).

What are You thing?

P.S. Sorry for the bad photo...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Two pipes are better than one.

I certainly agree. Except for when the swingarm is single-sided, there is no advantage to a big single pipe so far as I can tell, and I think it only has to do with the fact that it is cheaper to make one big pipe than two smaller pipes.

I am hoping that Kawasaki will have changed this in the production bikes. If they have been listening to what we potential buyers have been saying, they will have realized that virtually no one likes the look of that big ugly pipe. If they decided to do something about it, the obvious solution is to go with two smaller pipes instead of the one big pipe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
4 into one is just fine. Less weight and half the cost to replace the Muffler.
Function before form.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
368 Posts
Well.... if I were an after-market exhaust manufacturer... I'd make a couple different versions available. Given the choice, I prefer two, or one underseat type.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
I don't mind one pipe, but this thing is way too big. I know environment and stuff, but I will replace it asap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
4 into one is just fine. Less weight and half the cost to replace the Muffler.
Function before form.
Maybe. Question is - is it really before?

But there's some machines, there's some bikes, and there's some many other things where too economical behaviour isn't welcome. Top-bikes of the production gama of one so big and known producer as Kawasaki is, must be worthy of their "No.1" status. That also means that some luxury and some details has to be, cost that or not.

Can You imagine that Mercedes puts one pipe instead od four of them on it's sport machines? Or Ferrari? Can You imagine that even some glam-detail or luxury "need" to be missed because of "economy"???

No, You can't. To add some kilo's on GTR, even when it's 5 or 10, doesn't metter. Nobody will criticize Kawasaki because he put in serial equipment two pipes, even when it high a price for 50 or 100 euros. Nobody will criticize even one luxury details and putting on weight because of that, but will criticize because of missing some details which has to put on.

When You makes a admirality-ship for Your fleet, it's quite clear that anything, but anything, dare not to be there. And Kawasaki makes such a ship with GTR 1400. It has power enought to carry 5 or 10 kilos more spent on luxury, or technical, or design details.

It's amazing how small "details" makes final decision in humans mind!!!

And bikers are especially sensitive for such details, because bikes are much less on the street that cars, they're not "transport devices", they're still of life, they're expression of the bikers mind! Beauty, and million of details, fullfills picture of one bike. And none of it shall miss!

Kawasaki, can You hear us??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
That Pipe Is Just Too Big And Too Ugly!!!!!

Less weight and half the cost to replace the Muffler.
Function before form.
Those are valid points, and of course it is ultimately subjective. Single pipes just have never looked right to me on any bike without a single-sided swingarm. If the swingarm is single-sided, asymmetry is established, and having a single pipe on one side, looks natural. But when you have a double-sided swingarm, a single pipe on one side just doesn't look right, especially when it is as monstrous as this thing is. It is so damned big that it just overwhelms the rest of the bike. You look at the bike on that side, and the first thing that you say is, "Man, that is one big pipe!" I hope very much that this will be changed in production, to dual pipes that are each smaller. If I were a racer type and planning to take this bike to a track and race it, I would care about the extra weight. I still care about the extra weight, but not so much to overlook that big fugly pipe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Could be possible that Kawasaki started with especially policy known for a long time in car-industry, what means they made their especially solutions to which nobody will enter with it's own solutions. I mean on after-market offer.

Who will do one 4-in-1 such a big exhaust?? Nobody!! Even not Akrapovič, Bos or some other known name which guarantees some quality. That means Kawasaki cutted off in start any possibilities to somebody earns his money on Kawa bikes... even on only one model.

But "admirality" of that ship will be so shown on wrong place...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Could be possible that Kawasaki started with especially policy known for a long time in car-industry, what means they made their especially solutions to which nobody will enter with it's own solutions. I mean on after-market offer.

Who will do one 4-in-1 such a big exhaust?? Nobody!! Even not Akrapovič, Bos or some other known name which guarantees some quality. That means Kawasaki cutted off in start any possibilities to somebody earns his money on Kawa bikes... even on only one model.

But "admirality" of that ship will be so shown on wrong place...
Kawasaki has to obey the legislation considering the environment and hence the exhaust has to be silent and must contain a katalytic converter. And thus it will be enormous. Which doesn't mean they coulndn't make 2 smaller pipes like the ZX14... :rolleyes
In the futures noise and emissions must be even less and so expect even bigger pipes :crazyloco
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
The catalytic converter doesn't have to be in the muffler. It can be located ahead of the muffler, down where the 4 exhaust streams merge into a single stream, or just aft of that point, as with the FJR. The advantage of the putting it in the muffler, is that the significant heat given off by the catalytic combustion, will dissipate into the air more readily, with less radiation of heat into the frame and the engine or transmission. With bikes that have under-seat exhaust, there is no good place to put the converter.

I expect that there will be after-market mufflers for the Concours 14, but they will likely replace the single pipe. It seems unlikely that anyone would offer a two-pipe replacement.

But aside from the certainty that single-pipe replacement will be available, I just don't like the idea of having to go out and buy a replacement muffler. I've been an avid motorcyclist for more than 25 years now, and I have never replaced a stock pipe with an after-market pipe. There are multiple reasons for this, and although the cost is not the primary reason, it is certainly one of them. I say again, Kawasaki really needs to throw that big fugly pipe away, and replace it with two smaller pipes. :angry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Kawasaki has to obey the legislation considering
In the futures noise and emissions must be even less and so expect even bigger pipes :crazyloco
So let them put TWO big pipes, just to be more attractive!!! :mfclap :mfclap :mfclap
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
Whick kidney I'd have to sell to buy one for GTR 1400? :headscratch :headscratch :headscratch
I doubt Kerry will want you to sell your kidney!:crackup His pipes and canisters are competively priced with the other guys products.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
So let them put TWO big pipes, just to be more attractive!!! :mfclap :mfclap :mfclap

Let's just say "to each his own" applies here. Unquestionably everyone has their own tastes in aesthetics.
I try to be objective when viewing a future purchase as I did with a Bandit 1200. The mirrors? Hideous ! but easily replaced, the Muffler? Huge ! but a single bolt on stainless replacement was 1/2 hour of work and no great cost. Just as I personally view the C-14. Yes the 4 into one is old school but still an efficient, light weight exhaust system.....IMHO :rolleyes

I used to spend emotion picking things apart because it didn't live up to my expectations. We all find some faults in almost everything we encounter.
Long ago I quit looking for reasons to be offended by all things.
Just for the record I don't care for the raised ribs on the saddle bags but this won't keep me from buying it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Let's just say "to each his own" applies here.
Indeed, it all is subjective.

Although, the cost of purchasing and installing a dual-muffler set-up as replacement for an original single-muffler set-up, will be considerably greater than the cost of replacing mirrors.

Just for the record I don't care for the raised ribs on the saddle bags but this won't keep me from buying it.
I agree completely. For that matter, I won't let the big fugly muffler keep me from buying the C-14. In fact, it is unlikely that I would replace the muffler, no matter how much I don't like it. I just wouldn't be able to spend that much on something that is only really a matter of aesthetics. The only thing that would likely change my mind about buying a C-14 is if it turns out that the engine is buzzy. If the engine is not significantly smoother than the FJR, then as far as I would be concerned, the C-14 would not offer any significant advantage over the FJR. I've put a lot of time and effort into various improvements on the FJR, particularly the windscreen, which now with the Vario screen mounted so that the angle is steeper and more air flows under the lower section, works very, very well. I expect that the C-14's windscreen will work very well in stock configuration. The only significant complaint that I had of the FJR that I was unable to solve after investing considerable time, is the engine buzzing. I put up with until I rode it from Colorado to Kentucky and back, but my joints were all so sore when I got home that it was nearly a month before I had any interest at all in riding again. It was so bothersome that I actually considered trading the FJR for an ST13, until I looked again at the specs on the weight. But all the reports on the ZX-14 say that it is very smooth, and based on the diagram of the counter-balancer arrangement that I saw on some web site, it is designed correctly, and should work perfectly, just like the XX. I'm also hoping that the C-14 will have high-speed acceleration ability equal to the XX, which is to say, a notch better than the FJR. There seems to be strong likelihood that these expectations will be fulfilled by the C-14, and I be able to sell the XX, which will be a decade old this summer, and the FJR, which will already be five years old this summer. If this works out, I'll be one very happy camper with the C-14, big fugly muffler and all, and anytime that anyone points to the muffler and laughs, I'll just tell them that the muffler actually contains a JATO unit that I ignite only when being chased by the speed limit enforcers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
Not that I am one to start rumors but..... I hear Remus and some other European Muffler Manufacturers are well underway with replacement mufflers. Must have taken measurements at Milan or other shows?????
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
The only thing that would likely change my mind about buying a C-14 is if it turns out that the engine is buzzy. If the engine is not significantly smoother than the FJR, then as far as I would be concerned, the C-14 would not offer any significant advantage over the FJR. But all the reports on the ZX-14 say that it is very smooth, and based on the diagram of the counter-balancer arrangement that I saw on some web site, it is designed correctly, and should work perfectly, just like the XX.
Kaiser, I couldn't agree with you more. After riding a '05 FJR for a weekend sometime back I was impressed with everything but the buzz at highway speeds. Obviously Yamaha is aware of this even though the reviews I've read state the taller final gearing didn't solve the problem. Too bad they didn't design it with a 6th gear.
The Bandit 1200 was extremely buzzy and I am hyper sensitive to vibration. Fantastic UJM and tough as nails, toured on it, ran track days, commuted and drag raced it. No matter what I tried the vibes were numbing me to the point of selling the B-12.:angry
Everything I've read about the ZX-14 states no vibration felt at all speeds. One tester even stated it was the smoothest Kawasaki he had ridden.
I trust the C-14 will be as smooth considering the base platforms are the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
I have to consider myself "hyper-sensitive" to engine vibration as well, because it doesn't seem to bother most riders nearly as much as it bothers me.

I am not 100% certain, but I believe that the reason that the FJR's dual counter-balancer design doesn't work, is because the front balancer is located off to one side, to allow the oil/coolant heat exchanger to be positioned in the center. That is what it looks like to me in the diagrams in the factory service manual. The idea of the dual counter-balancer is that by using two spinning masses, spinning in opposite directions, the unwanted motion components of each will cancel the other. But they have to be positioned correctly in order for that to work.

Here is a diagram of the dual counter-balancer arrangement used in the ZX-14:


It is virtually identical to the design used in the XX. As you can see in the diagram, when the heavy side of each of the two spinning weights is at a position where they move either entirely toward or entirely away from the other balancer, the net motion of the pair of balancers, will be null. Rotate them 90 degrees, and the heavy side of each balancer will be moving in entirely the same direction as the other, and they work together to cancel the unwanted motion of the pistons and connecting rods. At any position, you get a mix of the two effects, and the unwanted motion of the two spinning weights always cancel each other. Clearly, in order for this to work, the two spinning weights have to be positioned at the mid-point of the crank, with two cylinders on one side, and two on the other. This is necessary not only so that the spinning weights can cancel the unwanted motion of the pistons, but also so that the unwanted motions of the spinning weights themselves will cancel with each other. Clearly, if you position one at the mid-point and the other one is offset toward one end, it will not work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
It has been a while since I looked at the diagrams in the FJR, so I just took another quick look.

The rear balancer is driven off the clutch outer instead of a dedicated "idler" gear as it is on the XX and appears to be on the ZX-14. There is nothing wrong with driving it off the clutch outer, but I'm looking at a diagram on page 5-19 of the FJR service manual, and you can clearly see the cover for the small compartment for the rear balancer, sort of nestled down into the shallow space behind the cylinders and slightly above and slightly forward of the transmission. It is located just barely inward of the clutch basket, and almost directly behind the cylinder on that end, perhaps a slight amount more toward the center than that cylinder.

There are several different diagrams that reveal the location of the forward balancer, for example, on page 5-108. In this diagram, the engine is flipped upside down and the crankshaft visible from the bottom. In this diagram, and in the others as well, the front counter-balancer is clearly visible, located way over at the end opposite to the clutch basket, i.e., at the far left end as you sit on the bike.

The rear balancer is located just inward of the clutch basket, well to one side of the mid-point, and the forward balancer is located way over to the other end. The unwanted motions of the two balancers cannot possibly cancel each other. This is just stupid, and so far as I can tell, it is not out of character for Yamaha to do something like this. It is very unlikely that I will ever buy another Yamaha again.

Because the design flaw of the FJR counter-balancer is so apparent, and because the ZX-14 does not share that design flaw, but appears to be essentially identical to the XX instead, I am very confident that the ZX-14 engine is every bit as smooth as the various reviews have said. I could take one for a test ride, but then I'd have to put up with some some sales person, and I don't really think it is necessary. I have no doubt that the ZX-14 is fully as smooth as the XX, and that the C-14 will be as well.

The C-14 will be worth the wait. The only uncertainty is whether it will be worth the weight. I expect it will be heavier than the XX, and that is okay, as long as it is not much heavier than the FJR. And if it comes with the big fugly muffler, I'll live with it.
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top