401 replies to this topic

[thefirstimmortal]

What kind of Gas do you use? What are the prices for regular and Super?

Attached Images

• 

[thefirstimmortal]

When I first got this bike gas just wasn’t a consideration. Gas was under a dollar so I could never even squeeze a 5 dollar bill into the tank. My other vehicles I used to own were not kind on gas. Keeping a 383 magnum fueled up cost some money but even then I didn’t think too much about gas. I mean, it took less than 20 dollars to fill my Dodge Charger, although a tank wouldn’t last long it still wasn’t the biggest deal in the world. This past summer when I had to watch every dollar, it was painful to keep my bike in gas. I’ll never forget one of the first times I filled my Ninja up from near empty and gas was 4.25 a gallon. It sucked up almost 19 dollars for one fill, what it used to cost to run my Charger.

Attached Images

• 

[thefirstimmortal]

Engine
SPECIFICATIONS USA - 2008 Kawasaki Ninja 650R:
SPECIFICATIONS USA - 1993 Kawasaki Ninja 600R:

Engine: Four-stroke, liquid-cooled, DOHC, four-valve per cylinder, parallel twin
Engine: Four-stroke, liquid-cooled, DOHC, four-valve per cylinder

Displacement: 649cc
Displacement: 592cc

Bore x stroke: 83.0 x 60.0mm
Bore x stroke: 60 x 52.4mm

Compression ratio: 11.3:1
Compression ratio: 11.7:1

Fuel injection: Digital fuel injection with two 38mm Keihin throttle bodies
Carbs: Keihin CVK32x4

Ignition: Digital CDI
Ignition: Battery and coil (transistorized ignition)

Cooling: Liquid
Cooling: Liquid

Transmission: Six-speed
Transmission: Six-speed

Attached Images

• 
• 

Edited by thefirstimmortal, 07 February 2009 - 05:22 AM.

[rwac]

What kind of Gas do you use? What are the prices for regular and Super?

Right now gas prices are 1.79/1.89/1.99.
Bottomed out at 1.49 or so, and on its way back up now.

I use the Plus (87 octane), but I could use 85 octane, simply because of the altitude (5000+ ft).
I believe normally, 87 is recommended.

[rwac]

dup

Edited by rwac, 07 February 2009 - 06:48 AM.

[thefirstimmortal]

What kind of Gas do you use? What are the prices for regular and Super?

Right now gas prices are 1.79/1.89/1.99.
Bottomed out at 1.49 or so, and on its way back up now.

I use the Plus (87 octane), but I could use 85 octane, simply because of the altitude (5000+ ft).
I believe normally, 87 is recommended.

What effect does altitude have on what you buy for gas? I'm sea level to 500ft max. I used to use 93 octane but I can't find it anymore, 91 octane is the highest around now.

[rwac]

What kind of Gas do you use? What are the prices for regular and Super?

Right now gas prices are 1.79/1.89/1.99.
Bottomed out at 1.49 or so, and on its way back up now.

I use the Plus (87 octane), but I could use 85 octane, simply because of the altitude (5000+ ft).
I believe normally, 87 is recommended.

What effect does altitude have on what you buy for gas? I'm sea level to 500ft max. I used to use 93 octane but I can't find it anymore, 91 octane is the highest around now.

In the Rocky Mountain (high altitude) states, 85 octane is the minimum octane and 91 is the maximum octane available in fuel. The reason for this is that in higher-altitude areas, a typical combustion engine draws in less air per cycle due to the reduced density of the atmosphere. This directly translates to reduced absolute compression in the cylinder, therefore deterring knock.

It is safe to fill up a car with a carburetor that normally takes 87 AKI fuel at sea level with 85 AKI fuel in the mountains, but at sea level the fuel may cause damage to the engine. A disadvantage to this strategy is that most turbocharged vehicles are unable to produce full power, even when using the "premium" 91 AKI fuel.

[thefirstimmortal]

In the Rocky Mountain (high altitude) states, 85 octane is the minimum octane and 91 is the maximum octane available in fuel. The reason for this is that in higher-altitude areas, a typical combustion engine draws in less air per cycle due to the reduced density of the atmosphere. This directly translates to reduced absolute compression in the cylinder, therefore deterring knock.

It is safe to fill up a car with a carburetor that normally takes 87 AKI fuel at sea level with 85 AKI fuel in the mountains, but at sea level the fuel may cause damage to the engine. A disadvantage to this strategy is that most turbocharged vehicles are unable to produce full power, even when using the "premium" 91 AKI fuel.

You have a fairly high compression motor, does that help with that situation?

[rwac]

What effect does altitude have on what you buy for gas? I'm sea level to 500ft max. I used to use 93 octane but I can't find it anymore, 91 octane is the highest around now.

Was your bike modified with power commander and stuff ?
That would be one reason to use higher octane.

I can't find the manual right now, but I think the 650R is designed for 87 octane gas.
That means that 87 octane gas won't cause knocking (premature ignition). That's pretty much it.

The compression is high, but it's still designed for 87 octane.

Do you think there's a good reason to run it on premium gas ?

[thefirstimmortal]

Was your bike modified with power commander and stuff ?

Dynojet Jet Kit, when I'm feeling better I'll detail that out a little more.

Do you think there's a good reason to run it on premium gas ?

There is for my bike at sea level. Runs cleaner, faster, more miles between fills. High altitude might have different requirement though, and the air fuel mix is something that might make it better for you to stick with a lower octane. A higher octane might be bad for your valves.

[thefirstimmortal]

I can't find the manual right now, but I think the 650R is designed for 87 octane gas.
That means that 87 octane gas won't cause knocking (premature ignition). That's pretty much it.

I checked my manual, under High Altitude Performance Adjustment Information
and it simply said, High altitude adjustment is not required for this motorcycle.

High octane makes an overall difference in performance and engine life. It burns cleaner so it doesn't mess your plugs up and it doesn't leave as much carbon build-up in your engine. I only ran it in my bike bacause I didn't see enough benefit to paying the extra to fuel up gas-guzzlers over the years. I did try 4 or 5 tankfuls of the reduced octane this past summer because of the nose-bleed price but my bike could tell the difference right away. It coughed and sputtered a few times so I went back to the premium.

[rwac]

I can't find the manual right now, but I think the 650R is designed for 87 octane gas.
That means that 87 octane gas won't cause knocking (premature ignition). That's pretty much it.

I checked my manual, under High Altitude Performance Adjustment Information
and it simply said, High altitude adjustment is not required for this motorcycle.

High octane makes an overall difference in performance and engine life. It burns cleaner so it doesn't mess your plugs up and it doesn't leave as much carbon build-up in your engine. I only ran it in my bike bacause I didn't see enough benefit to paying the extra to fuel up gas-guzzlers over the years. I did try 4 or 5 tankfuls of the reduced octane this past summer because of the nose-bleed price but my bike could tell the difference right away. It coughed and sputtered a few times so I went back to the premium.

So, what octane is the good stuff, and what octane caused the coughing ?

[thefirstimmortal]

In my manual
Under Fuel Requirements:
Minimum Rating

Antiknock Index: 87 Octane

Research Octane: 91 Octane

[thefirstimmortal]

So, what octane is the good stuff, and what octane caused the coughing ?

I used the regular, the cheapest stuff they sell. At the time I was just focused on saving a buck so I really wasn’t checking the octane rating but I think the lowest is 85 or 87. I didn’t think it would be a big deal and it’s not like it ruined the bike or anything, but it sure didn’t like it.

[thefirstimmortal]

SPECIFICATIONS USA - 2008 Kawasaki Ninja 650R:
SPECIFICATIONS USA - 1993 Kawasaki Ninja 600R:


Overall length: 82.9 in.
Overall length: 83.07 in.

Overall width: 29.9 in.
Overall width: 27.2

Overall height: 50.0 in.
Overall height: 45.28

Seat height: 31.1 in.
Seat height: 30.2

Dry weight: 393 lbs.
Dry weight: 397 lbs.

Fuel capacity: 4.1 gal.
Fuel capacity: 4.8 gal

I’m thinking that your bike is slightly shorter to improve cornering. The height, I can’t figure out why your bike would be almost 5 inches taller? Seat height is about the same, both nice and low making the bikes handle better by lowering the center of gravity. Another mystery, your bike dry weight is only 5lbs lighter. With all of the advances, and I know they seriously upgraded the motor and made it lighter, and other parts of your bike must have much newer metal alloys making it stronger and lighter at the same time. It seems to me that you should be more than 5lbs lighter. I took my center stand off the bike to shave off 10-12 pounds and add clearance to the bottom. My fuel tank holds more so when it’s full it’s even heavier; add another 5 or 6 pounds to the bike. Overall, they weigh about the same.

Attached Images

• 
• 

Edited by thefirstimmortal, 10 February 2009 - 05:31 PM.

[rwac]

SPECIFICATIONS USA - 2008 Kawasaki Ninja 650R:
SPECIFICATIONS USA - 1993 Kawasaki Ninja 600R:


Overall length: 82.9 in.
Overall length: 83.07 in.

Overall width: 29.9 in.
Overall width: 27.2

Overall height: 50.0 in.
Overall height: 45.28

Seat height: 31.1 in.
Seat height: 30.2

Dry weight: 393 lbs.
Dry weight: 397 lbs.

Fuel capacity: 4.1 gal.
Fuel capacity: 4.8 gal

I'm thinking that your bike is slightly shorter to improve cornering. The height, I can't figure out why your bike would be almost 5 inches taller? Seat height is about the same, both nice and low making the bikes handle better by lowering the center of gravity. Another mystery, your bike dry weight is only 5lbs lighter. With all of the advances, and I know they seriously upgraded the motor and made it lighter, and other parts of your bike must have much newer metal alloys making it stronger and lighter at the same time. It seems to me that you should be more than 5lbs lighter. I took my center stand off the bike to shave off 10-12 pounds and add clearance to the bottom. My fuel tank holds more so when it's full it's even heavier; add another 5 or 6 pounds to the bike. Overall, they weigh about the same.

That is odd, especially since my bike doesn't have a center to begin with.
So it's actually about 5 pounds heavier than yours.

[thefirstimmortal]

That is odd, especially since my bike doesn't have a center to begin with.
So it's actually about 5 pounds heavier than yours.

You don't have a center stand? Your not missing anything, they are dead weight and dangerous as far as I'm concerned. I never got the knack of putting the bike on the center stand; it's easy to drop the bike trying. It makes oiling a chain easier and oil change also, but it's not much harder to do it without it being on a center stand. They lower the clearance of the bike too; so they are not good t have in a corner with bumps.

5lbs lighter dry weight, but wet weight that makes it about dead even.

[thefirstimmortal]

I'm not sure how I missed this post.

I'm glad your dog was taken care of, such a smart looking dog.

He was put to sleep by the new owners shortly after they got him.

We need to get you preserved too, I'm sure you'd prefer to trade your bike for a fast intergalactic ship

Not really, I'm good with bike riding. I don't really have any interest in flying.

--perhaps in post-human state you could be in the open, feeling the elements while traveling.

I follow post-human and transhuman because I assume that immortality will require the use of these methods, but if I could get away with safely staying in my own body, I wouldn't be striving for a post-human condition.

I should say I learned to drive a motorcycle at age 12 before I learned to drive a car, also from age 6 on I rode on the back of my mother's bike--she changed from Harley to Suzuki for the speed

Suzuki, wise. For the better part of the last 15 years they have put out some of the fastest production street bikes with some of the best handling bikes also. They have dominated the field many years in a row. If I were buying new it would be between a Ninja or Suzuki and that would be it.

[thefirstimmortal]

I haven't posted in here for a bit because I'm so far behind the 8-ball. Thought I would throw up a net pic of my second bike, a 1983 GPZ 550.

Attached Images

• 

[thefirstimmortal]

That last pic was small and it had red rims, my bike didn't have red rims. Here is a closer pic.

Attached Images

• 

[thefirstimmortal]

I don’t Rwac, something doesn’t look quite right about the pic before this. Both of these pics claim to be 83's but this one looks closer to what I remember my bike looking like. Maybe I have the year wrong about my GPZ. Again, I have pics of it, I have to organize my pics and relearn how to scan them on the computer. When/if that get’s done I’ll have to match it up to these pics.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by thefirstimmortal, 25 February 2009 - 09:14 AM.

[rwac]

It's funny that there aren't very many plain motorbikes left, like your old bike.

These days, they're all sport bikes or cruisers.

How much did you mod your old bike ?

Oh, I just adjusted the chain slack on my bike.
It was pretty easy, even without a rear wheel stand.
The pain was getting the rear axle nut loose.

[thefirstimmortal]

It's funny that there aren't very many plain motorbikes left, like your old bike.

These days, they're all sport bikes or cruisers.

How much did you mod your old bike ?

It came premodified. Rich kid in town lost his licence much like the first bike purchase, but he wasn't stressing out over money for a lawyer like my first bike purchase. He just didn't really care what he got for the bike so I got it cheap. Hew was used to buying toys, dumping money into them and then he wanted to get the next best thing. It still made him a motivated seller however. I think I bought that in warm weather. The first bike I remember buying and moving it a day after we had light snow, but I think bike 2 was bought in the early spring.

Oh, I just adjusted the chain slack on my bike.
It was pretty easy, even without a rear wheel stand.
The pain was getting the rear axle nut loose.

Excellent, did you have any problem with getting the slack or tension correct? Did you look at the instructions on how to tighten it? Did you roll the bike to find the tight spot to make sure you had enough slack for the travel in the swing bar?

[rwac]

Excellent, did you have any problem with getting the slack or tension correct? Did you look at the instructions on how to tighten it? Did you roll the bike to find the tight spot to make sure you had enough slack for the travel in the swing bar?

I did move it in the wrong direction first, but it worked ok in the end.
I'll roll it to make sure there's enough slack.
Is there an easier way to find the tight spot ?

All I gotta do is make sure that the chain has a slack between 1.2 & 1.6 inches (from the manual) all the time, right ?

Edited by rwac, 26 February 2009 - 09:02 AM.

[thefirstimmortal]

It's funny that there aren't very many plain motorbikes left, like your old bike.

Actually, this was Kawasaki's forerunner to our bikes model. Something is wrong with the pics though. It's been years since I've even seen pictures of that bike, but I know something is off.

Here is the 86 version. It has the sweeping thin fairing all the way through the bike.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[thefirstimmortal]

Here is an 81, this looks closer to my old bike. It did not have the fuller fairing.

Attached Images

• 

[thefirstimmortal]

Excellent, did you have any problem with getting the slack or tension correct? Did you look at the instructions on how to tighten it? Did you roll the bike to find the tight spot to make sure you had enough slack for the travel in the swing bar?

I did move it in the wrong direction first, but it worked ok in the end.
I'll roll it to make sure there's enough slack.
Is there an easier way to find the tight spot ?

All I gotta do is make sure that the chain has a slack between 1.2 & 1.6 inches (from the manual) all the time, right ?

That's the general slack requirement, too tight and you could snap the chain over a real bad pothole. There really isn't any easy way to find the tight spot, it's just a pain in the ass without a center stand but just keep rolling the bike forward a few inches, check the chain and move it again. You will feel it get tight at one spot and then start to get looser again as you pass the tight spot. Just roll it back. As a general rule, I'll stay to the slacker side of tight unless I'm taking a very long trip (over 1000 miles). The only drawback to keeping toward the slacker side is that you have to check and tighten the chain a little more in order to keep things tweaked properly. But again, it safer than making the mistake of getting it too tight. After a few seasons of playing with that chain, you'll fall in love with the concept of one of those more expensive prestretced chains that go 4 or 5 thousand miles between tightenings. But like I said, wear that chain out first and get your moneys worth. By the time you get to the new chain you will be a pro at tightening your chain.

Attached Images

• 

[thefirstimmortal]

Another 83, still not what I remember.

Attached Images

• 

[thefirstimmortal]

LOL, OK, mystery solved. It was a 750 not a 550. 82 or 83, I'm still not 100% sure about, but this picture is a lot closer. This is an 82.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[thefirstimmortal]

This bike and the last both have red rims, which like I said, mine did not. The last bike had a sissy bar on it, that didn't improve the looks of the bike any.
The kid who had it before me put the shorty pipes on, and a 4 into one exhaust if I remember correctly. As you can see, I am a fan of the red also.

Attached Thumbnails

•