Jump to content
CBR1100XX.org Forum
ptxyz

2000 vs 2001 birds

Recommended Posts

i want to learn about why my beat up old 2000 blackbird feels so much quicker than my 2001 redbird.  the 2000 would often surprise me by lofting the front end on power alone while i have yet to experience this on my 2001.

 

i'd assumed both have stock gearing (similar rpm's at 70mph) until i counted the teeth on the rear sprockets.  45 on the redbird, 44 on the blackbird.  i'd have to remove the cover to count the teeth on the fronts.  assuming both have stock front sprockets and equal power, the redbird should feel quicker, correct?

 

as far as i know, the 2000's stock.

 

the 2001 has remus slip-ons but, appears otherwise stock.  

 

i've read in a few craigslist ads that the later bikes had the power restricted in the lower gears.  can anyone confirm this?

 

anything else to help enlighten me?  i get the feeling i really need to confirm the size of the front sprockets...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, ptxyz said:

i've read in a few craigslist ads that the later bikes had the power restricted in the lower gears.  can anyone confirm this?

Never heard of that.  Yes, you need to check out both sprockets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noticed the same. My 99 XX with almost 100K still out pulls my 01 with 35k and my 03 with 8k.

 

Mine are all stock with no gearing changes. It would be fun to do back to back dyno runs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well blackhawkxx, the mystery deepens...

 

both bikes have 17 tooth front sprockets.  both bikes have rear sprockets that are marked "45" - this (17/45) is stock.  i remember replacing chain & sprockets on the 2000 blackbird and ordered sprockets for stock gearing along with the chain.

 

here's where it gets tricky...  i counted 3 times and my wife, twice.  the sprocket on the 2000 blackbird that's marked "45" actually has 44 teeth.  the 2001 redbird has 45 teeth. just as it's marked.

 

given i've now confirmed the sprocket counts and ruled out externals like dragging brakes (wheels on both bike spin freely) or low air pressure (both bikes are about 40 psi front & rear), it really does seem like the poor shiny 2001 redbird is indeed down on power compared to the 2000 "matte"bird.

 

per the wikipedia page here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_CBR1100XX) it appears '02 and on birds have different f.i. mapping and lower output figures.

 

another thing i found unusual;  the redbird came with stock pipes that have catalytic converters (externally, the mid-pipes are fatter and you can see the catalyst inside - it looks like corrugated cardboard rolled up).  i thought these were only on r.o.w. (rest of world) bikes, not u.s. ones.  also, the ecu threw a code for the oxygen sensor once a couple of weeks ago (not since), something that's only supposed to apply to catalyst bikes.  am i mistaken that no catalyst bikes came to the u.s.?  might my 2001 redbird be r.o.w.?

 

i'm hoping a buddy who rides and i trust will show up so we can do some head to head "testing"...  hint, hint: anyone here on the forum local to san jose?  i'd love to find out before i sell the 2000...

 

if there's some old thread that answers all i seek, please feel free to hit me over the head with it...

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Edited by ptxyz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my 06 seems to have less torque from new than my 99, i rode an 05 for a day and it had more than both, a friend rode my 06 and and another 06 and said mine was down on power, last service they asked me if i bought it second hand cause it seemed to have a lot more miles on it than shown. I've had it since new and put it down to not running it in hard enough. Bothered me for a long time but at accelerating from 7k and 100mph it's hard to hang on to so i'm happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My old 01 XX had cats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No cats on my '01. I was previously under the impression that '02 and up CA models were the only ones you would find equipped with catalytic converters in the U.S., but it seems that extends at least to '01. I'm unaware of any 49 state models equipped with cats or O2 sensors.

 

If your '01 is equipped with O2 sensors, it's either an import or a CA model, which might very well explain the difference in performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, my ZX14 was black, so you may be on to something. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

redbird might be on to something, the seller (owner #2) told me the original owner was a long-time bay area resident.

 

wonder if the cams are different?

 

yikes!  for the 1st time in my motorcycling life, i'm about to be stepping down...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 01 has no CAT, or evaporate canister.  Purchased new in Georgia.

 

My shop manual to 2003 shows evap canisters for California, but no CAT.

 

Does the VIN plate show California or Canada like some cars do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an 01 if you wanna roll south to the LA area.

 

I've read in a few places that 99 was supposed to be the fastest, possibly about tied with 01, and all the others a tad slower.  Some have said that '97 was possibly the fastest.  99 and up have a different header giving more torque and less HP.  I've read in many credible places that 01 was the beginning of O2 sensors and cats but mine doesn't have them, I believe it was included on Ca. bikes and those going to some other countries; mine's not a Ca. bike.  Check the emissions sticker on the left side, it'll show meets US EPA or meets US and Ca requirements.  You could swap ECUs and see if the power follows the brain or the bike.  Being that you have O2 and had cats it's possible it was tuned mellower for stricter emissions.  I've never read of a different mapping for the low gears on the XX.  I don't see how it would since there's no gear position sensor tho it could do it off the speedo input.

 

The bigger rear sprocket would make it a tad quicker.  The slip-ons in theory would add HP at higher revs while loosing some at lower.  I put a full Yoshi on mine and my impression was that it lost power below 4k, was about even to about 5k, and much stronger above 6k.  As it comes onto the power it lifts the front quite well which I don't think it did before.  The only bird I've run mine against is mikesail's, don't know what year his is.  We did several side x side roll-ons from about 4k from memory and also swapped bikes.  I had the stock exhaust at the time and I pulled way better from low RPM, not sure about the top end but I think his was stronger.  He had a one tooth bigger front sprocket which will weaken acceleration and a full exhaust.  When I looked at his header I could see why the low end was weak, the tubes looked quite oversized.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, redxxrdr said:

My 01 has no CAT, or evaporate canister.  Purchased new in Georgia.

 

My shop manual to 2003 shows evap canisters for California, but no CAT.

 

Does the VIN plate show California or Canada like some cars do?

I thought evap was a federal thing.  Pretty sure my non-Ca. '01 has evap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some bikes are flukes in a good way from the factory. 

 

Years ago at a dyno day we had a guy with a newer Zx12r slip on only. He put down a healthy 176 HP 

 

No power commander added, OEM filter, still had the reflectors and stickers on it. Was an older gentleman that traded in a zrx1200 for some sportier. 

 

Know of one member here with a fluke XX, it is also black. 

 

Might have to paint mine to get that extra HP.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always wondered about different ways to break a bike in. Some claim it does make a big difference.  My son raced at the local drag strip in the points system and bought a new CBR1000RR midseason.  With less than 50 miles on it, raced it week after week with no ill effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

holy crap!  i've been using the wrong fuel!  i'll report back after a tank or 2 of the recommended 91 octane...

 

i found no such label on the 2000.

 

i was under the mistaken impression all birds could be run on 87.

 

IMG_0466.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of those canisters that Shane showed in his thread on my bike.

And my sticker doesn't say California either.

And I googled,  91 RON is 87 octane US.

 

image.jpeg

Edited by redxxrdr
Octane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked at the schematic for the post 99.

It looks like a 02 sensor is added for California.

I know that O2 sensors are used to clean emissions on cars ( make them lean out), and they will really screw things up if they go bad.

I wonder if you could swap ECM and disconnect  WPC GR and feel a difference?

image.jpeg

Edited by redxxrdr
Add word

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is totally a California Model bike. States so on the sticker near the end. I had the evap can and solenoid with the extra tubing on the ports, tying all together. It also has the o2 and pair systems. From memory only, i recall the 97 being a hell of a lot smoother on the throttle with a lot more oompf. I run stock pipes always. I am getting about twice the mileage on the '02. I see near 40's on the '03 and was getting 22mpg or less on the 97. Always run hi-test non-ethanol in mine. So many variations on bikes because of changing import and emission policies. Hard to know what you are really getting, i suspect. The Fi bike runs a TON hotter on the legs than the '97 did. I suspect it is from increased backpressure in the exhaust from the emissions crap, or maybe i was running WAAY rich on the '97. The differances between models is NOT as slight as one would think at first glance. Everyone else seems a lot faster now on the roads, so BOTH birds seem slower in the year 2016, than they were in 2006. Fwiw, BLACK is the fastest color by far.

DSCN5728.JPG

Edited by Hooplehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, superhawk996 said:

I thought evap was a federal thing.  Pretty sure my non-Ca. '01 has evap.

 

Everything I've heard or seen indicates the evap canisters go along with the O2 sensors and cats of the CA compliant models. My '01 had none of that crap on it and pulled 138 (corrected) HP bone stock. I've worked on a couple '02 49 state models here that had no evap, cats or sensors, so if it ever was a federal thing it didn't kick in until '03.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, redxxrdr said:

I looked at the schematic for the post 99.

It looks like a 02 sensor is added for California.

I know that O2 sensors are used to clean emissions on cars ( make them lean out), and they will really screw things up if they go bad.

I wonder if you could swap ECM and disconnect  WPC GR and feel a difference?

image.jpeg

I don't know what WPC GR is, but if you swapped in a non O2 computer it would obviously not be looking for an O2 reading.  The O2 is only adjusting things at light load, once on the gas hard they go off-line and fueling is handled based on programming and O2 signal is ignored....as far as I know from everything I've read about anything with an O2 that wasn't a wideband O2 which the bird never had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Hooplehead said:

This is totally a California Model bike. States so on the sticker near the end. I had the evap can and solenoid with the extra tubing on the ports, tying all together. It also has the o2 and pair systems. From memory only, i recall the 97 being a hell of a lot smoother on the throttle with a lot more oompf. I run stock pipes always. I am getting about twice the mileage on the '02. I see near 40's on the '03 and was getting 22mpg or less on the 97. Always run hi-test non-ethanol in mine. So many variations on bikes because of changing import and emission policies. Hard to know what you are really getting, i suspect. The Fi bike runs a TON hotter on the legs than the '97 did. I suspect it is from increased backpressure in the exhaust from the emissions crap, or maybe i was running WAAY rich on the '97. The differances between models is NOT as slight as one would think at first glance. Everyone else seems a lot faster now on the roads, so BOTH birds seem slower in the year 2016, than they were in 2006. Fwiw, BLACK is the fastest color by far.

DSCN5728.JPG

Your '97 was tuned way rich or was fucked up and running hi-test is a mistake that robs power and mileage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, ptxyz said:

holy crap!  i've been using the wrong fuel!  i'll report back after a tank or 2 of the recommended 91 octane...

 

i found no such label on the 2000.

 

i was under the mistaken impression all birds could be run on 87.

 

IMG_0466.jpg

RON is Research Octane Number which is one of the measurement systems, the other is motor octane.  When you look at the sticker on a pump you'll see that the octane is (R+M)/2 which is an average of the research octane and motor octane to give a total knock index (TKI) number and 91RON is generally equivalent to 87 at the pump in the US.  There's no reason to use any higher octane in a stock motor unless you like lower MPG, less power, and increased combustion by products.

 

From memory a basic breakdown of the octane measurements is that research octane measures the resistance to detonation at low RPM use like airplane engines and motor octane is the resistance to detonation at high RPM.  This is why aviation gas has high numbers while being cheaper than race gas and those who mistakingly use AV gas in place of race gas in a hot rod to save money wind up buying new engines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree with the above about octane, with one caveat.

Best power, and economy with the lowest Octane that you can run without detonation.

 

This is pretty easy with new engines with knock sensors.  If the computer hears a knock, it retards the spark to prevent destroying the engine.

 

Stay with the recommended octane fuel, or higher if you are running older high compression engines without knock sensors.

Or high compression power tools like my Stikl chain saw.  

You will eventually burn a piston on those engines, or worse.

 

The same is true if you add a hair dryer to 70's vintage 911, and try to drive 500 miles on 87.😰

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed.

 

My octane statement was in reference to a stock Bird motor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use