Gos!!!!!!Gosling1 wrote:I-K wrote:...and not for the most obvious reason, either. Mostly, the huge balls served as stabilisers.Gosling1 wrote:It took huge balls to ride a stock Z1 to 200,absolutely ! One big nad hangin' out each side to balance the old shitter !!!
Back in the 'Good Old Days', every new Kawasaki sold came with a Free Hinge in the middle of the frame................
Did you re-read that post before ya hit send??? You're sounding like a Ulysses member! 
is good for about 310 or thereabouts, maybe a couple more with a tailwind. The Busa of the same vintage was about 315.......so maybe 1 or 2% *faster* at absolute top-end...
Well it never did 
had that discussion with a mate the other day (speedo variation) because his R1 was reading 296 and i went passed him without too much effort and my bike is supposedly limited to299Gosling1 wrote:limited to 299, as are all the big-bangers.
The 2000 model ZX12R wasn't limited to 299, as the poster suggests. The infamous *unrestricted* model
Of course, speedo error never gets a mention when top-speeds are being discussed eh ?? I would love to get a radar reading at PI just to see how close the speedo was to actual *speed*...
Yep, his bike was *reading* 296, with only 5% speedo error, it knocks his *actual* speed back to around 280 or so.......could even be a little less, speedo error is supposed to increase with speed.....Rumbles wrote:....had that discussion with a mate the other day (speedo variation) because his R1 was reading 296 and i went passed him without too much effort and my bike is supposedly limited to 299
Terminal Velocity for any falling object is 260km/h i think, so rules that theory out.Neka79 wrote:it wasnt falling off a cliff was it??Rumbles wrote:fair enough cant expect it to be actually doing 296 it is a yamahahahaha
