[Psycho1]

Cycle Worlds times for the Katana 600 in September 1991 in their "Built for Speed 600's" article.

Stock 11.83 @ 113.78
Yoshimura modified (100whp) 11.33 @ 121.29
Top speed stock 132mph
Modified 144mph
They had a rear axle bearing sieze in the race track test, which was done after the drag strip and top speed tests, so it's possible their modified strip times and top speed runs may have been affected by a failing bearing causing excess drag.

[Liltroy]

That was for a pre, which is a bit lighter and has a bit more power than a 98+. At least, thats what I've been told. Anyway, I found the utimate mod for my 06 katana today......a trade-in on an unmolested,9000mile, 06 hayabusa. I take delivery tomorrow...

[Psycho1]

Congrats on the new to you bike. Post some pics of it after you pick it up.

[arsenic]

the pre and post 600 is the same damn engine.

[ITS_NOT_A_KNIFE]

i think thats b.s. on the 11.36e/t on 600. the best ive gotten out of my 750 was a 12.1, but i think i run my gears to high (14-52), cause im in 6th gear at the 1000ft. best believe i launch like all hell. ive never been tree'd at the track or the street.

lets see a video on your run

[Liltroy]

the pre and post 600 is the same damn engine.

I realize that, but for some reason, the pre's are quoted for having more HP on both the 600 and 750's. Of course that could be because of the change to SAE measurements, making the 98+ look like its got less when they actually have the same. Thats the only thing I could come up with. But in magazine articles, the pre's did run better numbers for some reason.

[arsenic]

750 pre and post IS a different engine, 600 is NOT.

[loudnlow7484]

i think thats b.s. on the 11.36e/t on 600. the best ive gotten out of my 750 was a 12.1, but i think i run my gears to high (14-52), cause im in 6th gear at the 1000ft. best believe i launch like all hell. ive never been tree'd at the track or the street.

lets see a video on your run

No no no...... He claims an 11.34 on a 600. I did 11.36 on a 750, but not a stock one. (BTW, I was running 14-45, I believe...... you've REALLY got it geared short!)

I know I've posted mine about 500 times, but here it is again. (Taken with a digi cam, while it was playing on my friend's TV, since it was an analog tape) I know it's hard to see the board at the end, but it is just barely visible at the very end. 11.36 @ 119.5.

[ame=http://s128.photobucket.com/albums/p174/loudnlow7484/?action=view&current=100_0288.flv][/ame]

[Liltroy]

750 pre and post IS a different engine, 600 is NOT.

I'm not arguing that bro. I know you've done alot of research and that you know your **** about these Kats. I'm just saying that the 600 pre's are listed as having 86hp and 44.1lbft, while the 600 98+ is listed as just having 80hp and 40.6lbft.The pre's also have lower reported 1/4 ET's so something is different somewhere??? Like I said, I would attribute the different horsepower to the changes made to the way manufacturers measure horsepower in the late 90's (SAE measurement). But that doesnt explain the pre's actually being faster. The pre's were also around 15 lbs lighter, but I cant really see that making that big of a difference. I was thinking about the carburation being different(98+ used a TPS to adjust timing), but I would think that should have helped to raise power slightly, not hinder it. My question is...... Wheres the extra couple tenths and mph coming from in the 1/4 on the pre's?

[arsenic]

well, it'll depend on what year the pre 600 was. If it's a 92-97 the cams are different, those years are shim valves (I know people are gonna say it's a different engine then, but NO, it's not). The bore and the stroke are the same from 88-06 600. The crank is the same, the pistons are the same. The engine is the EXACT same engine, the carbs are different 90-97 600 are 33mm carbs 98+ 600 are 32mm. 88-89 are 31, so I doubt they tested that. I'm guessing it was a shim valve, 33mm carb 600, it would give you your few tenths.

[waz_]

no, I'm just saying K&N on a Katana sucks large farm animals K&N on virtually every other application is pretty good.

must be different on an Australian Kat, my GSXF loves the K&N....

[Psycho1]

I thought the Suzuki bruchures for the '98 advertised that they made changes in cam timing or something to increase torque at lower rpm. If so peak torque may have been the same (just at different rpm's) but the pre would probably spin out a few extra ponies at high rpm. Also found this on the Sportrider website from a test of the '98 600 and 750.

"Generating the speed that the brakes scrub off, both the 600 and 750 engines employ the same basic design as the previous generations' air/oil-cooled engines. However, these engines have been hitting the gym for a little more muscle mass aimed at providing more power and improved ridability. The cylinders sport improved pistons and rings for a better seal. The rods gained better lubrication. The cylinders breathe through reshaped ports with valves operated by new camshafts for more low- and midrange power-right where street riders need it. The 600 and 750 engines feed the fire through 32mm and 36mm Mikuni carburetors, respectively"

http://www.sportrider.com/bikes/146_9908_suzuki_gsx_katanas/index.html

So it appears the camshafts are possibly different along with minor changes in the heads.

[Liltroy]

must be different on an Australian Kat, my GSXF loves the K&N....

Dont know where that came from, but I have to definately agree with arsenic on this one. Went I bought my kat, I made it a point to try everything that everyone on here said sucked. I got a full exhaust(loved it), got a Dynojet jet kit and got it tuned in perfect(loved it), bought a K&N filter(hated it). Felt like it maybe pulled a little harder up top but definately sucked large farm animals(as arsenic would say) for low/midrange and had a bad deadspot no matter what my guy did with the needles/jets, even float levels. He tuned on it for a whole day before telling me to ditch it if I wanted the thing to be "perfect" again.Like I said, I love making things work that people say wont...but that K&N just sucked!!

[arsenic]

werd, I don't make stuff up. If you haven't noticed, I've done everything I talk about and tell the hands on results, I'm not guessing here.

I thought the Suzuki bruchures for the '98 advertised that they made changes in cam timing or something to increase torque at lower rpm.

that was 96, the changed cam timing in 1996, the didn't change the actual cams until 1998. They did a lot of weird stuff in 96, spark plug diameter changed, CCT changed, cam timing changed, cam chain itself actually changed. Go figure, they did some of the changes that went into effect in 1998 a few years early.

[Mopar-Man]

10.8 @ 121? Somethings fishy...you sure thats your side of the slip?

And what do you mean by custom headers? You had a header fabricated and left the stock pipe on? You know the collector is the restriction point right..

Sorry, but I call "bullsh**" on this one. That is an E.T./mph for a DRAG CAR, not a street bike. 1.50 60 foot? Never happen on a Katana 600.