Any 600cc with quick shifter?

Forum Sponsor
Yanny said:
Thanks, I could care less about his comment, if something is useless they won't be put to use on the street. Ive heard more people saying they can't live without it because it's easier to change gear. There will always be people who opposes new features, mainly old fashioned riders or wannabe racers. People have said and continue to say ABS is useless on a bike as well, look what Europe have done, mandated all bikes ABS as standard.:lmao:
Click to expand...
Yanny you need to read and understand.


They are a great tool for track riding, I personally wouldn't ride on the track without one but they are useless on a street bike, just a nice to have but you gain nothing by having them on a street bike.

It's like arguing with stupid people.
 
ZX600 said:
Yanny you need to read and understand.


They are a great tool for track riding, I personally wouldn't ride on the track without one but they are useless on a street bike, just a nice to have but you gain nothing by having them on a street bike.

It's like arguing with stupid people.
Click to expand...

Why is the ability to perform clutchless, no-lift upshifts, even on the street, "useless"?

Sometimes "nice to have" is all the usefulness someone needs.

To each his own.
 
Blackfin said:
Sometimes "nice to have" is all the usefulness someone needs.

To each his own.
Click to expand...
That is a great point and the reason I installed one on my street bike this last week, not because I needed to but because I wanted to.

A QS will save you tents of a second when trying to achieve minimum lap time from point A to point B, when do you find yourself in a situation when you need to save tents of a second on the street? If you are racing against your buddy on the 507 then that is not a street application, that becomes a race application regardless if you are on track or not.

Even when I used to ride hard on the street and doing stupid stuff with friends I didn't need a QS, with all the obstacles on the road you are never going full on (some street riders swear they are but they are not) so the need to save tents is just not there

Want one, get it, they are cool.
 
Blackfin said:
Why is the ability to perform clutchless, no-lift upshifts, even on the street, "useless"?

Sometimes "nice to have" is all the usefulness someone needs.

To each his own.
Click to expand...

Agree. Obviously the purpose is not to save a fraction of second on the street:lmao:
 
It is my thoughts that there are many other WAYYYYYYY more beneficial ways to spend $250 on your street bike.
New tires. Suspension upgrades. Braided brake lines and better pads. Improved master cylinder.
If you want one, cool. But don't try to fool the rest of us into thinking you want it for any other reason than "neato" factor. Because there are many other improvements that should be made before that.
And further, if shifting a bike is too hard, why not buy a scooter? Those are auto....or get a pushbutton dual clutch bike....... and you won't even need to worry about straining your clutch hand or left ankle.....lol
 
omnivore said:
It is my thoughts that there are many other WAYYYYYYY more beneficial ways to spend $250 on your street bike.
New tires. Suspension upgrades. Braided brake lines and better pads. Improved master cylinder.
If you want one, cool. But don't try to fool the rest of us into thinking you want it for any other reason than "neato" factor. Because there are many other improvements that should be made before that.
And further, if shifting a bike is too hard, why not buy a scooter? Those are auto....or get a pushbutton dual clutch bike....... and you won't even need to worry about straining your clutch hand or left ankle.....lol
Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply. I don't mod my bike, that's why I want to find a bike that has QS from factory. I also don't think is neato? whatever that means, who cares if I have QS:confused::confused:
 
Yanny said:
Thanks for your reply. I don't mod my bike, that's why I want to find a bike that has QS from factory. I also don't think is neato? whatever that means, who cares if I have QS:confused::confused:
Click to expand...

QS is not new been around for years on drag bikes.
 
As far as I can tell, none of the Japanese 600s have a quickshifter as OEM. Some versions of the Triumph 675 (which is 600 "ish") have one. If you want an OEM quickshifter in a 600 "ish" bike, the Triumph 675 is it.

/end
 
BigEvilDoer said:
WTF? If you need a quick shifter to alleviate stress on your left hand while doing longer rides... you really need to hang up your keys and sell your bikes. They're a track orientated option, plain and simple.

It's not a big deal at all to simply roll off the throttle for a half second, click the shifter into a higher gear (*WITHOUT* pulling in the clutch) and away you go back on the gas.
If you can't do that without a quick shifter, you need to evaluate your riding skills and take some courses to improve them.

I'm curious though -- can you please explain to me how you find pulling a clutch lever on the highway once or twice an hour more tiring than controlling your throttle for the same amount of time?

You mentioned touring as the primary reason for needing one -- isn't most touring done on highways? Why would you need a quick shifter there? Makes about as much sense as wearing mukluks in the high desert.
Click to expand...

Fuckin right,
 
Yanny said:
Does any 600cc category bike have quick shifter? Originally I wanted to buy a S1000RR, for its electronic convenience features. But since I've been told there's a lot of heat I quickly changed my mind. I will be using it as my main transport, so it needs to be not harsh. The R1 was my next choice but still the heat issue concerns (if anyone experienced?). So I have quickly narrowed my choices to just 600cc. cruise control, abs, quick shifter, TC, power modes all useful features for street biking.
Click to expand...

How about Elec ,?you don't have to shift at all,
 
Clutch less up shifts are slightly smoother then what a QS would be at partial throttle. At full throttle the QS is nice and smooth but just cruising around they're pretty jerky, I wouldn't be able to stand it on the road.
 
dricked said:
Clutch less up shifts are slightly smoother then what a QS would be at partial throttle. At full throttle the QS is nice and smooth but just cruising around they're pretty jerky, I wouldn't be able to stand it on the road.
Click to expand...

That hasn't really been my experience overall though the large-ish gap between 1-2 can be somewhat jerkier than the other gears if you're using the QS at less than, say, 4000RPM and at light throttle. I usually just manually shift for 1-2 and while accelerating very slowly (e.g. in traffic.) As usual, YMMV.
 
I can see having one being nice...but I still can't fathom why some see it as a necessity on the street (unless they plan on using the street as a track).
 
conundrum said:
I can see having one being nice...but I still can't fathom why some see it as a necessity on the street (unless they plan on using the street as a track).
Click to expand...

Having a motorcycle is not a "necessity". Having a 600+cc motorcycle is not a necessity for riding on public roads. All motorcycles come with fully adequate front and rear brakes for riding on public roads; fancy radial master cylinders and braided lines are not a "necessity" either.

I could go on and on. We don't ride motorcycles out of necessity and virtually nothing we add to our bikes -- save something like panniers if you want to tour or something -- falls into the category of being absolutely "necessary."

Shorty, anodized levers. Spools. Steering dampers. Engine oil filler plugs. Anodized bar end weights. Aftermarket windscreens. Rim tape/stickers. Lightweight wheels. Fuel computers. Gold-link chains. Carbon fiber bits and pieces like front and hugger fenders. Radiator screens/guards. Rearsets. Suspension upgrades. The list of things people do to their bikes is endless and, for the average street riders, not a single one is absolutely necessary.

Was is really necessary for you do move from a 250 to a 650? Did the 250 not get you where you were going? Was it not capable of doing the speed limit? Why do you need 87HP when 24HP served you moving from point 'A' to point 'B' just fine? Are you using the street as a track?

I don't personally subscribe to some of the rationales given by others -- shifting and clutch-hand fatigue, for example -- for getting a QS but if that's their reason, more power to them. Why does it matter what rationale someone uses for modding their bike?

I'm glad there are people out there supporting the motorcycle aftermarket and wrenching on their bikes, no matter if it's just to be cool, for convenience or because they have some underlying medical issue that's none of my business. I'd rather ride with guys like that than the sterile, robotic types that look down their nose at anything not absolutely necessary and thus not pure.
 
conundrum said:
I can see having one being nice...but I still can't fathom why some see it as a necessity on the street (unless they plan on using the street as a track).
Click to expand...

It's a habit, it will become understandable after you've used it long enough. I disagree using the street as a track.

Thanks for everyone input.

/end
 
dricked said:
Clutch less up shifts are slightly smoother then what a QS would be at partial throttle. At full throttle the QS is nice and smooth but just cruising around they're pretty jerky, I wouldn't be able to stand it on the road.
Click to expand...

There must be a big difference between QS that come stock with the bike and aftermarket units. Most of the time I shift mine at around 5000, 10% throttle and it is dead smooth, same with my wife's bike. Both bikes came stock with quick shifters.
 
Oh there's a huge difference. I already wrote about my experience in post #46 of this thread.

An OEM quickshifter is implemented within the engine control ECU. As a result, it knows, and can account for (not saying they all do, but they can):
- Throttle position
- RPM
- Road speed
- What gear you are in and what gear you are changing into
- Whether you have the clutch lever pulled in or not (disable quick shifting if so)
- Whether the clutch is slipping as a result of you pulling in the clutch lever (It knows what the RPM should be based on mathematics from the road speed and what gear you are in, and it knows what the RPM actually is)
- How strongly you are pulling on the shift lever (It's a strain gauge, which is an analog input, not a simple "if - then" switch that changes state at a fixed threshold)

In addition, because it is within the engine control ECU, it can detect the change in RPM that accounts for the shift being completed and resume power output the moment it detects that the shift has been completed, and/or it can detect the completion of the shift by seeing the sensor on the shift drum change state, as opposed to being a fixed preset time delay.

Aftermarket add-on boxes ... don't have most of this.

The OEM quickshifter on my beast works seamlessly. It just doesn't work with reverse shift pattern (yet - until I apply some mechanical engineering design to get around its design limitation).

I had to modify the add-on quickshifter on my other bike to disable it if the clutch lever is not completely out. Part-throttle driveability was intolerable otherwise.
 
Brian P said:
Oh there's a huge difference. I already wrote about my experience in post #46 of this thread.

An OEM quickshifter is implemented within the engine control ECU. As a result, it knows, and can account for (not saying they all do, but they can):
- Throttle position
- RPM
- Road speed
- What gear you are in and what gear you are changing into
- Whether you have the clutch lever pulled in or not (disable quick shifting if so)
- Whether the clutch is slipping as a result of you pulling in the clutch lever (It knows what the RPM should be based on mathematics from the road speed and what gear you are in, and it knows what the RPM actually is)
- How strongly you are pulling on the shift lever (It's a strain gauge, which is an analog input, not a simple "if - then" switch that changes state at a fixed threshold)

In addition, because it is within the engine control ECU, it can detect the change in RPM that accounts for the shift being completed and resume power output the moment it detects that the shift has been completed, and/or it can detect the completion of the shift by seeing the sensor on the shift drum change state, as opposed to being a fixed preset time delay.

Aftermarket add-on boxes ... don't have most of this.

The OEM quickshifter on my beast works seamlessly. It just doesn't work with reverse shift pattern (yet - until I apply some mechanical engineering design to get around its design limitation).

I had to modify the add-on quickshifter on my other bike to disable it if the clutch lever is not completely out. Part-throttle driveability was intolerable otherwise.
Click to expand...

Good to know. Based on that, I understand why people using aftermarket units would advise against using QS on the street.
 
Blackfin said:
Having a motorcycle is not a "necessity". Having a 600+cc motorcycle is not a necessity for riding on public roads. All motorcycles come with fully adequate front and rear brakes for riding on public roads; fancy radial master cylinders and braided lines are not a "necessity" either.

I could go on and on. We don't ride motorcycles out of necessity and virtually nothing we add to our bikes -- save something like panniers if you want to tour or something -- falls into the category of being absolutely "necessary."

Shorty, anodized levers. Spools. Steering dampers. Engine oil filler plugs. Anodized bar end weights. Aftermarket windscreens. Rim tape/stickers. Lightweight wheels. Fuel computers. Gold-link chains. Carbon fiber bits and pieces like front and hugger fenders. Radiator screens/guards. Rearsets. Suspension upgrades. The list of things people do to their bikes is endless and, for the average street riders, not a single one is absolutely necessary.

Was is really necessary for you do move from a 250 to a 650? Did the 250 not get you where you were going? Was it not capable of doing the speed limit? Why do you need 87HP when 24HP served you moving from point 'A' to point 'B' just fine? Are you using the street as a track?

I don't personally subscribe to some of the rationales given by others -- shifting and clutch-hand fatigue, for example -- for getting a QS but if that's their reason, more power to them. Why does it matter what rationale someone uses for modding their bike?

I'm glad there are people out there supporting the motorcycle aftermarket and wrenching on their bikes, no matter if it's just to be cool, for convenience or because they have some underlying medical issue that's none of my business. I'd rather ride with guys like that than the sterile, robotic types that look down their nose at anything not absolutely necessary and thus not pure.
Click to expand...

I don't know about you, but I don't see lightweight parts and fancy brakes, etc as requirements....sure they are nice to haves...but if suddenly bikes stopped coming with them I'm not going to huff and puff and stop riding.

As for the 250 -> 650 comment that is just BS as well...I got it because I wanted more power for passing at highway speeds (something the 250 was short on), otherwise it was a great bike that I actually do miss sometimes. The power increase is nice to have...but if the 650 didn't exist I wasn't about to give up riding as the 250 was 'not enough'. It was enough, I just wanted (not absolutely needed to the point of complaining about it on a forum) more.

Also to add, I'm not against people wanting to put quickshifters and the like on street bikes...more power to them if they want to spend their money and modify their bikes to their liking. What I am somewhat against is when people say things like quickshifters are a requirement for a bike to be functional on the street, and complain about why all bikes aren't made with them stock.
Forum Sponsor
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom