MCRIDER007
Well-known member
It has been a long cold winter (and spring) in Washington and I now have 2300 miles on the C14 and enough experience on the C14 to talk about its engine performance and how it compares to my 05 FJR. My initial impressions was that the FJR had a power advantage below 4000 rpms but the C14 made more power above 6500 rpms (and was a lot smoother). This was pretty much confirmed by a test I will describe later.
As a bit of background, the C14 has the highly touted Variable Value Timing (VVT) which advances cam timing by 23 degrees and is supposed to reduce to and to build power over a very wide rpm range -- but when it was introduced everyone was asking what happened to the low end power. It turned out that one set of engineers designed a very flexible engine with great low end power and another set of engineers worked with the lawyers to mute the low end power and protect Joe Public from himself, using the same technology they put on the ZX-14.
The C14 has secondary butterflies (flies) that are controlled by the ECU and are almost totally closed until 4000 rpms in the first 4 gears and not fully open until around 6000 rpms. The result is a very docile and easy to ride motorcycle that also has a very smooth power delivery and relatively slow throttle response in gears 1-4. Gears 5 and 6 start opening the flies much sooner and may also have different fuel maps and ignition curves, but no one knows for sure and Kawasaki isn't talking. Every C14 dyno run I have seen in a magazine or on the Internet appears to be using 4th gear. The C14 also has a 24 inch, 20 pound muffler, that is full of baffles to meet the European noise standards and greatly restricts air flow -- and oddly enough, the standard fuel map is very rich between 2000-3500 and 8700-10,500 rpms which also has a negative impact on both low and top end performance.
My FJR is bone stock in the engine and exhaust department and I really intended to leave the C14 in a stock configuration but it was a long winter and after a month of looking at the cannon hanging off the C14, which is really ugly with the bags off, I ordered an AreaP carbon slip off and power commander from Fuel Moto USA. I had never purchased a slip on or PC but FuelMoto had some very impressive dyno runs using that slip on with their custom PC map, about a 13.5 HP and 5.3 torque increase, most coming at above 5000 rpms but still impressive. The AreaP slip on was also 14 pounds lighter.
I bought the PC because was worried about having a dangerously lean condition with the AreaP but that was not necessary, FuelMoto's custom map actually leaned the fuel mixture over 90 percent of the fuel cells, the same as Dynojet's map for a stock C14. However, the PC is probably responsible for half the HP gain on the dyno since the C14 is drowning in its own fuel at high rpms (the same thing Cycleworld reported on the 2008 ZX-14).
I installed the AreaP and PC in mid-January and found that FuelMoto's dyno curve seemed pretty accurate. There was a small increase in the low end power but the difference at 5000 rpms was very noticeable and it seemed to have a big hit at 6000 rpms that went all the way to redline. It also seemed to accelerate in 4th as hard as it previously did in 3rd and the acceleration above triple digit speeds in 4th, 5th, and 6th seemed to be linear, it would just kept going at a constant rate up to an indicated 150 mph.
What about low end power? FuelMoto also has fuel maps for those that wanted to completely remove the "flies" and results are pretty remarkable with 20 pound torque increases at 3000 rpms and 95 pounds of torque at 3500 rpms. There is also a small increase in torque above 6000 rpms all the way to redline and a 3 HP gain. This mod is very easy to do but a PC is required to avoid a dangerously lean condition. The downside is slightly lower gas mileage and maybe too much power and throttle response for low traction conditions.
An alternative is one of the TREs (Timing Reduction Eliminator) that fools the ECU into thinking its in a different gear. There is a YouTube video of the C14 on a dyno that demonstrates the difference in low end performance between 4th and 5th gear, and it is substantial, 15 pounds of torque at 3000 rpms, even more at 2500 rpms. GiPro makes very nice TRE that has its own gear display and allows you to emulate either 5th or 6th gear or turn it off and use the stock maps. It works by intercepting the voltage signal that is sent from the gear selector to the ECU, using that signal for its display, and then sending the voltage signal for the selected gear to the ECU. The ECU then displays the gear being emulated on the C14's dash display. Selecting 5th gear is a "soft" setting, 6th gear is a "hard" setting and there is a noticeable difference in 5th gear when the hard setting is selected so the 6th gear map is either opening the flies sooner or has a different fuel map/ignition curve then 5th gear. In either case, the power increase in the lower gears is very impressive (like WOW -- this is the way it should come from the factory) and the throttle response is much quicker, there isn't any hesitation, when you turn the throttle it just goes. I would guess that I am getting 75-80 percent of the power increase I would get with the flies completely removed and am very satisfied with the results, especially since I can turn it off in low traction conditions.
How does my modified C14 compare to my bone stock FJR? The only testing I have done to date is a roll on at various speeds between 2 signs (about 200 yards apart) in a remote area a few miles from my house. Not very scientific but I have done it enough that my results are usually with 1 mph and it avoids the problem of using different riders of different weights -- and it is surprising how much a 35 pound difference in rider weight can effect a roll on result. My test measures the differences in terminal speed, not elapsed time. Two bikes with the same terminal speed may have much different elapsed times if one has a quicker throttle response and that bike may appear to have a stronger engine but a dyno run will probably show that they are about the same. The FJR has a quicker throttle response than the C14 but this is reversed when the C14 is using the TRE.
In stock configuration, the (new) C14 accelerated from 70 mph to 105 in 5th gear, the same as my 05 FJR. Both bikes were indicating 4000 rpms at 70 mph and it validated my seat of the pants impression that they were pretty equal between 4-6000 rpms. I should mention that the overall gear reduction ratios between the FJR and C14 are pretty similar in the first 5 gears. The FJR has a 10.96 gear reduction in 1st gear and a 4.03 gear reduction in 5th gear. The C14's respective gear reductions are10.56 and 4.09. The C14 is really a 5 speed with an overdrive rather than a 6 speed. The overdrive's gear reduction is 3.40.
When I added the AreaP exhaust and PC, the C14's terminal speed increased to 110 and it was just hitting its power band.
I added the GiPro TRE to increase the C14's low end power so for the next tests I used a starting speed of 50 mph, about 3500 rpms in 4th gear and 3000 rpms in 5th. The FJR had a terminal speed of 95 in 5th gear and 102 in 4th. The C14, with the TRE emulating 6th gear, had terminal speeds of 105 in 5th gear and 112 in 4th. When I turned the TRE off, the terminal speeds dropped to 100 in 5th gear and 108 in 4th, which indicated that the TRE was not making as much difference as I thought, and that the C14 with the AreaP exhaust and PC was a pretty strong performer even at 3000 rpms.
If you assume my numbers are accurate, then my modified C14 can accelerate from 50 mph to 105 in the same distance that the fully stock (low mileage) C14 did 70 mph to 105 and that the modified C14 is a gear faster (from 50 mph) than my stock FJR. There isn't any doubt that the C14 has the stronger engine, 6 different riders have ridden both and agreed but I don't know if the difference is that great. Once the weather warms up and we have the time to ride to a very secluded testing area, we can run them side by side and see what happens.
To change the subject a bit, I am one of the few that has never thought that the FJR needed a 6th (overdrive) gear but I really like riding the C14 in OD at highway speeds. I don't think it makes much difference in gas mileage but the engine is so smooth and seems so "relaxed" that the FJR seems "buzzy" in comparison. I am now a OD convert.
As a bit of background, the C14 has the highly touted Variable Value Timing (VVT) which advances cam timing by 23 degrees and is supposed to reduce to and to build power over a very wide rpm range -- but when it was introduced everyone was asking what happened to the low end power. It turned out that one set of engineers designed a very flexible engine with great low end power and another set of engineers worked with the lawyers to mute the low end power and protect Joe Public from himself, using the same technology they put on the ZX-14.
The C14 has secondary butterflies (flies) that are controlled by the ECU and are almost totally closed until 4000 rpms in the first 4 gears and not fully open until around 6000 rpms. The result is a very docile and easy to ride motorcycle that also has a very smooth power delivery and relatively slow throttle response in gears 1-4. Gears 5 and 6 start opening the flies much sooner and may also have different fuel maps and ignition curves, but no one knows for sure and Kawasaki isn't talking. Every C14 dyno run I have seen in a magazine or on the Internet appears to be using 4th gear. The C14 also has a 24 inch, 20 pound muffler, that is full of baffles to meet the European noise standards and greatly restricts air flow -- and oddly enough, the standard fuel map is very rich between 2000-3500 and 8700-10,500 rpms which also has a negative impact on both low and top end performance.
My FJR is bone stock in the engine and exhaust department and I really intended to leave the C14 in a stock configuration but it was a long winter and after a month of looking at the cannon hanging off the C14, which is really ugly with the bags off, I ordered an AreaP carbon slip off and power commander from Fuel Moto USA. I had never purchased a slip on or PC but FuelMoto had some very impressive dyno runs using that slip on with their custom PC map, about a 13.5 HP and 5.3 torque increase, most coming at above 5000 rpms but still impressive. The AreaP slip on was also 14 pounds lighter.
I bought the PC because was worried about having a dangerously lean condition with the AreaP but that was not necessary, FuelMoto's custom map actually leaned the fuel mixture over 90 percent of the fuel cells, the same as Dynojet's map for a stock C14. However, the PC is probably responsible for half the HP gain on the dyno since the C14 is drowning in its own fuel at high rpms (the same thing Cycleworld reported on the 2008 ZX-14).
I installed the AreaP and PC in mid-January and found that FuelMoto's dyno curve seemed pretty accurate. There was a small increase in the low end power but the difference at 5000 rpms was very noticeable and it seemed to have a big hit at 6000 rpms that went all the way to redline. It also seemed to accelerate in 4th as hard as it previously did in 3rd and the acceleration above triple digit speeds in 4th, 5th, and 6th seemed to be linear, it would just kept going at a constant rate up to an indicated 150 mph.
What about low end power? FuelMoto also has fuel maps for those that wanted to completely remove the "flies" and results are pretty remarkable with 20 pound torque increases at 3000 rpms and 95 pounds of torque at 3500 rpms. There is also a small increase in torque above 6000 rpms all the way to redline and a 3 HP gain. This mod is very easy to do but a PC is required to avoid a dangerously lean condition. The downside is slightly lower gas mileage and maybe too much power and throttle response for low traction conditions.
An alternative is one of the TREs (Timing Reduction Eliminator) that fools the ECU into thinking its in a different gear. There is a YouTube video of the C14 on a dyno that demonstrates the difference in low end performance between 4th and 5th gear, and it is substantial, 15 pounds of torque at 3000 rpms, even more at 2500 rpms. GiPro makes very nice TRE that has its own gear display and allows you to emulate either 5th or 6th gear or turn it off and use the stock maps. It works by intercepting the voltage signal that is sent from the gear selector to the ECU, using that signal for its display, and then sending the voltage signal for the selected gear to the ECU. The ECU then displays the gear being emulated on the C14's dash display. Selecting 5th gear is a "soft" setting, 6th gear is a "hard" setting and there is a noticeable difference in 5th gear when the hard setting is selected so the 6th gear map is either opening the flies sooner or has a different fuel map/ignition curve then 5th gear. In either case, the power increase in the lower gears is very impressive (like WOW -- this is the way it should come from the factory) and the throttle response is much quicker, there isn't any hesitation, when you turn the throttle it just goes. I would guess that I am getting 75-80 percent of the power increase I would get with the flies completely removed and am very satisfied with the results, especially since I can turn it off in low traction conditions.
How does my modified C14 compare to my bone stock FJR? The only testing I have done to date is a roll on at various speeds between 2 signs (about 200 yards apart) in a remote area a few miles from my house. Not very scientific but I have done it enough that my results are usually with 1 mph and it avoids the problem of using different riders of different weights -- and it is surprising how much a 35 pound difference in rider weight can effect a roll on result. My test measures the differences in terminal speed, not elapsed time. Two bikes with the same terminal speed may have much different elapsed times if one has a quicker throttle response and that bike may appear to have a stronger engine but a dyno run will probably show that they are about the same. The FJR has a quicker throttle response than the C14 but this is reversed when the C14 is using the TRE.
In stock configuration, the (new) C14 accelerated from 70 mph to 105 in 5th gear, the same as my 05 FJR. Both bikes were indicating 4000 rpms at 70 mph and it validated my seat of the pants impression that they were pretty equal between 4-6000 rpms. I should mention that the overall gear reduction ratios between the FJR and C14 are pretty similar in the first 5 gears. The FJR has a 10.96 gear reduction in 1st gear and a 4.03 gear reduction in 5th gear. The C14's respective gear reductions are10.56 and 4.09. The C14 is really a 5 speed with an overdrive rather than a 6 speed. The overdrive's gear reduction is 3.40.
When I added the AreaP exhaust and PC, the C14's terminal speed increased to 110 and it was just hitting its power band.
I added the GiPro TRE to increase the C14's low end power so for the next tests I used a starting speed of 50 mph, about 3500 rpms in 4th gear and 3000 rpms in 5th. The FJR had a terminal speed of 95 in 5th gear and 102 in 4th. The C14, with the TRE emulating 6th gear, had terminal speeds of 105 in 5th gear and 112 in 4th. When I turned the TRE off, the terminal speeds dropped to 100 in 5th gear and 108 in 4th, which indicated that the TRE was not making as much difference as I thought, and that the C14 with the AreaP exhaust and PC was a pretty strong performer even at 3000 rpms.
If you assume my numbers are accurate, then my modified C14 can accelerate from 50 mph to 105 in the same distance that the fully stock (low mileage) C14 did 70 mph to 105 and that the modified C14 is a gear faster (from 50 mph) than my stock FJR. There isn't any doubt that the C14 has the stronger engine, 6 different riders have ridden both and agreed but I don't know if the difference is that great. Once the weather warms up and we have the time to ride to a very secluded testing area, we can run them side by side and see what happens.
To change the subject a bit, I am one of the few that has never thought that the FJR needed a 6th (overdrive) gear but I really like riding the C14 in OD at highway speeds. I don't think it makes much difference in gas mileage but the engine is so smooth and seems so "relaxed" that the FJR seems "buzzy" in comparison. I am now a OD convert.
Last edited by a moderator:
