AMCN responded saying that each manufacturer who offer bikes for reviews do it
differently and that it often can't get the bikes weighed.
Fair enough. However, I'd like to know - what's the difference between wet and
kerb weight?
I first noticed this kerb weight thing when I read the first reviews of Honda's
VFR1200. It listed the bike as around 260kg "kerb weight".
Despite lots of Googling and question asking in various forums I never did find
out how much it weighs compared to my dry weighted 217kg Blackbird...
I'm pretty sure kerb weight and wet weight are the same measurement.
Bike with a full radiator, sump and petrol tank, ready to ride.
Nev..
At one extreme Guzzi list kerb weight which, in their case, is as ridden,
with a full tank of fuel. I've also seen kerb weight as with 4 litres of
fuel. The difference would be 20 litres or 14 kg for a Guzzi.
Manufacturers that list dry weight generally mean, no fuel, no oils and no
battery. Makes their bikes sound really light. A full tank of fuel will add
14 kg for a 20 litre tank. Oils will add another five, and the battery at
least eight, which will get your Bird to 244, not that much les than the
VFR.
When I had my first Guzzi I filled the tank and rode it to a weighbridge.
Parked on the bridge and asked the guy how much. He said do you want to know
how much it weighs or do you need a ticket? I said Huh? He said, it weighs
241 kg but if you want that in writing I'll have to charge you $5. The
brochure said it weighed 240 kg.
Theo
> Manufacturers that list dry weight generally mean, no fuel, no oils and no
> battery. Makes their bikes sound really light. A full tank of fuel will add
Thanks Theo, but I was more interested in how they worked out this new kerb
weight standard.
But, as for dry weight, if they're all weighed the same, at least there's a
basis for comparison.
Now, with kerb, wet and dry weight measurements I have no fucking idea any more
(or some may say, "any less").
And the bike mags could do us a better service by standardising their reviews.
Lash out, buy a bloody weightometer and use it. Don't merely rely on press
releases for their reviews.
Worth having a look at:-
http://ols2.rta.nsw.gov.au/rvd/searchRVD.do;jsessionid=c0a80d99223cd466641d0f3c4a24a15ff5de37deb2c3.e38Lc38KbxiObO0Schb0glbGmkTylN4?submitValue=start
The RTA's weight numbers don't always agree with the manufacturer's
quoted numbers, and I believe the RTA may actually weight a real life
one. How much fuel, oil and coolant may be in it at the time.... <shrug>
Sorry, I dunno how to make a wee URL.
regards,
CrazyCam
>
> Worth having a look at:-
> http://ols2.rta.nsw.gov.au/rvd/searchRVD.do;jsessionid=c0a80d99223cd466641d0f3c4a24a15ff5de37deb2c3.e38Lc38KbxiObO0Schb0glbGmkTylN4?submitValue=start
>
>
> Sorry, I dunno how to make a wee URL.
>
For long URLs , you can either put angle brackets around the URL ,
eg < long url address > to keep the address altogether without breaks
or you can use TinyURL to make a short URL.
--
Sandgroper
--------------------------------------------
Save planet Earth !
It's the only place that has Pizza and Beer
And even if they had a standardised weight system, it still wouldn't be
a level comparison, because two bikes of similar style and weight might
have completely different weight distributions - CoG etc, eg a standing
upright harley style 45° V-twin with a fuel tank mounted traditionally
above the engine/frame vs a bike with a yamaha style leaning forward
4cyl engine mounted very low and an under seat mounted fuel tank.
Nev..