my friend has an 09 650r and i have another friend with an 07 650r for starters....
the 09 gets 38 mpg the 07 gets 53 mpg
09 runs bout 126 mph 07 runs 138 mph
09 tachs out after 9-10 grand 07 pulls strong all the way to 11 grand

is this normal for the 07's to be this much different than the 09's?

im not there to prod anyone or prod 650r's i just have a very concerned friend on an 09 thats gettin beat by an older 07 bike..
the engines are the same but the claim they redid the ecu on the 09s for a better "midrange" power ...are the ecu's interchangeable on the 650r's?
i didnt see any posts on this matter
4 of my friends ride 650r's 2 07s 1 08 and 1 09

thanks for any replies on this matter

 

That is interesting. I would be curious on swapping the ecu's if the engine specs are all the same for testing.

 

Sounds like one may be geared. Count the sprockets and see if both are stock.

 

ya the gearing is off 1 tooth in the rear so i didnt bother posting it

 

Mystery solved!

 

1 tooth in the rear is no biggey. and I am not up on the 650's to be of any assistance. Although I am curious now.

 

The 07 doesn't run 138 mph. Best on test from any of the mags was a shade under 130 mph, but then you must allow for speedo error. 10 mph at the top end is about right for both models. That's exaggerated when the gearing is altered. One tooth up on the rear improves the speedo accuracy. One tooth down makes it worse, both by about 2% of the true speed. One tooth either way will make very little difference to the actual top speed. The most common mods applied together will add about 3 - 5 bhp, which again makes very little difference to top speed, but makes the bike noticeably 'stronger'.

A low mileage bike that's been properly broken in will be a little slower than a higher mileage one - it takes about 10K miles for the motor to fully loosen up. That will also make a difference to the mpg, as will altering the gearing, but not as much as riding style does.

It does sound from the revs that you talk about that the 09 perhaps wasn't broken in as well as it might have been though, and is down on power as a result, or maybe the rider is an aerodynamic disaster. Excess drag can easily knock 10 mph off the true top speed and 10 mpg from the fuel consumption.

Personally I prefer the earlier bike, but that's because I prefer the shape of the fairing and hate the digital instruments on the 09. I'm also unhappy about the 09's slimmed down and more 'flexible' (Kawaski's description) frame, but I wouldn't expect any real difference in performance. Peak power is claimed to be the same for both bikes.

Rob