close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Kz1300 Hp?

Discussion in 'Moto Club' started by WERA49, Nov 23, 2004.


  1. WERA49

    WERA49
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2003
    665
    0
    Location:
    Ohio
    How much HP did a KZ1300 make?
     

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. Compy

    Compy
    Expand Collapse
    CompensateWhat?

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2000
    1,159
    0
    Location:
    Neither here nor there
  3. WERA49

    WERA49
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2003
    665
    0
    Location:
    Ohio
    Thank you, Sir!

    I need that information to settle a disagreement. A guy at work claims that his stock 1979 KZ1300 makes 175 rear wheel HP. I told him that he'd be lucky if it made 175 HP at the crank. He said that crank and rear wheel HP are the same.............;Q
     
  4. WERA49

    WERA49
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2003
    665
    0
    Location:
    Ohio
    The order of post's is not correct. :)


    That's funny. I've never seen that before on a forum.
     
  5. Compy

    Compy
    Expand Collapse
    CompensateWhat?

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2000
    1,159
    0
    Location:
    Neither here nor there
    Funkadelic! It's like we're in some sort of SQL time warp or something!
     
  6. FoxMustang

    FoxMustang
    Expand Collapse
    We Deal in Lead

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2001
    313
    0
    It's been happening in at least one other forum on here. Something to do with the time, and things are getting out of order. I've seen it on other message boards, but this is a GT first for me :)
     
  7. ClickClickBoom

    ClickClickBoom
    Expand Collapse
    Sod Off

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    54
    0
    Location:
    Still The Back 40
    Used to have an 82 KZ1.3, according the owners manual (Yes, kawasaki used to print their HP ratings in the manual), It was 130 horses. Which would be quite possible considering the engine displacement and configuration. Of course it would be hampered by the fact the bike weighed about 730 pounds, and it was shaftdriven, so tack on an additional 7% to parasitic drivetrain loss. Realistically, if the HP had been rated at the crank, figure a little over a 100 horses at the rear wheel.
     
  8. gixxer11

    gixxer11
    Expand Collapse
    bbrrraaapppppp!

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    257
    0
    Location:
    in the garage
    Yes, approx 100hp is more like it. It's an old design, 2 valve, crappy carbs (I've rebuit a set, they're terrible and small), it doesn't rev, heavy crank, etc. Actually 100hp is optimistic in stock form. Don't get me wrong, I think they're really neat, I'm just being realistic. Back in '82 they were tough, but any modern 600 would beat it on a dyno hp wise.