But the blade has one advantage if you break it you can get another engine less ancillaries for about £200 as I did off ebay. This gives great piece of mind as you thrash the pants off it.
Hi,
First post and I'll apologise now if what follows is a daft question...
I want to build a fireblade BEC and have been searching ebay etc for an engine kit.
Does anyone have any views on which engine represents best value for money / reliability
893, 918, 929, 954 or 998
and roughly what price I should be looking at paying
Many thanks
Stick with the later carb'd versions, later injected Blades have the HISS ignition system (avoid), I think the 918 would be the choice.
Try Mal at Yorkshire engines (do a search), then buy an R1 motor !
hi,
we had the 929 injection fireblade which went well with a dynojet system mapped by holeshot racing. we got the engine from ebay for £800 with all of
the ancillaries. For the price i would look at maybe an R1 engine as they have slightly more torque and there are plenty of them about so they are
'tried & tested' in my opinion the R1 choice seems better value for money as for if not the same just a little more money you get more
torque. Also the kawasaki ZX9 seems to be about on par with the blade engine. So in my opinion the R1 is best value for money but see what everyone
else says.
Tom
[Edited on 25/5/06 by tom windmill]
Hello again and thanks for the replies
As you've mentioned the R1 is this the way to go? Do you think the fireblade will result in repeated stalling / spinning the wheels in an effort
to get away ?!?!
I'd like to think it won't be like that!
cheers
Mark
I have an R1 BEC and have no problem pulling away. You only spin the wheels if trying very hard. Stalling is not a problem if you have enough travel
on your pedal. I doub't the fireblade engine would be any worse.
R1s have more power than blades. This improves acceleration at the top end of road legal speeds. Perhaps only of real benefit on trackdays.
My two pennies worth.
Build it around an 893 blade engine, high emmisions allowed as a pre aug 93 engine so no CAT required.
This should cost £300 - £500 all in (get the headers and modify so limiting your spend on this lump.
Once SVA'd if you are unhappy with the performance upgrade and sell on the old lump.
Regards Mark
Agree with you all. I have 893 RRS No problem with stalling etc and pulls well. R1 would be my choice too.
But the blade has one advantage if you break it you can get another engine less ancillaries for about £200 as I did off ebay. This gives great piece
of mind as you thrash the pants off it.
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
R1s have more power than blades. This improves acceleration at the top end of road legal speeds. Perhaps only of real benefit on trackdays.
quote:
Originally posted by mark chandler
My two pennies worth.
Build it around an 893 blade engine, high emmisions allowed as a pre aug 93 engine so no CAT required.
This should cost £300 - £500 all in (get the headers and modify so limiting your spend on this lump.
Once SVA'd if you are unhappy with the performance upgrade and sell on the old lump.
Regards Mark
quote:
Originally posted by the_fbi
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
R1s have more power than blades.
954's are 149bhp (and 77ft/lb) as standard which is the same as an R1?
quote:
Originally posted by Lightning
.....engine less ancillaries for about £200 as I did off ebay.......
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
quote:
Originally posted by the_fbi
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
R1s have more power than blades.
954's are 149bhp (and 77ft/lb) as standard which is the same as an R1?
carbed blades are about 135 and fuel injected are 149 as you say.
carbed R1s are about 150 and fuel injected are about 180.
Both are fast.
you wont be disappointed with an 893 blade, I wasn't
quote:
Originally posted by the_fbi
Not sure where your figures came from, the 2002 R1 is 152bhp. The latest and greatest may be 180.
quote:
sounds like a cracking deal but what are engine ancillaries? sump etc?
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
quote:
Originally posted by the_fbi
Not sure where your figures came from, the 2002 R1 is 152bhp. The latest and greatest may be 180.
2004 onwards is 180 in round figures. There have been intermediate modles between the 1998 R1 and the latest 2006 version but it would be just nerdy to quote them all, wouldn't it?
my 2p worth as much as I love my r1 performance
the amount of hassle and on the edge of seat setting up which still hasnt got through SVA
stick a pre 95 engine in any mods can come after
so deff go for early blade which can easily be tweeked up
or replaced at a later date
Ive had both in my car, and they are both good reliable engines and you won't go wrong whatever you chose, but if you can stretch to the R1 then
I would recommend it. Apart from the extra ponies (it is noticable), the clutch is much bigger on the R1 which helps reliability and seems to make it
less prone to slipping when the plates start wearing a bit, compared to the blade, and the gearbox is far nicer too, much more precise and less prone
to false neutrals than the blade. Also unless you go for an injected (and far less proven in BEC circles) blade engine, the newest engine you're
going to get hold of is a '99 RRX. With the R1, you have the choice of anything up to 2003 injected R1s before the engine changes and again
becomes a little unproven.
As I said though, you wont be disapointed with either, and as others have mentioned the blade does give you the option of easy emissions at SVA with
the pre-95 engine which is a bonus if you can find a good engine.