Aprilia RSV4 Factory Vs. NJMP Thunderbolt

By

Thunderbolt.jpgThe company’s first ground-up, in-house superbike, the Aprilia RSV4 Factory is smaller than an R6 and more powerful than an R1. “Factory” denotes the top-of-the-range model, fitted with Ohlins suspension and adjustable engine mounts. Max Biaggi is using his to mop the SBK floor with 2010′s other brand-new superbike, the BMW S1000RR. But can racing success make the only current V4 liter bike stand out from the race replica crowd? We took it to the Thunderbolt Raceway at New Jersey Motorsport Park to find out.

Click below for the feature.
2010 Aprilia RSV4 Factory Vs. Thunderbolt

  • http://www.urbanrider.co.uk Urban Rider

    Stunning looking bike, awesome stats, scared the cr*p out of me just reading the report. Great work.

  • http://muthalovin.com the_doctor

    Damn! That was an excellent read. I would like to adapt it to a screenplay. Maybe we could get Mike Bay in on this.

    Way to show the Camaro boys whats what. And also way not to find out about the grass.

  • Nick

    The wait was worth it chaps – great writing and the usual top quality art direction. So Grant, are you planning on getting the Alitalia race plastics?

  • Nick

    Oh and it looks like you managed to sort out your AGV visor there Wes.

    • http://Http://hellforleathermagazine.com Wes Siler

      Not pictured: faffing about with agv visor for 15mins.

  • Woody

    Next time just remember that the track looks like a squirrel.

  • gregorbean

    Nice write up. I just got my new issue of Sport Rider, complete with Superbike Showdown!!!! Anyway, this guy didn’t fare so well against the big boys. And of course the oh-so-hot-right-now S1000RR won.

  • 2ndderivative

    New BMW, new Aprilia…why do I still want a Fireblade?

    • Nick

      I’ve had the Fireblade for 2 years, ridden the BMW and RSV4. I bought the RSV4. There’s no comparison. The Fireblade is a sports tourer compared to the RSV4 and the BMW is a sports tourer with traction control.

  • AGP

    Mopping the floor? Ha ha… that’s pure comedy.

    If you really believe that the bike you tested has anything (other than the name) in common with the bike Biaggi races you are seriously deluding yourself. True of all SBK bikes, but especially of Aprilia, which are notorious for bending the rules. Besides the fact that one fork on the SBK bike costs more than the road bike there, or that the racer has different brakes, wheels, suspension, body, swingarm, electronics, exhaust, etc. Aprilia has the least stock-like bike on the paddock. The engine is not only tuned, it is flat out different (the racer uses gear driven cams, which was the subject of much complaint from other teams last year – so now Aprilia is offering the engine mods as an option for sale… what a joke). Did you hear the latest? On the most recent test at Assen Biaggi tested a new bike with the gas tank relocated under the seat… just like the one you got, right? ;) Here’s a pic for you… the tank is that large black box under the seat: http://static.blogo.it/motoblog/aprilia-rsv4-factory-di-max-biaggi-ad-assen/big_aprilia_rsv4_factory_biaggi_06.jpg

    If you want to compare actual bikes go to superstock, where Badovini on the S1000RR is 3 for 3, and Aprilia is dead last in manufacturers. Or the Spanish superstock series, or the Italian one, or the French one… the S1000RR is dominating in all of those, because those are actually based on stock bikes.

    • Nick

      And you would be dead last on a BMW as well. Superstock is very much down to the rider. Masterbike gives a better idea of what is down to the bike. Yes, the BMW won that thanks to traction control and ABS but the RSV4 was second. None of the current litre bikes come close to the RSV4 in handling or a pure race bike experience. You can get every single WSBK component for a road going RSV4 from Aprilia – yes, it will cost you a lot of money but it’s possible. There’s a very good reason why a large proprtion of production RSV4s are track only bikes. Ride them all back to back and see for yourself rather than relying on your armchair experience.

      • AGP

        Armchair my ass. I have ridden both bikes on the track, the BMW several times. The RSV4 is an awesome bike, one of then best handling ever, but the BMW is just as good, much more evolved, powerful and infinitely better on the road.

        And super stock is all about the rider? How convenient… ;) my point was that BMW is dominating in ALL the European stock classes, which means that off the floor and with basic race prep it is probably the most competitive platform (which you would not think from looking at WSBK performance… yet ;) ).

  • ez

    AGP the Yamaha R1 runs the tank under the seat too and did all of last year as well. Dont see that one in the Yamaha accessories catalog ether. Or the 23.9liter gas tank for the 1198r, or the square off tank of the CBR, and those are just gas tanks.

    WSBK isnt the best place to looking for stock to SBK comparisons because it wont mean crap unless you have 80 grand to throw at it (thats not including who in the hell is going to sort your sourced mess and make it actually work. After that you can start comparing and pointing fingers.

    (and yes the BMW is fast, 180hp fast, stock)

  • Sean Smith

    Rad. It’s like song of the sausage creature part 2, only with actual fast riding, and a track.

    Why can’t the magazines print stuff like this?

    • BL

      are you effin serious?
      wes writes a decent story, but Thompson he is not.
      He’s queer for anything fast though…..

  • Pamberjack

    Wes

    Unless I’m sadly mistaken, a recent test by the UK mag BIKE showed that the RSV4 was well down on power from all of the other liter sports bikes (R1 included) and nowhere near 180 bhp.

    From memory (I don’t have the article in front of me) it was only showing around 150bhp on the dyno. Blade was at about 170 bhp, and the new BMW S1000RR rang the bell at 193 bhp.

    Where did you get those figures from?

    • Pamberjack

      OK. Got the stats in front of me. The vanilla RSV4 has 152 BHP. The Factory has 162. The R1 has 160. So you are correct in saying that it has more power than the R1 – but only marginally. Different bikes on a different day and that could easily be reversed.

      And while we are at it, the Blade has 164, the ZX-10R has 171, the GSX-R1000 has 165 and the BMW S1000RR has 194 (!)

      Don’t get me wrong – from all accounts the standard RSV4 Factory is a great bike. It’s just not as powerful as you suggest and IMHO it would have a damn hard time “mopping the floor” with a standard BMW S1000RR in the real world…

      • http://hellforleathermagazine.com Wes Siler

        You shouldn’t draw conclusive results from a single dyno test, there’s just so many damn variables. Yes, the S1000RR is more powerful, but what’s peak power compared to mid-range? The V4 makes power and torque everywhere, that’s kinda the idea. Instead of a peaky inline-four it feels more like a V8.

        • AGP

          Eh? The RSV4 barely wins in torque under 4K RPM, after that it is on par with the other liter bikes, and gets destroyed in midrange by the CBR, the only 4 cylinder bike with a significant midrange advantage..

          I get that you love and want to love the bike, but you might want to stop making stuff up…

  • meatsmasher

    Man you guys really like that bike huh?

  • PhillyGuy

    The write-up squares with my memory of NJMP quite well. Ofcourse I was riding a 98hp British inline-four…man, I gotta get out there again.

  • Brian Evans

    I dig the article and the approach big time – I like the h4l approach, that being said the APE is not lighter than an R6. In fact it’s not even close…

  • Brian Evans

    According to a test just conducted by Road Racing World – June 2010, of all 1000cc contenders on the same race rubber in the same conditions the S1000RR generated more torque over a longer period than ANY other litre bike! It’s only a few ft/lbs but it is more and the curve is smooth and flat! All the new 1000cc bikes are generating about 77 ft/lbs of torque, and the BMW is putting out 81 so they are pretty close. With an unlocked ECU the R1 and RSV4 are putting out nearly identical hp and tq figures. Add in a lighter set of wheels, because the APE has forged OZ rims, and the weight difference is negligible but there would still be almost 5k in price difference….use that money for an exhaust and better suspension and the R1 would run circles around the RSV4 for the same money…sorry to digress :-)

  • Bob

    Badovini won in superstock on the Aprilia as well last year. He is clearly a better rider (or more experienced) than the other super-stock riders. He did well in WSBK too.

    If you look at the BSB stock class standings, Kawasaki is in first or second. Does the Kawasaki wipe the floor with the BMWs then? I agree with others who say that the rider makes the biggest difference in stock class racing.

    • AGP

      I never said anything about anyone mopping the floor with anyone else. :) in any case, of course the rider is crucial to a race platform – my point was, again, that the S1000RR is a very competitive platform where the bikes are still relatively close to their production models, much more so than in WSBK where so many other factors come into play, and the bikes are pushed to a level closer to prototype than production.

  • brettvegas

    Great Read.

    Huh, you roadies push the inside bar to go into a turn?
    Weird, I pull the outside bar to go into a turn.
    Don’t really matter much, the fucking bike turns bothe ways.
    Pushing on the bars just seams like yur wanting to get off the bike.
    Pulling sits you down into the bike.
    Perhaps it only works like that for dirt bikes, haven’t ridden big street bikes much, just the k100, and it’s a tank.
    Works on it though…

    heh

    Brett

  • luckyguy19

    It bugs me when writers state facts that aren’t true. It’s not hard to fact-check; it took me about 2 minutes to verify the weights of the compared bikes. The R6 is 409#s w/gas, the RSV4 Factory 453#s w/gas (via MotoUSA). These bikes aren’t even close. To say the Aprillia is lighter is ignorant and kills the credibility of the whole article. It makes me wonder if you’ve ever actually ridden an R6.

    • http://hellforleathermagazine.com Wes Siler

      Aprilia quotes a “kerb” weight of 179kg (395Lbs) that’s sans fuel and battery but supposedly includes everything else. Yamaha quotes a “wet” weight of 189kg (417Lbs) for the R6, but it’s not clear how much fuel or what else that includes. Admittedly not a great comparison without the bikes being on equal terms.

    • brettvegas

      Luckyguy19,

      I dunno, I am willing to forgive alot of mistakes if an artical is writen with passion. Hell, most of the time I write I dot the ‘tees’, and cross the ‘eyes’. Look past the nitpicking.

      BVG

      • luckyguy19

        Don’t get me wrong, I love an article written with passion. Admittedly, that is why I read HFL. Although I don’t believe it excuses misquoted facts. My problem is this; either the writer is lazy, or doesn’t think highly enough of his readers. I mean did he really think a blog that caters to enthusiasts wouldn’t pick up on something as simple as weights of the bikes compared. As an enthusiast, I know that weights quoted by manufactures are not to be believed, that the only source for comparison must come from a third party. I don’t think that honest and informed journalism can be overlooked. Otherwise this is a well written fiction piece based loosely of facts.

        • http://hellforleathermagazine.com Wes Siler

          Oh come on, you’re going to bitch and moan that much about something that I’ve clearly explained in response to your comment?

          • http://twitter.com/marshallhaas Marshall Haas

            Word

  • ln

    good read as with the rest of the sie.
    graphics is awesome too.

  • http://twitter.com/greatistheworld will

    Well, having nothing to add to the armchair specs-nitpicking I’ll go ahead and congratulate Grant on a brilliantly written piece. It’s even good enough to pass by the JPG text.

    Love the Vs. series. It should be a weekly.

    • Grant Ray

      Thanks, but actually, Wes wrote the story while I shot it and built all the graphics and features.

      • http://twitter.com/greatistheworld will

        My apologies- congratulations to Wes too, then- This is why I read about motorcycles while not regularly riding. I feed off the passion and felt writing. Car reviews complain about knee room, thin brake pedals and creaky gearknobs and shit. Well-written motorcycle reviews like this bring to life, define the joy and sensation of the sum experience.

  • luckyguy19

    Ever been talking to someone you really respected, just to have them say or do something dumb? You lose some of that respect for them, the relationship may never be the same. There are few motorcycle blogs out there, let alone good ones. So when a good one says something dumb it pisses me off. Articles I read about the R6 talk about what a feather weight it is. Articles I read about the RSV4 state how small and compact it is, but how surprisingly heavy it actually is. Wes, you owe it to your readers to keep your facts strait.

    • http://hellforleathermagazine.com Wes Siler

      At worst the RSV4 might be 17Lbs heavier than the R6. (395 Lbs + 4.5 gallons of fuel at 6 lbs/gallon + 12 lbs for the battery). That assumes that Yamaha quotes its wet weight figure with a full tank of fuel and that it’s an accurate figure. That’s close enough as not to matter and that’s the worst case scenario.

      Given the lack of independent weight measurements from any reliable source, I go with manufacture figures and some guestimation. Wish I could measure them myself.

      • luckyguy19

        Okay, the weights I got are from Motorcycle USA, they measure the bikes themselves. I have no trust for manufacture stated weights.

        Both tank full weights.

        http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/26/6291/Motorcycle-Article/2010-Aprilia-RSV4-Factory-Comparison.aspx

        http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/268/2808/Motorcycle-Article/2009-Yamaha-YZF-R6-Comparison.aspx

        So from the same source, assuming the same scales, 44# difference.

        That’s about 10%, that’s huge for a sport bike.

        Really if the difference was 5 or 10 pounds I wouldn’t have said a word. I just had one of those “what the fuck is he talking about moments.”

        Like I said, I agree that it may be nit-picking.

        I would have called out one of my friends had they said the same thing.

        • http://hellforleathermagazine.com Wes Siler

          No worries, we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I have a hard time believing what other bike publications write, particularly in this country where there’s a very direct link between what advertisers want and what the magazines (or Moto-usa in this case) publish.

          • luckyguy19

            Fair enough.

            It sucks, but I do agree with you about magazines and advertisements.

            I assumed that something as black and white as bike weights were close to accurate, and therefore similar from source to source.

            I just check motorcycle.com, they claim 470#s wet for the RSV4, and 414 wet for the R6. I can’t imagine that scale discrepancy’s can make up the 17# difference for the RSV4 between the two online mags.

            • http://hellforleathermagazine.com Wes Siler

              Now you see why I try to go with official numbers. Far from perfect, but at least it’s a basic standard for comparison.

              • luckyguy19

                The closest I could find for comparison was a dry weight of the R6 from 2008. It’s basically the same bike. These manufactures need to all get on the same page and measure their bikes the same.

                Either way, I’m jealous and would love to rip an RSV4 around a race track.

                http://www.yamaha-motor.com/sport/products/modelspeccompare/8/1751/0/compare.aspx

              • Salad Shooter

                It’s pretty easy to get real numbers. Buy a cheap digital wheel scale. Cut a deal with a local shop that has a dyno. Use a tape measure for everything else. That’s what most of those crappy print mags and moto sites do to get their data. Funny thing is, their numbers are usually pretty close to each other–if not identical–and nowhere near the manufacturer’s own claims. Start gathering your own data and you’ll see that the “official” manufacturer’s claims, which are usually mathematical calculations based on some theoretical optimal weight or power output of each individual component, are the absolute least reliable source of information. If I wanted to be regarded as a source of credible information, I’d start by never using a number, weight or measure that I haven’t verified myself.

                • http://hellforleathermagazine.com Wes Siler

                  The trouble with that is there’s really only need for one outlet to do that testing and we don’t want that outlet to be us. That outlet just needs to do it well and do it free from the influence of advertisers, sadly, that doesn’t appear to exist.

                  Vs. is about experience, not numbers, for one very important reason: numbers are shit boring.

                • Salad Shooter

                  “There’s really only need for one outlet to do that testing. That outlet just needs to do it well and do it free from the influence of advertisers, sadly, that doesn’t appear to exist.”

                  Really? Please produce an example of an actual measured weight, power output, ergo measure, lap time, quarter mile, acceleration figure or other data point that has been published recently by either a print magazine or Web site that does actual performance testing, that you think has been fudged for the benefit of a manufacturer or advertiser. I read pretty much every magazine and Web site out there, and though I might not agree with every opinion or conclusion, I think their numbers are pretty reliable.

                  The above quote, on the other hand, appears to be just another baseless claim that isn’t supported by any actual proof or reality. What’s Roadracing World’s tagline? “Honest Journalism, not Mindless Cheerleading?” This is more like “Lazy Journalism and Mindless Criticism.”

                • http://hellforleathermagazine.com Wes Siler

                  Taking a tape measure and scales to something isn’t terribly difficult, but I have yet to see someone do it with a consistent methodology that creates comparable results. If measurement’s are going to be your thing, do it well or not at all.

                • Salad Shooter

                  My point exactly. So you’re suggesting that when Sport Rider, or Motorcyclist, or Cycle World does a five-bike shootout and publishes their measured wheelbase, or wet weight, or takes all five bikes the the same dyno on the same day and runs them back-to-back, that these results are somehow not consistent or comparable?

                • http://hellforleathermagazine.com Wes Siler

                  I’m suggesting that there isn’t a consistent methodology between different tests.

                  So, as LonelyGuy suggests above, there’s no resource to turn to to look up results across a variety of bikes. Where can I look up the accurate weight of an RSV4 that’s been measured in an identical manner to an R6 or, say, a KTM 690 Duke or anything? Seriously, I’m not trying to be difficult, I’m asking, I’d love to find such a resource.

                  The lack of that resource is the reason I have no other choice than to go with manufacturer quoted weights, it’s the only thing approaching a consistent standard for comparison so that I can give readers maximum transparency. All weights quoted on HFL are from manufacturers unless stated otherwise.

                  How the hell did we get into this whole debate? This is supposed to be a fun, exciting story about the experience of riding a crazy new superbike to its limits, not a numbers comparison.

                • Nick

                  Wes, you should know better! This is tame compared to superbike forums (one in particular springs to mind). Any litrebike report is gonna get dicks swinging and the measurbators out en masse.

                  p.s. I pick my Factory up tomorrow :)

  • Woody

    People will always bitch about their free entertainment, or they just have to prove to everyone on the internet that they’re right.

  • Salad Shooter

    Why would you assume that any given magazine or Web site’s published measurements aren’t consistent? Why wouldn’t they measure every bike in the same way? I’d assume they’re as interested–if not more–than anyone else in having consistent, comparable data. To assume otherwise is pretty cynical.

    And why on earth would you assume that manufacturer’s claimed weights–which come from different manufacturers all acting in their own self interest and conforming to no standard or agreement whatsoever–are somehow more consistent or comparable?

    That logic is deeply flawed.

    • http://hellforleathermagazine.com Wes Siler

      Relying on manufacturers numbers is deeply flawed, but you’re still not showing me a consistent resource for independent numbers.

      My cynicism is based on experience.

  • Chris

    HP ratings are, at best, sketchy, but I’ll add a few notes from my time with my RSV4.

    2007 R1 vs RSV4-R, same dyno (DJ 250i). R1 w/full Ti Graves system, PC3 w/custom map (EDR Performance tuned) = 154 rwhp.

    2010 RSV4-R, full stock. 158 rwhp.

    Both values are w/STD correction factor. Figure ~150hp for the R1 and ~153-154 for the RSV4 SAE based on temps (similar for both runs).

    None of the above info really tells you anything about how the bike rides though. The R1 is an awesome bike, but the RSV4 was far easier for me to “get on with” than any other liter bike I’ve ridden, barring maybe the 01′ R1 (which is an amazing streetbike).

  • http://www.postpixel.com.au mugget

    Great report!

    That’s the way I wish all bike reviews were written. I don’t want to hear about the new frame, 10 grams lighter wheels or whatever else they have – you can get that straight from the manufacturer.

    Reading about spinning rear wheels and tank slappers – yes that’s what I want to read!

  • Keith

    All this talk of weights and HP and such misses the point.He’s not trying to sell bikes here just write a POV of running the bike on the track.
    I have only raced cars on tracks, not bikes, but could almost feel the speed and clench factor of a wild ride.
    I was amused by the “image”factor in the graphics.
    Nice work :)