Is the Pre-gen 250 still a capable bike?

[sombo]

And the numbers do not support your theory of feeling something increase when it's decreasing. I'm not as dumb as you seem to think I am, I know the difference between torque and HP. I know that the off-the-line acceleration is based on torque and not hp, I've often had to explain this to local tuners. However, I still argue that you can not feel an increase in something when it's measured value decreases. That alone defies logic. Just as you can not feel an increase in temperature when it's measured value goes down.

I'm not arguing the science, just what you believe you are feeling. Just as science can't explain everything in the universe and is not perfect, it can not tell you what exactly you are feeling. If you measure something to be decreasing yet FEEL an increase in something, then how can you logically say that what you are feeling is the same thing being measured to be decreasing? Therefore, if you are truly feeling an increase in your bike at the 8k-12k rpm range, yet the torque begins to decrease at this level, then how can you logically explain feeling it increase? What you feel may not be what you think it is, we are not scientific measuring devices.

[Skippii]

Don't get discouraged; physics is complicated. If physics was easy, it would be called "Your mom."


Maybe this will help:
Remember that horsepower produced by engine is the same at a given engine speed--that is, you can't get more horsepower by changing your sprockets. That does, however, effect the torque.
If what you feel is HP, and not torque, you would feel the exact same amount of pull in frist gear as in 6th. Since that's not the case, it can't be HP that you "feel".

Technically, it's not torque, either. You only feel acceleration, which newton's second law tells us is based on force (and mass). Since most motorcycles use round tires, torque is a simpler measurement for us to use.

[Skippii]

Originally Posted by sombo

I'm not as dumb as you seem to think I am,

No one's accusing you of being dumb. You're able to hold a conversation about this stuff, and that says something. The dumb thing to do would be to blindly accept what other people says without understanding it.

[PlaneGuy]

Originally Posted by sombo

And the numbers do not support your theory of feeling something increase when it's decreasing. I'm not as dumb as you seem to think I am,

I don't think you are dumb. I just think you are mistaken.

I know the difference between torque and HP. I know that the off-the-line acceleration is based on torque and not hp, I've often had to explain this to local tuners. However, I still argue that you can not feel an increase in something when it's measured value decreases. That alone defies logic. Just as you can not feel an increase in temperature when it's measured value goes down.

The dyno is always the final arbiter since it provides real measurements. But if you look at the curve, there is torque peak in the Pre-gen bike that in your graph begins at just below 8,000 and peaks at 10,000 RPM. But remember, that torque and hp curve is for one bike. It is very possible that my bike, for whatever reason, has its torque peak begin at a slightly different point.

And then there are reasons that my not-so-scientific seat-of-the-pants observation might be wrong, i.e.:

1. my tach might not be right;
2. since the RPM was changing rapidly, I might not have read the RPM at exactly when I was feeling the torque increasing.

But one thing is clear from the curve you posted, the bike that was tested shows the beginning of a clear torque increase occurring at just below 8,000 RPM and remains elevated above the lower RPM torque until about 11,000, pretty close what I said I was feeling.

But I am pleasantly surprised to see just how flat the torque curve is from 6000-12000 RPM. Thank you for posting the torque and HP curves. I really appreciate it.

[sombo]

Originally Posted by Skippii

Don't get discouraged; physics is complicated. If physics was easy, it would be called "Your mom."


Maybe this will help:
Remember that horsepower produced by engine is the same at a given engine speed--that is, you can't get more horsepower by changing your sprockets. That does, however, effect the torque.
If what you feel is HP, and not torque, you would feel the exact same amount of pull in frist gear as in 6th. Since that's not the case, it can't be HP that you "feel".

Technically, it's not torque, either. You only feel acceleration, which newton's second law tells us is based on force (and mass). Since most motorcycles use round tires, torque is a simpler measurement for us to use.

Perhaps, but I was going off of his original statement/question:

When I dial the throttle on starting at, say, 4000 RPM, and hold it there until I hit redline, I feel a clear increase in torque starting around 8000 RPM and starting to trail off at around 12000 RPM.

Even your explanation here disagrees with his statement/question. That is the point I am trying to make and everyone is telling me I'm wrong when the data supports my argument.

[sombo]

Originally Posted by PlaneGuy

But one thing is clear from the curve you posted, the bike that was tested shows the beginning of a clear torque increase occurring at just below 8,000 RPM and remains elevated above the lower RPM torque until about 11,000, pretty close what I said I was feeling.

Not really. It shows a slight increase to it's peak at about 9k where it drops off. Even then the increase is only about 1ft-lb for less than 1k rpms before starting to drop. Yet if you look there is an increase of over 6hp (8hp with the add-ons) starting at 8k and not dropping off till 12k where it hits its peak.

[PlaneGuy]

One more point Mike, don't go by the slope of the torque curve, look at the absolute values. Lay a straightedge on the graph horizontally even with the lower torque peak at about 6,500 RPM. You will see that the torque rises above your straightedge at about 8,000 RPM and stays above it until reaching about 11,500 RPM. You can also compare it to the average torque between 4,000 and 7,000 RPM and the effect is even more pronounced.

But I suspect that some of the "obvious" increase in torque at 8,000 RPM that I noticed stems from the difference from the torque "dip" at just about 7,000 RPM. As I said, my butt is not a calibrated accelerometer. There are certainly errors in my subjective observation. OTOH, it does seem to match the measured torque curve moderately well, suggesting that I was indeed feeling the torque increase.

[PlaneGuy]

One last point: if acceleration is proportional to HP then acceleration would increase until you hit the HP peak. I suggest you try a ride on your bike using an accelerometer. You will find that acceleration is proportional to the torque curve, not the HP curve.

Many of the current crop of smartphones have accelerometers and accelerometer/dynomometer aps available for them. I have one for my iPhone called PocketDyno. You can tape your iPhone to the tank and go out and do some runs up and down a straight piece of road. You will find that the acceleration curve closely maps the torque curve and not the HP curve. Remember, experimentally produced empirical results always trump opinion.

[Cuongism]

If you just search "Ninja 250 specs," pretty much every site will show max torque to be around 9500-10000 rpm which is where it peaks. Best torque range or powerband will be 8k-11k.

[Skippii]

Originally Posted by PlaneGuy

All roads lead to Mecca. (Or is it Rome?)

But it is interesting to realize that torque is a measured value. HP is a calculated value and is calculated from torque (times RPM times constant).

Just to keep this thread going, let's start nit-picking!
Some dynomometers don't measure torque. Instead, they consist of a calorimeter to measure the energy at the rear wheel, and calculator torque from that.
That's as much as I know about them, since they're pretty obscure these days, but it shows that torque can be a calculated value, not a measured one. I honestly can't remember where I read about this--I think it was some kind of early development before water brake dynos (which maintain a constant temperatue of fluid.)

[PlaneGuy]

Originally Posted by Skippii

Just to keep this thread going, let's start nit-picking!

OK. I'm down with that.

Some dynomometers don't measure torque. Instead, they consist of a calorimeter to measure the energy at the rear wheel, and calculator torque from that.
That's as much as I know about them, since they're pretty obscure these days, but it shows that torque can be a calculated value, not a measured one. I honestly can't remember where I read about this--I think it was some kind of early development before water brake dynos (which maintain a constant temperatue of fluid.)

Yes, you can calculate torque almost that way and, in fact, it is how most of the bigger dynos work now. But they measure power directly, not energy. I will go into this a bit more below.

The energy measurement technique is a way of measuring power where your power source is very noisy (lots of short-term power changes) and you want to know a long-term average. This is what we do when measuring very noisy electrical or radio signals. (Right now I am in the process of designing a new radio system so I am rather intimate with this approach.) The longer the integration period, the more accurate the results.

But when measuring mechanical torque and power, it is usually easier to put a brake on the output shaft and measure the torque directly, and then multiply by RPM to calculate instantaneous power. You need a brake or other device that will transfer the torque without transferring the rotation. Some small dynos use a straight friction brake like a clutch. (Ever hear the term "brake horsepower?" That is where it comes from.) Others use a fluid coupling like the torque-converter in an automatic transmission. Today most of them use a generator/alternator and convert the mechanical power into electrical power and then either mechanically measure the torque applied to the generator shaft or, as you originally suggested, just measure the power and the RPM and calculate the torque from that.

One of my students was working on a science fair project to determine if various fuels would change the thermodynamic efficiency of an internal combustion engine. He was using a one-cylinder honda engine that would be adapted to run on gasoline, alcohol, natural gas, and hydrogen. He was going to measure how much power went into waste heat and how much power went into mechanical output. The ratio of mechanical power output to waste-heat output is the thermodynamic efficiency. We had to come up with a cheap dynamometer in order to measure the mechanical power output. We went with an automotive alternator driving a bank of light bulbs which we could switch in and out to vary the load. We calibrated it by allowing the case of the alternator to rotate and then using that with an arm and a weight to measure torque. We calculated mechanical power (HP = k*torque*RPM) going into the alternator and electrical power out from the alternator (P(watts) = Volts * Amps) and applied the conversion (746W = 1HP). Since the conversion process in the alternator is lossy (alternators tend to be only about 80%-90% efficient) we would have to determine the coefficient of loss in the alternator.

(Yeah, I thought it was a way-cool project. I was sorry he didn't finish it. I may have to because it is just too cool to let die.

Another student is into extreme cycling so he experimented with bicycle helmet design and even got Snell to test his samples. We learned a LOT about helmet design from that one and I can safely say that I now know that what most people think they know about helmets is wrong. He managed to earn a third-place win at the California State Science Fair in the Applied Materials and Structures category for that project. Who says you can't find the science in the things you love to do!)

So, as was said at the beginning, that HP and torque are inseparably related, is completely true. If it is easier to measure power, do that and calculate torque. If it is easier to measure torque, do that and calculate power. It is all good.

But in the end, it is torque that provides the force that causes the bike to accelerate. If you measure acceleration, know the mass of the bike and rider, and the radius of the driving (rear) wheel, you can quickly and easily calculate torque at the rear wheel. If you integrate the acceleration you can get the velocity and use that to calculate the HP, either by calculating the power (force x distance / time) or by knowing the gear ratios and working backward from linear velocity to rotational velocity of the rear wheel, and then using final drive ratio and gearbox ratio to get back to RPM.

(I love this stuff! )

[copperaxe]

OK, now that the power difference has been sorted out from every angle...

Yesterday my friend and I weighed our race bikes, 2004 EX250 and a 2008 EX250. Both bikes had about a 1/2 gallon of gas, both bikes have Area P exhaust systems but the 2004 has a 18" stainless muffler while the 2008 had a lighter 12" carbon-fiber muffler,, both bikes have fiberglass bodywork and clip-ons. My 2004 has a 2008 frontend and wheels and a Works shock.

So then I think most would agree that these bikes are very similar Ninja250s to compare the race weight difference between the old and new generation... then calculate that into your power to weight ratio!

2004 Ninja= 310.8 lbs (151.6 rear/ 159.2 front)
2008 Ninja= 326.6 lbs (165.2 rear/ 161.4 front)

[Skippii]

Originally Posted by copperaxe

OK, now that the power difference has been sorted out from every angle...

Yesterday my friend and I weighed our race bikes, 2004 EX250 and a 2008 EX250. Both bikes had about a 1/2 gallon of gas, both bikes have Area P exhaust systems but the 2004 has a 18" stainless muffler while the 2008 had a lighter 12" carbon-fiber muffler,, both bikes have fiberglass bodywork and clip-ons. My 2004 has a 2008 frontend and wheels and a Works shock.

So then I think most would agree that these bikes are very similar Ninja250s to compare the race weight difference between the old and new generation... then calculate that into your power to weight ratio!

2004 Ninja= 310.8 lbs (151.6 rear/ 159.2 front)
2008 Ninja= 326.6 lbs (165.2 rear/ 161.4 front)

But is that Pound-Force, as in the newtons with which the bike is pushing on the scale, or pounds as in mass, like kilograms?
Troy pounds or Avoirdupois pounds?

[CZroe]

Wait. Did I hear you guys say that you can swap the forks and swingarms between generations as a straight swap?! New gen forks and front fender/wheel with new gen swingarm and rear wheel on pre gen? I'd LOVE to see this on the Duc 999 Ninjette with a Sportisi hugger.

[PlaneGuy]

Originally Posted by Skippii

But is that Pound-Force, as in the newtons with which the bike is pushing on the scale, or pounds as in mass, like kilograms?
Troy pounds or Avoirdupois pounds?

No confusion needed. Pounds are force. If you want mass then you need to use slugs.

Newtons are force. Kilograms are mass.

Well, if you want confusion then there is kgF (Kilograms of force), the force exerted by 1kg in a 1G (gravitational acceleration of 9.8m/s^2) field.

[cerberusrex25]

Originally Posted by CZroe

Wait. Did I hear you guys say that you can swap the forks and swingarms between generations as a straight swap?! New gen forks and front fender/wheel with new gen swingarm and rear wheel on pre gen? I'd LOVE to see this on the Duc 999 Ninjette with a Sportisi hugger.

Swingarms are a straight swap as long as you have all the respective hardware(dogbones are different), the wheel might need some "convincing" to fit right on the pregen swingarm( hub is wider).

I have yet to try the forks and the front wheel and rotor, most likely it will need some kind of adapter or extender for the front caliper if you are leaving the pre gen shocks( rotor is slightly bigger).

[CZroe]

But a current-gen swingarm and shock with the current-gen wheel and brakes will fit with no "convincing" as long as you have the right dog bones? Interesting. I guess you'd need to disconnect the old brake lines to move them to the new caliper, which is always a pain.

I know you can use the current-gen sprocket and clutch cover too, so you can get the previous-gen engine area looking pretty close to the current-gen as it is. The fender and swingarm are the parts I've always wondered about addressing. People keep asking about a hugger for the pre-gen, but this looks like the best way to add one.

So, to update the look of the pre-gen: Reshape the headlight with an AirTech cover, intergrate the turn signals in the tail pods, paint the outer bubble of a double-bubble windscreen to match the body color, replace or remove the stalky mirrors, get Asian Cycle flush-mount front signals with body colors, swap the front forks to get an updated fender and front wheel, switch the swingarm to add a hugger and updated rear wheel, add a seat over or airtech cowl to modernize the tail, and switch the engine covers to match the current model. Sounds do-able!

[PlaneGuy]

Maybe I missed something but a lot of what you are talking about seems purely cosmetic. I could certainly see switching to the current generation forks, headplates, swingarm, and shocks if these changes improved the geometry and handling of the bike. (In fact, I want to tune the suspension and suspension geometry of my bike, if possible.)

So, what ARE the advantages of these changes?

Thanks!

[sombo]

Originally Posted by PlaneGuy

Maybe I missed something but a lot of what you are talking about seems purely cosmetic. I could certainly see switching to the current generation forks, headplates, swingarm, and shocks if these changes improved the geometry and handling of the bike. (In fact, I want to tune the suspension and suspension geometry of my bike, if possible.)

So, what ARE the advantages of these changes?

Thanks!

Some of it I'm not sure I understand either. However, some of it I do. The wheels being 17" vs 16" gives you more choices in tires, so I could see where that might be helpful. The suspension parts I do understand because the pre-gen's is a just a bit too soft. I put a new-gen shock in back and heavier springs up front and the bike rides much better (no more bottoming out or rocking back and forth, holds the ground better, that sort of thing). Don't know about the rest though.

[cerberusrex25]

Originally Posted by CZroe

But a current-gen swingarm and shock with the current-gen wheel and brakes will fit with no "convincing" as long as you have the right dog bones? Interesting. I guess you'd need to disconnect the old brake lines to move them to the new caliper, which is always a pain.

I know you can use the current-gen sprocket and clutch cover too, so you can get the previous-gen engine area looking pretty close to the current-gen as it is. The fender and swingarm are the parts I've always wondered about addressing. People keep asking about a hugger for the pre-gen, but this looks like the best way to add one.

So, to update the look of the pre-gen: Reshape the headlight with an AirTech cover, intergrate the turn signals in the tail pods, paint the outer bubble of a double-bubble windscreen to match the body color, replace or remove the stalky mirrors, get Asian Cycle flush-mount front signals with body colors, swap the front forks to get an updated fender and front wheel, switch the swingarm to add a hugger and updated rear wheel, add a seat over or airtech cowl to modernize the tail, and switch the engine covers to match the current model. Sounds do-able!

Basically, just switching the old legs with new gen legs, I was amazed to find out the entire back section( wheel, shock, swingarm and unitrack) was compatible with my ninjette. I already installed that and some stock OEM 08+ foot controls(also straight bolt on) and the back section looks so much better.

Most of the changes I had been making was with the suspension in mind(08+ is stiffer and seems to handle my big butt better), the rest is just purely cosmetic, I wanted to make that bike unique and trully mine. The fact that I bought it in pieces just made my decision easier.

[Jinx250]

Originally Posted by Skippii

Tires: Here's where the new-gen has the advantage. The rear is simple: just mount a hypersport front tire backwards, since they're the only sticky rubber you'll get in 130-16.

You know that there's a reason why tires are made specifically for the front and rear, right?

[CZroe]

Originally Posted by cerberusrex25

Basically, just switching the old legs with new gen legs, I was amazed to find out the entire back section( wheel, shock, swingarm and unitrack) was compatible with my ninjette. I already installed that and some stock OEM 08+ foot controls(also straight bolt on) and the back section looks so much better.

Most of the changes I had been making was with the suspension in mind(08+ is stiffer and seems to handle my big butt better), the rest is just purely cosmetic, I wanted to make that bike unique and trully mine. The fact that I bought it in pieces just made my decision easier.

I know that the front sprockets are often listed as compatible between the generations, but there is a slight difference. Do you think the newgen or the pregen front sprocket aligns better with the newgen swingarm?

[copperaxe]

This is great to see more people converting the old Ninjas to the new wheels! Now it will be cool to see more of these Frankenstein Ninjas at the track.

[cerberusrex25]

Originally Posted by CZroe

I know that the front sprockets are often listed as compatible between the generations, but there is a slight difference. Do you think the newgen or the pregen sprocket aligns better with the newgen swingarm.

The manual lists the gearing as comapitble, I guess I will find out once I install my engine.

Originally Posted by copperaxe

This is great to see more people converting the old Ninjas to the new wheels! Now it will be cool to see more of these Frankenstein Ninjas at the track.

Is the green pregen in the race bike thread yours? ifit its what tail did you use on it?, looks pretty slick. also how hard is it to install the front wheel on a pregen?

[PlaneGuy]

I am coming at this as a virtual noob. From playing with Miatas on the track (like the Ninjette you get a LOT of bang for your buck) I have learned that suspension is far more important than engine. I have brought my Ninjette back to stock on the engine (pipes and intake) and am quite happy with the result. I just don't see that, without major engine modifications, I am ever going to get significant improvements. OTOH, I can see a number of things I think I want to do on the suspension side of things.

Brakes I understand. The pads on the rear are worn out. It is time to change. I have a brand new set of stock pads for both front and rear but I am not completely happy with the feel of the current stock pads. The only question is, which pads?

Now on to the rest of the suspension. I am 210 lbs in my gear. (I am 6' 2" so it isn't all fat, thank you.) When I get on the front brake I can compress the stock forks pretty close to all the way. The question now is: spacers, different spring rate, or both? Increased spring rate demands higher coefficient of damping which, as I understand with the stock forks in the Ninjette, means a different viscosity damping oil.

Of course I have to deal with the rear end too. That implies to me a new shock and spring. Suggestions there?

Lastly, and most importantly, I am going to have to replace the rear tire. I am used to being pretty picky about my tires. I run R-compound tires on the track and as close as I can on the street. But I have no clue when it comes to bike tires. Help.

So, thanks in advance. Trying to get the Ninjette to the point where I am comfortable as possible on the twisty little roads, all different, that I live on.

BTW, I thought about starting a new thread but, given that my bike is a dead-stock 2006, it seems to be right on for this topic.

73

[cerberusrex25]

Wow you are one tall customer, unlike you, Im 5'10'' and 270( and going down). The 08+ back shock so far is stiffer and handles my weight fine. Technically the pregen can handle up to around 300 pounds(saw this on the ninjette wiki) but most of the are soft either due to prolonged use or design, I really don't know. Since the 08+ shock can be fitted to a pre gen, this means an Ohlins shock for the newer 250 could fit too, I read about racing springs for the forks but I do not recall the brand. Someone else here has them on their yellow pre gen, Im gonna do some digging and get back to you on that one. Also the fact the 08+ foot controls are pretty much a bolt on on the pregen suggests that after market rearsets could also fit and be an option for you( being taller and all), hop this suggestions help.

[PlaneGuy]

Thanks. Good starting points. Looking forward to your report on the springs. I just don't know where to start looking.

[cerberusrex25]

Go and start here and read as much as you can on suspension, they also have a nice section on racebikes:

http://faq.ninja250.org/wiki/Main_Page

Also go to this thread and befriend a lot of this cats, they sure know their way around optimizing a ninjette:

http://www.ninjette.org/forums/showt...light=racebike

Hope this helps you.

[Skippii]

I think I mentioned earlier, but aftermarket exhausts on the pregen save you over 20 pounds, so I classify them as "handling/suspension" mods, not "engine/power mods." The advantage is still pretty minor, though.

The only question is, which pads?
Vesrah pads. Put them on the front, and it make a HUGE difference. There was a thread here a while ago saying that EBC pads might be a little better for street use, and Vesrah better for track use since they have a stronger initial bite. Neither are very expensive. A steel braided brakeline for the front will also help braking feel.

The question now is: spacers, different spring rate, or both?
Both. I'm running Eibach springs now. I used to run Progressive springs when I did an odd combination of track days and off-road dirt trails, but if you stick to pavement the set rate will probably be better. Aftermarket springs will come packaged with spacers you can cut down.
The best bang for buck on front end suspension is supposed to be Cartidge Emulators. I haven't tried them myself, but I've read amazing reviews and talked to people in person who have used them. They're not cheap, but the difference is supposed to be huge.

That implies to me a new shock and spring. Suggestions there?
Any shock from any 600 on ebay for less than $40. Anything can be made to fit with enough machining and/or brute force. I've used an RF600 and ZX600 rear shock on my 2005 and 2006. I'd recommend one with a remote resovoir that you can attach to the rear passenger peg brackett--if you get one with a piggyback reservoir, it might not fit in the space. If you get one without a reservoir, it probably sucks and will hardly have any adjustment available.

Lastly, and most importantly, I am going to have to replace the rear tire.

The only track-spec tires you'll find in 130 width 16" rim are going to be listed as front tires. Flip them so the tread is consistant with rear tires, and they'll be the best, stickiest rear tires you can find.
I've posted a video tire review here in the Vids section of the Battlax BT-016 front tire on the rear of my 2005--check it out here, it should be helpful and informative about the differences.

[cerberusrex25]

Oh yeah, forgot to add, ask skipii. Dude knows his way around a pregen. Thanks dude. How is your broken ninjette coming along?

[Skippii]

ZX600 rear shock with remote res:


Tire Review:
http://www.ninjette.org/forums/showthread.php?t=83126

[cerberusrex25]

Is the front from an EX500?

[Skippii]

Originally Posted by cerberusrex25

How is your broken ninjette coming along?

Slowly...and with much mockery.
http://advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=722423

[Skippii]

Originally Posted by cerberusrex25

Is the front from an EX500?

Yes. Stronger forks and the 17" rim make it a worthwhile, easy swap.

And I put the front of a DR-350 dirt bike on the EX500.

[PlaneGuy]

Originally Posted by Skippii

I think I mentioned earlier, but aftermarket exhausts on the pregen save you over 20 pounds, so I classify them as "handling/suspension" mods, not "engine/power mods." The advantage is still pretty minor, though.

OK, I wasn't thinking along those lines just yet either.

The only question is, which pads?
Vesrah pads. Put them on the front,
OK, I will. Where does one source these things?

The question now is: spacers, different spring rate, or both?
Both. I'm running Eibach springs now.
Well, I am used to rates being spec'd when talking about springs ... unless there is only one rate available?

The best bang for buck on front end suspension is supposed to be Cartidge Emulators. I haven't tried them myself, but I've read amazing reviews and talked to people in person who have used them. They're not cheap, but the difference is supposed to be huge.
Never heard of them. <sigh> Life is a learning process.
That implies to me a new shock and spring. Suggestions there?
Any shock from any 600 on ebay for less than $40. Anything can be made to fit with enough machining and/or brute force. I've used an RF600 and ZX600 rear shock on my 2005 and 2006. I'd recommend one with a remote resovoir that you can attach to the rear passenger peg brackett--if you get one with a piggyback reservoir, it might not fit in the space. If you get one without a reservoir, it probably sucks and will hardly have any adjustment available.

I'm still thinking about spring rates, valving, damping rates ... <sigh>

Lastly, and most importantly, I am going to have to replace the rear tire.

The only track-spec tires you'll find in 130 width 16" rim are going to be listed as front tires. Flip them so the tread is consistant with rear tires, and they'll be the best, stickiest rear tires you can find.
I've posted a video tire review here in the Vids section of the Battlax BT-016 front tire on the rear of my 2005--check it out here, it should be helpful and informative about the differences.

Interesting. Thanks!

[eddiekay]

Take it out just as it is
If you have fun...it's still capable.....right ?

[PlaneGuy]

That is certainly what I am doing now and getting a feel for what I like and ... don't like. I am figuring out the things that I feel a need to change. After going the route of building a car for the track and learning about suspension tuning, I know how much more there is to be experienced.

[Skippii]

OK, I wasn't thinking along those lines just yet either.

The only question is, which pads?
Vesrah pads. Put them on the front,
OK, I will. Where does one source these things?
Any motorcycle store should be able to get them. I believe EBC and Vesrah are both carried through Parts Express, so if they can get one, they can get the other.
The question now is: spacers, different spring rate, or both?
Both. I'm running Eibach springs now.
Well, I am used to rates being spec'd when talking about springs ... unless there is only one rate available?
There aren't too many options, really, but if you check the manufactures websites, or even call them with your details, they'll give you recommendations.

The best bang for buck on front end suspension is supposed to be Cartidge Emulators. I haven't tried them myself, but I've read amazing reviews and talked to people in person who have used them. They're not cheap, but the difference is supposed to be huge.
Never heard of them. <sigh> Life is a learning process.
Race Tech Gold Valve Cartirdge emulators are the original, but a few years ago another company started making a similar product a bit cheaper. They were called something very unimaginitive like "Silver Valve Cartidge Simulators" or something.

That implies to me a new shock and spring. Suggestions there?
Any shock from any 600 on ebay for less than $40. Anything can be made to fit with enough machining and/or brute force. I've used an RF600 and ZX600 rear shock on my 2005 and 2006. I'd recommend one with a remote resovoir that you can attach to the rear passenger peg brackett--if you get one with a piggyback reservoir, it might not fit in the space. If you get one without a reservoir, it probably sucks and will hardly have any adjustment available.

I'm still thinking about spring rates, valving, damping rates ... <sigh>
Aftermarket ones will have adjustable damping on the remote reservoir, and adjustable preload on the spring.
Don't worry about spring rate for now. It's not a matter of "getting it exactly right," it's a matter of "Anything in the world is much better than the stock suspension."
Don't get me wrong: an perfectly customized suspension is going to be better than a ZX600 stocker, but unless you're racing, I'd spend the $50 instead of the $800 and spend the rest of the money on track days.
Lastly, and most importantly, I am going to have to replace the rear tire.

The only track-spec tires you'll find in 130 width 16" rim are going to be listed as front tires. Flip them so the tread is consistant with rear tires, and they'll be the best, stickiest rear tires you can find.
I've posted a video tire review here in the Vids section of the Battlax BT-016 front tire on the rear of my 2005--check it out here, it should be helpful and informative about the differences.

Interesting. Thanks![/QUOTE]

[Skippii]

If you understand suspension but don't have experience with motorcycle suspension tuning, this should be your very first purchase:

[PlaneGuy]

Sportbike Suspension Tuning -- ordered. Thanks for the pointer, Skippii!