Two Moons Oregon or Bust Saddlesore 1000

IBA ZX-9R

Well-Known Member
#1
Start time: Monday 06/13/22 at 12:49 AM
NW Reno, NV - Petaluma, CA - Bodega Bay, CA
Bodega Bay, CA - Gualala, CA - Leggett, CA
Leggett, CA - Eureka, CA - Brookings, OR
Brookings, OR, - Eureka, CA, - Fortuna, CA
Fortuna, CA - Red Bluff, CA - Corning, CA
Corning, CA - Vina, CA - Chico, CA
Chico, CA - Orovilla, CA - Comptonville, CA
Comptonvilla, CA - Sierraville, CA - Truckee, CA
Truckee, CA - Sparks, NV, to SE Reno, NV
End time: Monday 06/13/22 at 10:17 PM

Iconic Highways in route
CA-1 Pacific Coast Highway
CA-36 Volcanic Legacy Scenic Byway
CA-49 Golden Chain Highway

Motorcycle: 2000 Kawasaki ZX-9R Ninja (50-state California EVAP model) One of six known to still exist.
GKF_220612SD.jpg
Fuel: < 22 USg; 87 AKI E10 - 91 AKI E10, mostly CaRFG3
Fueling: Keihin CVRD-40 x 4 carburetors; Air cleaner: K&N; Exhaust: Supertrapp, CA-EVAP emissions equipment intact
Outside air temperature range: 42° - 94° F
Elevation range: 10' AMSL - 7,239' AMSL
Moonlit skies: 2. At the beginning and at the end of the ride.
Weight loss during ride: none
Weight lost in preparation for the ride: 17 lbs
Citations: none
Food consumed: 2.5 Asian burrito equivalents, 8 oatmeal cookies
Water consumed: ~2.5 liters
Vitamins consumed: 5 multis, various other vitamins, & 3 Aspirin
Captured video hours: ~15.5
First camera failed to record beginning AM leg from Reno, NV, to Bodega Bay, CA.
Awake hours: 24.25 hours 11:33 PM 06/12/22 - 11:50 PM 06/13/22
Odometer miles door to door: 1,135, time 23 hours 13 mins
Google GPS miles: 1,086
Forced route deviations due to road closures: 3. One foreseen, two unforeseen.
Construction zones: about a dozen
Service stations that failed to accept credit card after hours: 1 (Sierravilla, CA)
P6132819SD.jpg
 
Last edited:

keithu

Premier Member
IBA Member
IBR Finisher
#2
One of six still known to exist? What a shame. The ZX-9R should be a great LD bike.

Excellent ride! I love the detailed stats.
 

IBA ZX-9R

Well-Known Member
#4
Motorcycle: 2000 Kawasaki ZX-9R Ninja (50-state California EVAP model) One of six known to still exist.
One of six still known to exist? What a shame. The ZX-9R should be a great LD bike.

Excellent ride! I love the detailed stats.
:cool:

To clarify... Rest easy, the world probably still has a thousand or more 49-state or 49-state equivalent ZX-9Rs. :)

The (49-state) are the ones reviewed by magazines and motorcycle editors. The 50-state or California EVAP emissions model, the only model variant allowed for sale and to be registered in California, was never reviewed. Most have been stripped of their EVAP equipment, converted to 49-state models. It's generally one of the primary things most owners did to theirs once they took possession.

It's an interesting story too, for those who wouldn't know some of the background to it, but would like to find out. The 50-state model was known to be available for review in 1998, 2000, & 2002, but was seemingly intentionally passed over for submission by KHI. Sport Rider, Cycle World and many other magazines performed the reviews entirely within California's borders using CaRFG2 oxygenated gasoline in Southern California. KHI provided the ZX-9Rs from their Southern California headquarters through, I imagine, a California temporary permitting variance. Kawasaki could have more easily taken one of their 50-state models available on California showroom floors, but instead chose to go through the additional paperwork to have 49-state models delivered into California for testing. An opportunity missed by Kawasaki, unfortunately.

Anyone cross referencing the stats from my 50-state bikes to the reviewed 49-state ZX-9Rs will notice the discrepancies.... My SS1Ks have all been accomplished using less powerful modern CaRFG3 specification E10 gasoline, not the slightly more potent CaRFG2 gasoline that was available at the time the magazines reviewed their brand new (49-state model) ZX-9Rs, in California. Furthermore, my SS1Ks included miles on fuel thirsty California highways 1, 36, & 49. The magazines steered clear of those twisty Northern California highways when determining maximum highway MPG numbers.

50-state ZX-9R: Fuel consumed: less than 22 USg, distance 1,135 miles (see above)
49-state ZX-9R: Fuel consumed: at a maximum of 42 MPG. 1,135/42 = 27.02 USg, i.e > 22% more fuel used. Miles that would not have included Hwys 1, 36, or 49. Had they, based on their consumption numbers, it would have been ~33.38 USg consumed, i.e. > 50% more fuel used. Either way, the discrepancies are consistent with numbers reported by 49-state ZX-9R owners worldwide.
 

keithu

Premier Member
IBA Member
IBR Finisher
#5
That's interesting. I actually worked in the motorcycle press back then (Street Bike Magazine based in San Francisco) and I think our assumption was that the differences between 49-state and CA models primarily had to do with evaporative emissions. The CA models usually had extra equipment to prevent or capture fuel vapor from fuel tanks and carburetors. This equipment might include extra plumbing, charcoal cannisters, and cooling fans. This stuff added weight and sometimes reduced fuel capacity, but I've never heard of things that might actually improve fuel economy. Our assumption was always that the 49 state models were a little lighter and less complex, but everything else should have been the same.

It's also worth noting that this generally wasn't a choice given to the magazines. There was never (AFAIK) an option for magazines to choose between 49-state or CA models. We got what we were given. If Kawasaki decided to provide magazines with 49-state models, they probably judged that the 49-state models would perform better in some way. Press fleet bikes always had manufacturer plates which allow them to operate vehicles that aren't necessarily homologated in the state issuing the plate.

What feature do you think the CA-model ZX9R has that gives it better fuel economy than the 49-state model? Is there any other performance difference, such as power/torque?
 

IBA ZX-9R

Well-Known Member
#6
I would agree with you on all accounts, adding that the ZX-9R EVAP model used a heavier twin catalytic converter equipped stainless steel muffler, disimilar to the 49-state's no catalytic converter Titanium muffler. Kawasaki had to make the conscious decision for reviewers to compare their 49-state model to the R1 and CBR, at that time. The carbureted R1 of that generation passed CARB emissions without needing to have an EVAP 50-state version. And being that the 49-state ZX-9R was 7 lbs lighter than the EVAP, that's what KHI sent. Seems logical to me. It probably resulted in a bike ~0.04 seconds quicker in the 1/4 mile, but even so, it would have been interesting to see a 53 MPG appear on the bike's stats, instead of a 42 maximum, as well as the wide eyes it would have created from you magazine staffers.

Sorry about the novella. :confused:

I've had to research this stuff manually, but it's been an enlightening journey that I've shared in multiple referenced threads on our bike forum.

So you might know the answer to one of the questions about the 50-state models. They have three nipples at the back side of the fuel tank. Two are used by the CA-EVAP system, as you explained. The third is the fuel overflow. However, I've had my bikes tip over multiple times and they don't spill a drop. My assumption is that the 50-state's tank fuel overflow is what is redirected to the charcoal EVAP emissions equipment, where it is stored until the fuel level falls below the ON tube's level when in the ON position. Vacuum, then draws liquid/vapor back into the tank to be used/purged normally. So if up to 1 liter of fuel dumps into that canister, it's easy to see some of where the 50-state gets its range superiority from. Meaning, the overflow nipple itself is a probably a blank, serving no purpose. Something you might know or might be able to ask around about.

It's also equipped with a float-bowl fuel cut-off valve, powered off intake vacuum from a port below #2 cylinder. 49-state don't have this valve, so once the engine is turned off, gasoline vapors from the float bowls immediately vents out the RAM-air equalization plumbing, located in the air scoop. 49-state bikes are notorious for gummed up fuel in their float bowls and decomposing foam filters, whereas 50-state are more like fuel injected bikes, able to sit unused for up to a year without worry and never needing their snorkel filters replaced.

Lastly, it's the fuel. Kawasaki jetted each model year the same as it left Japan, so a 1998 ZX-9R shipped to Spain had the same #155 x 4 Keihin main jets as a 1998 U.S. 49-state and 50-state model, yet Spain used ETBE based E5, the U.K. used MTBE E5, while California had refineries produce CARBOB, the state's own RFG, specific to California. My first stock 2000 ZX-9R got 48 MPG highway. My second 2002 F1 in stock form got 48 MPG highway. My third (pictured above) got 43 MPG, but was a 50-state converted to a 49-state. Once the EVAP equipment was restored, it jumped up to 48 too, but has since UEGO tuning moved closer to the other two, in the low 50s.

I learned this from my UEGO O2 sensor, which I have had on each of my three 50-state ZX-9Rs. You can jet a bike richer and get away with it for jumping back and forth between E0 and E10, but you cannot jet a bike leaner, optimized for E0, then go back to E10. It won't be rideable. To jet for fuels warranted in the Kawasaki Owner's Manual, if it says that E10 gasohol can be used, then the jets are already big enough to accept the resulting leaner AFRs that result from 3.7% oxygenated fuels, like E10. But that's a fine line too. They had to also make the bike rideable, perform at sea level where there's a ton of oxygen, as well as, pass CARB emissions tests using Indolene oxygen-less gasoline. From 1996 - 2002, coinciding with the 1996 ZX-9R B3 - the 2002 ZX-9R F1, SoCal reviewed ZX-9Rs would have been tested using CaRFG2 which had about 2.1% oxygen from MTBE, but owners manuals for all ZX-9Rs say E10 is acceptable for use, even if on a limited basis (pre-1996). Coincidentally, the quickest and best tank ranges for 96- 02 ZX-9Rs were all set by those using CaRFG2 in SoCal, not in the UK or elsewhere using 0% - 1.7% oxygenated or oxygen-less E5 from that era. Further evidence that the richer jetting that was established by California specific ZX-9Rs was ill suited for any of their 49-state cousins, at least in the tank range department.

So from my own UEGO and tank range observations tracked over 70,000 miles, E10 is the better gasoline for Kawasaki's stock jetting. Which aligns with what the owner's manual says they're warranted to use: no greater than 10% ethanol, 15% MTBE, 16.7% TAME, 17.2% ETBE, & 5% Methanol. Those three things: the fuel tank and EVAP emissions recovery equipment, the float bowl cut-off valve, and the jetting set to E10's oxygen levels in stock form, are what gives the 50-state its advantage.
 

IBA ZX-9R

Well-Known Member
#7
...Is there any other performance difference, such as power/torque?
Sorry, I neglected to address your last question.

Virtually none, but in favor of the 50-state, ironically. The only 50-state I've been able to document that got dyno'ed in mostly stock form was a 2000 model in Hillsboro, OR. It's like mine above. It was used as a case study on Factory Pro's Web site: 131.6 dynojet HP prior to modification. Kawasaki rated it at 144 crank HP.

The benchmark 49-state was reviewed by Sport Rider Magazine the same year. Its dyno results using virtually identical 1.7% - 2.1% MTBE oxygenated gasoline of the time in SoCal and reviewed at basically the same sea-level elevation, yielded 131.4. HP.

From an SS1K standpoint though, a 49-state bike would require 3 - 4 additional stops for the routes I take, so 30 - 45 minutes longer to complete the ride.

Update on the 49-state vs 50-state. (07/27/22) I've been exposed to reviews written all over the world in my quest to either find a 49-state that can match a 50-state ZX-9R on tank range, I've even put the challenge out to other ZX-9R owners on our worldwide forum to see if they could find articles not already seen, perhaps in other languages or out of print that could fill in the gaps, but all have only solidified the results. So I poked a little further down the food chain to the first ZX-9R model, the B model, ones I couldn't find the reviews for and frankly didn't think would be any different than just another KHI delivered 49-state model, with the same 49-state results. But I was wrong.

Sportbike Magazine in the UK had tested their 1995 49-state equivalent B2 model in one of the 1995 issues. Sorry, I don't have the month, just the article pages, starting at page 55 of whatever issue that was. Some of its performance stats came out as follows:
Quarter Mile: 10.7 @ 131 MPH
Top Speed: 166 MPH
Tank Range: 206 miles

All fairly average for an OEM ZX-9R B1 - B4 49-state model.

However, last night I poked into Cycle World Magazine's archives, which are still online and sometimes accessible in ways I wouldn't think possible with just a login. Tuesday, they were and I spent little time finding the last of the Southern California reviewed potentially 50-state ZX-9R candidates, the 1994 B1 model. Rather ironic it being the first model and first reviewed, but yet it was one of the last to finally be analyzed and added to our forum's broad collection of reviews. I went about adding its stats to the lists of others on our forum with the mindset it was a 49-state model too:
Quarter Mile: 10.65 @ 131 MPH
Top Speed: 166 MPH

Tank Range:... which was listed in high/low/avg MPG had to be carried forward to the tank's 20 liter capacity of 5.28344 US gallons. Max MPG was 47. So then 248.3 miles to the tank or 20% more fuel used by the UK 49-state B2. Uh-oh! I thought this could very well be a 50-state California EVAP, but there's no mention anywhere in the article about the bike's origins. The only possibility would be if by some fluke a picture were included in that 28 year old article that showed, conclusively, something that only a 50-state model would, its evaporative emissions equipment or the naked 50-state fuel tank. After scouring each photo, I identified what appeared to be the 50-state's float bowl breather canister there on the left side of the exposed engine, just like my CA EVAP ZX-9Rs have. But to confirm that a 49-state wouldn't include such a breather, I also queried a video a 49-state equivalent B1 owner made of his bike. No breather canister. And it shouldn't have one either. That breather canister is specifically only on California models, because of the evaporative emissions equipment it is connected to.

1994 50-state ZX-9R B1 California EVAP
Tank Range: 248.3 miles
 

Attachments

Last edited: