Yamaha R1 Forum: YZF-R1 Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Difference between a Yamaha R1, R7, and R71

53K views 88 replies 40 participants last post by  firehawk2003 
#1 · (Edited)
I've had a few messages about what an "R71" is, thought this might help.

Back in 1999, World Superbike displacement was limited to V-twin 1000cc (RC-45, Ducati 916) or inline-four 750cc bikes (ZX-7RR, YZF-750). Bikes like the R1, ZX-10, and GSXR1000 weren't allowed until 2002, when displacement rules changed to allow 1000cc inline-fours. World Superbike is a 'production' bike series. Bikes must be 'homologated', meaning that a manufacturer must build 500 road versions of their bike to be legal for WSBK racing.

The Yamaha R1 hit the street in 1998. This was the replacement for the YZF1000 and YZF750. Yamaha did away with the 750 version of their bike, and hit the market with the 1000 (R1) and 600 (R6). However, WSBK rules hadn't changed, and they still needed a 750 to race the series in 1999.

Yamaha secretly developed a WSBK weapon for Nori Haga....the YZF-R7. The R7 was built with similar dimensions as Yamaha's YZR-500 GP bike. They built the racer first, then 500 road versions with lesser-quality OEM bits. Civilian R7 models were sold as race only, to team owners and licensed racers. Asking price was $32,000, and Yamaha did not offer a warranty. OEM bikes were heavily restricted, making only 106 hp. YEC offered modification kits that would bump output to 135 hp (Stage 1) or 160 hp (Stage 3).

Power aside, the R7 is known as one of the best handling bikes in the world....even by today's standards. Frame strength and geometry help the bike to hold a line similar to a GP racer.

Right off the bat, R7 cranks failed from a manufacturing flaw. Crank alone was $4500. There was no factory recall, no warranty, and Yamaha had to come out of pocket to replace cranks free of charge. In addition, racers complained that the need for YEC kits made racing the R7 far too expensive. Many R7 models sat in showrooms well past 2002, heavily discounted. The R7 was expensive to produce, and Yamaha lost considerable money on each one. Last nail in the coffin was Nori Haga's championship loss in 2000 because of a positive drug test for Ephedrine.

Because of Nori Haga's success on the bike, limited numbers, and overall beauty of the motorcycle, the R7 has developed a cult following in the motorcycle world. During the bike's life, there's been many different interpretations of what an R7 or R71 actually is.

1) Because the R7 cost so much, many R1 owners converted bikes to look like the R7.

2) Many R7 owners yanked fragile motors, and modified the R7 frame to accept an R1 motor.

3) Stateside, Graves Yamaha entered the Formula Extreme class with an R7 chassis and R1 motor. The AMA eventually banned this successful bike, stating that '50% of the frame had to be from the same bike as the motor'. Graves quickly mated an R1 and R7 frame together, calling the bike an "R71".

4) In the UK, QB Carbon created the R71 SPS. This bike was built with Yamaha's blessing by QB Carbon. Was an R1 frame and motor, with modifications to accept an R7 subframe and tail. Made in very limited numbers.

5) Also in the UK, the Harris Performance R71 was a hand-made frame with the same dimensions as the R7, but with modular mounts to accept an R1 motor. Because Harris made this frame so close to the WSBK switch to 1000cc bikes, not many sold. Asking price was close to $10,000, and they only made 8 total frames.

----------------------------------------------

Original Yamaha R7 racebike, Nori Haga



Road version of the Yamaha R7



Factory Yamaha R7 race bike, Aaron Gobert



Graves Yamaha R71 race bike (R7 frame and R1 motor)



Graves Yamaha R71 race bike (50-50 R7/R1 frame and R1 motor)



QB Carbon (UK) R71 SPS (R1 frame/motor and R7 subframe/tail)





Harris R71, sold as a 'frame kit' for nearly $10,000. Only 8 were ever made.





Yamaha R1/R7 Replica. Many bikes in the US with this style. Sharkskinz sells an "R71" bodywork kit, which is an R7 upper/lower made to fit the R1. Bike is essentially ALL R1 with a different fairing and replica paint job.

 
See less See more
10
#2 ·
way too much reading involved, on to the pics :fact
 
#15 ·
Thanks for the post. I always heard a lot about the R7 and admired pics, but never knew the full story.
 
#17 ·
Should be seven others. I know of one complete bike, one bike built by Harris in-house, and chassis that was up for sale two years ago. Means there's four others. Would be cool to know where they are.

The last bike in gold has since been disassembled, and is being restored/painted in original R7 colors.





 
#21 ·
Awesome write up Mark...and your build will be the jewel in the crown. :thumbup
 
#22 ·
Might find this one interesting....

In 2002, WCM Yamaha was forced to abandon the YZR500 two-stroke they had been using, and move to the MotoGP format 990cc four stroke. Since they couldn't lease YZR-M1 bikes from Yamaha, they had no choice but to develop a prototype bike from scratch.

They approached Harris to build a prototype chassis, and cast an engine 'loosely based' on the R1. Hired James Ellison to ride it. Castings were similar as the R1, displacement was the same. Bike couldn't keep with the field, and GP officials HATED the bike because of similarities to a "production" R1. Eventually, it was banned.

Fast forward 10 years, and the CRT MotoGP bike is a prototype chassis with a production motor....WCM was 10 years ahead of it's time.

Frame/swingarm were hand-made by Harris, but borrow heavily from both the 2002 R1 and the Harris R71. Has the same suspension link as the R7.









 
#23 ·
OUTSTANDING read brotha! It's little things like this that I could sit back and read all day long, put a book in front of me and I'm done in 2.2 seconds... :lol
 
#26 ·
sweet, more pics!! :lol
 
#28 ·
Cool read buddy, tks for sharing! :thumbup
 
#34 ·
But if the R7 was intended to go into production for other than the homologation bikes, you would not have seen them with machined frames like that. It would be so cost prohibitive they would either lose their ass by giving it away or have to charge so much more that the sales numbers would not be there. The R7 really was the opportunity of a lifetime to buy a purpose built race bike right off the showroom floor.
 
#35 · (Edited)
But if the R7 was intended to go into production for other than the homologation bikes, you would not have seen them with machined frames like that. It would be so cost prohibitive they would either lose their ass by giving it away or have to charge so much more that the sales numbers would not be there. The R7 really was the opportunity of a lifetime to buy a purpose built race bike right off the showroom floor.
Absolutely, great point bro. That's one of the reasons that Yamaha hates to talk about the R7. It lost them a monumental amount of money.

The R7 chassis was race-ready off the showroom floor; the engine was absolutely not. Modern sportbikes can be competitive with minimal modifications. Yamaha was asking potential R7 racers to purchase nearly $30,000 worth of engine modifications to keep up with other bikes. Not to mention, things like the $5000 hand-made aluminum tank made crashing a scary (and very expensive) problem for a privateer.

By the way, failed to mention that the R7 was Yamaha's first fuel-injected sport bike.

 
#42 ·
Everyone knows my builds for the attention to detail. Most of that detail comes from studying photos, research on the interwebs, and help from friends. Found a lot of photos like this over the years, lots of good stuff out there.

People have a laugh cause I'm not taking pictures of a race bike as a 'whole'....I'm down taking pictures of the front rotor or rear brake setup. :lol
 
#43 · (Edited)
"Right off the bat, R7 cranks failed from a manufacturing flaw"
I heard from a very good source that this was not a machine flaw ..it's a difference in engine building principles from japanese and american tuners. In Japan, it's not a big deal and it's planned to tear the engines down pretty often during a race season. They are not designed to last a full year - for example. In the USA, if an engine doesn't last --it's an issue.

The problem is that the r7 engine was made to the same specs as a race bike and sold on the street as is w/out a warranty. The bearing tolerances were too loose for the street. Folks are not / were not happy to purchase a 30k bike that required an engine tear down < 5k miles.

The fix from the factory was basically tighter crank bearing clearences ( I'm sure I'm oversimplifying it here ).
 
#44 ·
I heard from a very good source that this was not a machine flaw ..it a difference in engine building principles from japanese and american tuners. In Japan, it's not a big deal and it's planned to tear the engines down pretty often during a race season. They are not designed to last a full year - for example. In the USA, if an engine doesn't last --it's an issue.

The problem is that the r7 engine was made to the same specs as a race bike and sold on the street as is w/out a warranty. The bearing tolerances were too loose for the street. Folks are not / were not happy to purchase a 30k bike that required an engine tear down < 5k miles.

The fix from the factory was basically tighter crank bearing clearences ( I'm sure I'm oversimplifying it here ).
I probably should have been a bit more clear...the manufacturing flaw was the bearing tolerance :)

Nice post, brotha. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top