I looking for a new ride, and have kind of' settled on either a the standard z900 Kaw, or gxs-s1000 Suzuki. The only quarter mile time I can find for the z900 is in Motorcycle Consumer News, and they no longer actually test, they compute with a formula. Their time listed is 12.2. I don't see how a bike with about 110 rear wheel horsepower and weighing 465 could be slower through the quarter than my 30 year old Yamaha Fazer 700 (11.8 from old Cycle World road test. Google searches only produce the piss poor road tests that today's magazines do these days, without quarter times.
Holy shit, that's a terrible estimate.
I ended my 24 years as an MCN subscriber in part because they quit performance-testing bikes and started publishing "estimates" instead. But I happen to have the issue with the Z900 vs. FZ-09 comparison (August 2017), and it has an equally stupid estimate for the Yamaha, 12.1@112. It's like they had some non-moto droid plug in numbers and run the app, but the editor didn't check for a reasonable result before shipping it off to the printer.
About 10 years ago I put together a motorcycle quarter-mile model that takes weight, hp, and top speed as input. At the time, I checked the results against my Motorcycle Performance Database from Hell (a compilation of MCN test data going back to 1995) and found that they were within a tenth of a second or two, and +/- a few MPH. So I dug it out of the archives and ran it on the Z900. Assuming the MCN weight and dyno results, and a 150mph top speed, it came up with 10.6 for the Z900 and 10.7 for the FZ-09.
Now, WTF could they have done to get it so wrong? On a hunch, I ran my model SUBSTITUTING TORQUE FOR HORSEPOWER. Bingo. With 67hp instead of 116 for the Kawasaki, my model estimated 12.1@ 107. Making the same error for the Yamaha resulted in 12.0 @ 107.
FWIW, I think quarter-mile MPH is a good metric for comparing bikes on the "How hard is she gonna accelerate?" scale.