Official 2013 Ninja 300 (and 250) Thread

[Jiggles]

Originally Posted by seanshawnS

I considered it, but in my mind It's a ganked 650 rather than it's own bike. Sort of like the fz6r or something.

As for the 650, the 2013 in white looks gorgeous.

The 400 actually is the 650, same engine block, with smaller pistons

[massacremasses]

Originally Posted by CC Cowboy

You are very hurtful.

I <3 u

Originally Posted by Jiggles

Justin is straight

[ninjaone]

Originally Posted by ai4px

You have a point there, I may have to adjust my thinking.

I recommend you (and everyone here) seriously try to find an opportunity to get some seat time on a 600 supersport some time. Dealerships will frequently have demo bikes you can try, whether it's Kawasaki at this time or not.

It's easy to dog on supersport owners if you've never tried it, thinking they are insane machines for the streets. If you push it to the limit, yes, the 600 is not appropriate for public roads, but really the same could be said for 250s as well. MotoGP has a 250cc series too after all.

Supersports are a huge barrel of fun though, even if you will never approach their limits. They have two characters, a docile, easy going character below 8000, and a rip your face off extreme speed character near 14000. Even if you only keep things below 8000, the markedly improved suspension, forks, braking, and steering geometry means you can have a lot of fun (and have a lot of confidence) in corners even if you only go the speed limit.

Trust me, go to a demo day and you will see that 600s aren't the "big scary monsters" some of these forums make them out to be.

[ninjamunky85]

Originally Posted by ninjaone

600s aren't the "big scary monsters" some of these forums make them out to be.

You are 100% correct. I rode one for the first time a few weeks ago. I wouldn't say that it was easier or more fun to ride than my bike though. Throttle control was no problem, and at lower RPM's the power isn't either.

Power in the higher RPM's is crazy though, and it's boring riding at slow speeds. It doesn't even feel like you are moving until your going 85. It's was harder to handle at slow speed and I noticed the extra weight every second I was on the bike.

Of course a 600 weighs a lot more than the old 250. In the end I felt like it was more work and less fun, but I'm a heck of a lot more comfortable on my bike cause I ride it everyday.

[seanshawnS]

Originally Posted by ninjamunky85

You are 100% correct. I rode one for the first time a few weeks ago. I wouldn't say that it was easier or more fun to ride than my bike though. Throttle control was no problem, and at lower RPM's the power isn't either.

Power in the higher RPM's is crazy though, and it's boring riding at slow speeds. It doesn't even feel like you are moving until your going 85. It's was harder to handle at slow speed and I noticed the extra weight every second I was on the bike.

Of course a 600 weighs a lot more than the old 250. In the end I felt like it was more work and less fun, but I'm a heck of a lot more comfortable on my bike cause I ride it everyday.

Cheers I feel the exact same way. For the track those bikes make sense.. but for practical use, it's just too much. I want torque at slow speeds, the only thing I dislike about the ninja is the gutless low end/fistful of throttle and constant shifting required to pull away at a stop light.

[Jiggles]

I have never ridden a 600, I have however ridden and owned a Ninja 650. That thing has too much power for the street. That bike is not a good beginner bike. How could a production 600 race bike that is arguably better in every aspect than the 650 be a good beginner bike?

[seanshawnS]

Originally Posted by Jiggles

I have never ridden a 600, I have however ridden and owned a Ninja 650. That thing has too much power for the street. That bike is not a good beginner bike. How could a production 600 race bike that is arguably better in every aspect than the 650 be a good beginner bike?

maybe torque curve? If you really want to stretch an argument.

Same reason some have made the argument in favor of the ninja(250) over the cbr250r, low end torque can get you into trouble just like top end speed. The difference is you'll probably walk away from the low speed drop vs the high speed Sonny Bono.

[namdamyo]

Should we take into account that OP only has one post? seems trollish.

That aside, I think that a bike between 250 and 600 would be great. There's a pretty big gap in the US, especially now that the ex500 and GS500 are no longer produced. A 400 would be nice, but more in line with the current 250r styling rather than the canadian version. I think if they had that, maybe there wouldn't be as many people starting on 600s (or moving up to 600 after a month + totaling the 250... lol)

[Jiggles]

Originally Posted by seanshawnS

maybe torque curve? If you really want to stretch an argument.

Same reason some have made the argument in favor of the ninja(250) over the cbr250r, low end torque can get you into trouble just like top end speed. The difference is you'll probably walk away from the low speed drop vs the high speed Sonny Bono.

You really can't compare 250s and 600s the way you are trying to

[ninjamunky85]

Originally Posted by namdamyo

Should we take into account that OP only has one post? seems trollish.

Oh, it's absolutely "trollish", I mean a Ninja 300, c'mon

Originally Posted by seanshawnS

Cheers I feel the exact same way. For the track those bikes make sense.. but for practical use, it's just too much. I want torque at slow speeds, the only thing I dislike about the ninja is the gutless low end/fistful of throttle and constant shifting required to pull away at a stop light.

I feel you about the lack of low end torque, it would be nice to have more. It would be nice to have more power everywhere. Changing the gearing helped me with the constant gear changes though.

In the end bikes below 600cc are a tough sell here. I think the Ninja 650 was always intended to be a replacement for the 500. It seems bikes are going the same way as cars, bigger and heavier but not any better.

[seanshawnS]

Originally Posted by Jiggles

You really can't compare 250s and 600s the way you are trying to

I told you it was a stretch

[ninjaone]

Originally Posted by ninjamunky85

You are 100% correct. I rode one for the first time a few weeks ago. I wouldn't say that it was easier or more fun to ride than my bike though. Throttle control was no problem, and at lower RPM's the power isn't either.

Power in the higher RPM's is crazy though, and it's boring riding at slow speeds. It doesn't even feel like you are moving until your going 85. It's was harder to handle at slow speed and I noticed the extra weight every second I was on the bike.

Of course a 600 weighs a lot more than the old 250. In the end I felt like it was more work and less fun, but I'm a heck of a lot more comfortable on my bike cause I ride it everyday.

The weight difference between the 250R and the ZX-6R is less then 50 pounds. I wouldn't call that "a lot" more. It is less then the difference between, say, a 250R and a 250R with a 6 year old as passenger. I believe the ZX-6R also has a lower center of gravity, and the higher quality suspension should have been obvious around turns. Yes, it sucks maneuvering any bike at extremely low speeds, and the ~50 extra pounds would be obvious backing your bike into a parking space, but really how often do you move that slowly?

The nice thing about 600s is that it can be whatever bike you want. If you just want to put around down, don't use the extra RPMs, if you do, it's there for you when you want to have fun. You can shift it just like a 250R and go about as fast, or you can stretch your shifts out and be screaming down the road.

Anyway, I'm glad you actually tried one. I recommend others do as well before making assumptions, such as - as soon you twist the throttle on a 600 you are going to die.

[ZackoFF96]

oh god, kawasaki please dont release a 300.

i just bought my baby for like a month i dont want my bike to be outdated already

[Whiskey]

IF the 250 is being replaced (I dont think it will) it will be a 400cc to replace it, I'd almost guarantee that there will be a new 400 on sale next year from one of the big 4.

Originally Posted by Jiggles

100% agree, 400 is the perfect amount of power with great MPGs

However in America, I don't think anyone (besides me) would consider a 400, they'd jump straight to the 600/650s

Europe is bringing in a new set of orders on cc, power & age limits for bikes, the intermediate step is a 400-600cc bike for 2 years

Originally Posted by Apex

Meh, I think they need to make up a points system. After so many points, you are allowed to upgrade to the next class. That way you don't get those tards that say "I can handle a 1000" when they have never been on a bike before.

It would promote sales and also promote safer riding. Of course, cruiser riders would be screwed.

Maybe
≤300cc sport bike and ≤800cc cruiser for a year or two
≤600cc sport bike and ≤1000cc cruiser for a year or so
then full access.

You ride a bicycle. so how about you have to get a licence, then ride a bmx for a year or two, then a city bike for a year or so then you can ride any bicycle you like...

I was restricted to 33bhp/25kW for 32 months, It does not promote sales or safer riding, half the riders where I'm from ignore the restriction, buy a 600, get the cert, take out the baffles & ride on regardless. I got the ninja (which is quoted as 33bhp) so I kept it & served my time, but I ride like an because of it, I should have moved up in power over a year ago, but instead I followed the law (at least in part) but have taken to misbehaving on the road, obnoxious lean angles for city riding, winding it on

Originally Posted by dirty nasty

For public road ways it is my belief that anything over 300cc is absurd. My 250 gets me around much faster than almost any every day vehicle I come across in my travels. I'm not saying one shouldn't ride anything larger than a 250, but some people really need to re-consider their wants vs. their needs. Me, myself, I want a road legal RGV250. However, the Ninja 250 is what I need right now. I'll get my RG someday.

Try a few bigger bikes, go educate yourself before making stupid comments, not every bike is a supersport, try full on long range touring on a 250 & come back to me saying over 300cc is absurd. You sound like an idiot.

Originally Posted by ninjamunky85

I haven't seen anybody mention that in Europe new riders are limited to 125cc. While that wouldn't fly in America, it's not a bad idea to have a limit for new riders.

For once I agree with Jiggles though. This is America, and you should be able to buy whatever bike your wallet allows.

The sad truth is though that small bikes are a hard sell in this country, especially since they aren't much or any cheaper than bigger bikes. Hell, the WR250X was over 7K off the showroom floor. The Ninja250 is a success story. Yet, even though the old gen was one of Kawi's best selling models for 20 years, I didn't even know they made a 250 Ninja until I bought one.

I'd be very surprised to see any big changes to the Ninja250, and very disappointed if it wasn't being sold.

Europe doesn't currently have a coherent restriction system, it's bringing one in early next year.
A1) 16 - <125cc & <11kW =>2 year wait & test/training course to move up to A2
A2) 18 - <600cc & <35kW (test on a >400cc bike) bikes may be restricted from higher power, but may not have their power reduced by over half =>2 year wait & test/training course to move up to A
A) 20 - unrestricted cc & hp

Direct access to A will be available to riders over 24, they havn't mentioned how that will be done, but the current UK system is a 3 day course & a stricter test on a >500cc bike.

Originally Posted by Jiggles

I have never ridden a 600, I have however ridden and owned a Ninja 650. That thing has too much power for the street. That bike is not a good beginner bike. How could a production 600 race bike that is arguably better in every aspect than the 650 be a good beginner bike?

Lower torque, a I4 makes more BHP but less torque than a twin, Alex's I6 will have a very smooth delivery, your I4 will be a bit more torquey & the 650 will be the most peaky ( short of a thumper). Torque kicks in at the lower revs, power is higher, so the 650 twin will be more aggressive & twitchy at lower revs (where you tend to use on the street)

[Jiggles]

So that makes it a good beginner bike?

[Whiskey]

They have it as an intermediate bike.

It'll be something like

CBR 125 => something 400 => any bike

It seems that you have to do the 4 years & 2 tests or 3 training courses & 1 test to full power (Ireland had originally announced 6.5 year minimum where you would have the same power restriction for the final 4 years) the actual implementation was only announced today and is written in legalese so it'll take a while for the RSA (DMV) staff to figure it out.

Edit: I was dealing with your 1st point- fixed the quote.

And no a full power 600 SS is a bit much for a 1st bike, but I took one for a spin within months of getting my 1st bike, it was scary fast wen I wound it on but manageable when I didn't misbehave on it

[Jiggles]

But sir, even though my harley is 800cc's it won't go over 80mph, can't I please ride it?

[ninjaone]

Originally Posted by Jiggles

So that makes it a good beginner bike?

I actually question whether bikes like the SV650 or Ninja 650 are actually better "beginner bikes" then a 600 supersport. In the case of the Ninja 650, the latest generation actually weighs more then the ZX6R. The suspension of a ZX6R is light years beyond the 650 and the power delivery "around town" in the lower rev range is much more docile.

Personally I don't think either the SV650 or Ninja 650 are good for beginners. I don't think they are much better then a supersport either, if at all. If anything the torque makes them more of a hooligan bike for around town.

I think stepping up to something like a supersport from a 250 makes more sense in a lot of ways. You learn what a high quality suspension feels like. You can learn even greater finesse with the throttle by slowing learning to dip into the upper rev range, and you can learn more about power management for the streets. A Ninja 650 or SV650 on the other hand will just feel like a rocket across the whole rev range.

Again, not saying that either bike would be good for a beginner, but I'm not sure it's as cut and dry as people make it out to be.

[Whiskey]

Originally Posted by Jiggles

But sir, even though my harley is 800cc's it won't go over 80mph, can't I please ride it?

You're getting me wrong, this is what the fourth reich safety nazis are bringing in, I think it's a load of bollox.

let people get what the want, if you're an idiot & want to kill yourself starting on a 1000cc superbike with no helmet & only a borat mankini on go for it, just carry an organ donor card.

[gt_turbo]

i hear they'll make it a three cylinder too.


gtfo troll! lol

[Jiggles]

Are we really arguing that 600s are better for a beginner because they are slower than 650s?

Ninja 650R



zx6r

[ninjaone]

Originally Posted by Jiggles

Are we really arguing that 600s are better for a beginner because they are slower than 650s?

Define "slower"? Slower around town? Slower light to light? Easier to ride slower?

I would argue a 600 is easier to ride slowly once you have learned the basics on a 250. There's nothing hard or challenging about shifting below 8000 RPMs.

[Jiggles]

Originally Posted by ninjaone

Define "slower"? Slower around town? Slower light to light? Easier to ride slower?

I would argue a 600 is easier to ride slowly once you have learned the basics on a 250. There's nothing hard or challenging about shifting below 8000 RPMs.

Yes, Apparently yes we are arguing that 600s are better for beginners because they are slower than 650s.

I'm going to go dig up my stash of percocet now

[ninjaone]

To be clear I said repeatedly that both a 600 supersport and a 650 are TERRIBLE bikes for beginners. They aren't good platforms to learn the basics of throttle control, they are heavier then 250s so are harder to learn the basics of smooth cornering lines and ramping up lean angles. There are many benefits a 250 has over either a 650 or a 600 SS.

Between a 650 and 600SS , well there are pros and cons. 650 has several cons such as - heavier then a 600SS on a much crappier suspension with much lower limits, but can still go the same speeds as a 600SS around town "light to light".

Seems like you want to say there are absolutely no pros for a 600SS and absolutely no cons for a 650. Well, that's your opinion, but I disagree. Enjoy the percocet.

[Jiggles]

No, the 650 would be a ****** option for a new rider, a 600 would be an even shittier option

The whole discussion was "Hey 600s aren't that bad as a first bike and are easier than a 650!"

[Whiskey]

Originally Posted by Jiggles

Are we really arguing that 600s are better for a beginner because they are slower than 650s?

Ninja 650R



zx6r

Have a look at the torque curves

Not all 600 I4s are supersports, all the big 4 have a SS & a sports model, kawi is the only one not doing a sports I4 Suzuki gixxer bandit, Yam R6 fazer, Honda CBR hornet

Kawi's I4 sports is a 750

[ninjaone]

Originally Posted by Whiskey

Have a look at the torque curves

Not all 600 I4s are supersports, all the big 4 have a SS & a sports model, kawi is the only one not doing a sports I4 Suzuki gixxer bandit, Yam R6 fazer, Honda CBR hornet

Kawi's I4 sports is a 750

Yam also has the FZ6R, which again to my point, has an extremely budget oriented suspension, and is much heavier then the R6.

Another point I was making is that I don't think you will learn much as a rider stepping up from a 250 to a 650. Stepping to a 600 you can control how often you dip into that rev range, and you can play with a much more flickable, confidence inspiring chassis.

[Jiggles]

Originally Posted by Whiskey

Have a look at the torque curves

Not all 600 I4s are supersports, all the big 4 have a SS & a sports model, kawi is the only one not doing a sports I4 Suzuki gixxer bandit, Yam R6 fazer, Honda CBR hornet

Kawi's I4 sports is a 750

The torque curve does not matter, hp is what accelerates you and the 650 has 5 more hp up until 6k rpms

I think most people are under the impression that when you say 600 you mean r6 not fz6r

[Whiskey]

HP => speed
Torque => acceleration

[Jiggles]

Originally Posted by ninjaone

Yam also has the FZ6R, which again to my point, has an extremely budget oriented suspension, and is much heavier then the R6.

Another point I was making is that I don't think you will learn much as a rider stepping up from a 250 to a 650. Stepping to a 600 you can control how often you dip into that rev range, and you can play with a much more flickable, confidence inspiring chassis.

IMO there is a split when moving up from the 250. 600s are racing machines built with high quality racing parts, the ninja 650 is more of a sport touring machine and the 250 is inbetween those two.

There is no doubt that a 600 will allow you to advance your skills more than a 250, but that takes place on a race track not a city street

[Jiggles]

Originally Posted by Whiskey

HP => speed
Torque => acceleration

Wrong

[dirty nasty]

Originally Posted by Whiskey

IF



Try a few bigger bikes, go educate yourself before making stupid comments, not every bike is a supersport, try full on long range touring on a 250 & come back to me saying over 300cc is absurd. You sound like an idiot.

No, my thoughts are well backed through my experiences. If you can't do it on a 250, you can't do it on a SS bike. Why the **** would you want to do long range touring on a SS bike anyways? There are other bikes much better suited toward that duty that will actually provide some level of comfort. People are free to ride whatever they want, but I think to think you NEED something is a bit ridiculous. I say quit being a baby and deal with it.

Like I (well, Jiggles I suppose) said, brain surgeon's going for the janitor's position.

[Jiggles]

Looks like a mistake on your part about what motorcycles you meant. You didn't say supersports, you said anything over 300ccs

[espacef1fan]

So....


This thread got lost and is now on the way to "Is this s**t for-real-ville?"

[dirty nasty]

Originally Posted by Jiggles

Looks like a mistake on your part about what motorcycles you meant. You didn't say supersports, you said anything over 300ccs

Sowwy.

[Jiggles]

Original title of the thread is so ridiculously absurd that we just had to make this thread at least a little entertaining

[dirty nasty]

We need a 666cc bike.

[Jiggles]

With 66 cylinders

[Whiskey]

Originally Posted by Jiggles

Wrong

I'm going on experience of twins Vs I4s & hopping on any bike I can get a go of,
the twins have more grunt down low & will pull harder from the light & at lower RPMs, they have higher torque values too. The I4s are a bit quicker higher up but feel weaker at lower RPM.

Horsepower is proportional to torque at a given RPM, below 6.5k RPM on your graphs the ER6 has the advantage.

so for city riding torque has a bigger impact on acceleration. Are you going to wind the ZX6 to 14k RPM in town, or will you have the ER6 at 6k?

[Jiggles]

I was saying that your determination of what hp and torque relate to are wrong. yes, under 6k the 650 has 5 more horsepower but I fail to see how a 10% difference in hp is the determining factor that a 600 is a better beginner bike than a 650

Also consider that at 6k rpms the 650 is more than halfway to redline and a 600 is about 1/3 there