Ninja 250 vs 300 chart

[Hero Danny]

After searching for a chart that would compare the ninja 250 to the 300, I got frustrated and decided to make my own and share it for other's to enjoy.

BLUE indicates a spec that is superior, and RED indicates a spec that is inferior.

If there already is a chart, then i'm sorry I missed it
If there is anything that is incorrect please let me know, and i'll fix it. Obviously certain things such as top speed and 0-60 times could be off by .1 second (too many factors decide those figures)
Also if there is anything you think should be added let me know, and i'll update the photo.

Enjoy

Update: I threw a zx6r in just for fun.

[MrAtom]

Thanks, man! Helpful.

[ForceofWill]

Where are these numbers from? How's the 300 trapping lower than a 250?

[choneofakind]

About 0.1 seconds? Try off by about 0.5 seconds. Go to my 0-60 thread. Jiggles and I both dropped times with some practice. 6.2-6.4 or so is easily attainable by an average rider with a good launch. And he's got a lot of weight on me, so that tells me it's more influenced by the rider and the launch, less on the physical weight of the rider.

[Somchai]

XX

[dcj13]

20% bigger engine should mean about 20% better performance. If I needed a new Ninjette, I'd get the 300.

[cadd]

70mpg???

[subxero]

As Tom pointed out the 1/4 mile times don't make sense, and the torque listed for the 250 seems a little bit optimistic IMO from what I have seen from various sources over the years

[Hero Danny]

Hey, thanks for the reply guys! I've been trying hard to gather my information from many different sources! The Torque is straight from the kawi website for the 250.

As for the quarter mile, I agree, it makes no sense, I put it up there with intentions of someone correcting it, I for the life of me, couldn't find accurate numbers on it.

I'll adjust all as suggested No worries, thank you for letting me know.

70mpg seems fairly accurate, I routinely get 65 mpg on my 250, and the FI in the 300 is supposed to get it to about 70 mpg.

The reason why i'm comparing these models, is for many reasons. One being people looking to buy a smaller bike can compare which one suits their needs better in a nice easy to read table that gets right to the point without them having to scurry around the internet (like I did) to get comparisons. I chose the carb'd model of the 250, because 99% of us have that model and 99% of new riders only have access to that model.

I may in the future add a 600 so people planning on upgrading from a 250 to a larger bike can compare side by side if the 300 would be enough of an upgrade to suit their needs, or if a 600 really is necessary for them.

[Hero Danny]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

About 0.1 seconds? Try off by about 0.5 seconds. Go to my 0-60 thread. Jiggles and I both dropped times with some practice. 6.2-6.4 or so is easily attainable by an average rider with a good launch. And he's got a lot of weight on me, so that tells me it's more influenced by the rider and the launch, less on the physical weight of the rider.

The problem with your thread, is that you are using a pregen, pregen's are faster than the newgen. I specified that in the chart that I was comparing the 08+ model to the 300 since they're closer in age.

Also, Jiggles' stated his bike is slightly modified, that is a big no-no, this is stock vs stock.

[Somchai]

XX

[sharky nrk]

The only single reason to get a 250 over a 300 is $$$ or personal preference for some unknown quantity (looks or something). The 300 out does the 250 in just about every way (as it should being its successor). I have a 250 instead of a 300 cause, well I already have it. If I was shopping for a replacement, the 300 wins hands down.

[subxero]

^ with this guy.

lack of funds is the only reason I would see to not get an N300 over a 250, that and if for some reason you had a hard on for carbs

[Hero Danny]

lol, I cannot stand carbs in the slightest, I know some people around here really do prefer them though.

Again, I'm only trying to compare the carb'd 250 to the FI 300 in this chart, maybe i'll add pregen's and FI 250's later, but for now I want to keep it simple... however, I think i'm going to throw a 600 in the chart too, it would be very interesting to someone who is upgrading from a 250 to compare a 300 to a 600.

By the way, this chart is NOT trying to figure out which bike is better, if you wanted to know which one was truly better than you could simply ask someone or read one of the 30 million reviews of the 300 online. But I want to show people just how much better the 300, so the buyer can make the decision over whether or not it is worth it to spend the extra $$ on a 300.

[choneofakind]

Originally Posted by Hero Danny

The problem with your thread, is that you are using a pregen, pregen's are faster than the newgen. I specified that in the chart that I was comparing the 08+ model to the 300 since they're closer in age.

Also, Jiggles' stated his bike is slightly modified, that is a big no-no, this is stock vs stock.

Actually, his was faster. And he's heavier. So that negates all pregen vs newgen garbage. The pregen really isn't any faster. Ride both and you'll see.

You should check your power figures as well. Make sure both your numbers are either at the crank or at the wheel. Looks to me to be a bit off.

and I still don't believe those trap speeds either, considering the large time differential. Not enough time is spend in the midrange of the 300 powerband to make that kind of time but only be moving 2 mph faster.


aaaaand if you're not trying to show how much better the 300 is through a decision matrix, I'm not sure why tire size got the preference of larger. Depending on your reasoning, it could go either way for either size being preferable.

[Hero Danny]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

Actually, his was faster. And he's heavier. So that negates all pregen vs newgen garbage. The pregen really isn't any faster. Ride both and you'll see.

You should check your power figures as well. Make sure both your numbers are either at the crank or at the wheel. Looks to me to be a bit off.

and I still don't believe those trap speeds either, considering the large time differential. Not enough time is spend in the midrange of the 300 powerband to make that kind of time but only be moving 2 mph faster.


aaaaand if you're not trying to show how much better the 300 is through a decision matrix, I'm not sure why tire size got the preference of larger. Depending on your reasoning, it could go either way for either size being preferable.

I owned a pregen for a month and put 1,000 miles on it, it's DEFINITELY faster in the straight, I mean it's not night and day, but it's most certainly faster, A ton of other people agree as well.

I mean, if you have some sources for 1/4 mile times, link them up and I'll update the list(s)!

Tire size isn't exactly a + I guess it's all up to preference. I was going with the bigger one because I figured it would be better for traction, etc.

[choneofakind]

Unfortunately, I do not have any reputable sources for 1/4 mile times. It's all heresay and guesses from armchair drag racers.

I've spent some time on both and never really noticed any fasterness from the pregen. If anything, the newgen is easier to ride fast because of the mid range.but meh. moot point really.

[InvisiBill]

If you want more numbers for comparison, here's the Gen2 Ninja 500.

498cc
59.1HP @ 9500rpm
30.9lb-ft @ 8000rpm
118.5mph
3.7s
440lb
48.5 mpg
4.8 gal
110/70-17 & 130/70-17
30.50 in
12.98s @ 99.0mph

As you might expect, the power is about twice that of the 250, but still quite a bit less than an I4 600.

[cadd]

I was thinking about the seat height difference.....

How much of that difference is attributed to the slightly larger circumference of the rear tire on the 300?

[tfkrocks]

Those are really optimistic MPG figures

[Hero Danny]

Originally Posted by tfkrocks

Those are really optimistic MPG figures

Not really, I consistently get 65 mpg on my 250, I tend to shift at 8k and don't often go above 70 mph, so 65 is easily obtainable. I'm certain if my bike was fuel injected (like the 300) I would for sure see higher numbers such as 70 which is advertised by kawi.

I mean, if you are riding it like you stole it and constantly keeping the revs near redline, then of course you're going to see different results

[choneofakind]

I see ~60 mpg and have combinations of utilitarian commuting and backroad funzies. However, I get about 35 at the track. braaaap!

I think Danny is a little lighter on the throttle than some of us.

[tfkrocks]

I don't ride that hard and never redline my bike but I don't come close to the advertised mileage.

[subxero]

I think I get high 40's mpg on my new gen, but it is not stock and I live in the high revs

[Hero Danny]

Well I was damn near red lining her on the highway for about 5 minutes, so we'll see what kind of mileage I get...

Also I am running an aftermarket slip on which may be causing the bike to run a little lean and thus giving me slightly better gas mileage, although i'm not sure cause my bike doesn't feel like it's real lean.

The streets are no place to be revving out the bike riding it like you stole it.

[jkv45]

Originally Posted by Hero Danny

Well I was damn near red lining her on the highway for about 5 minutes, so we'll see what kind of mileage I get...

Also I am running an aftermarket slip on which may be causing the bike to run a little lean and thus giving me slightly better gas mileage, although i'm not sure cause my bike doesn't feel like it's real lean.

The streets are no place to be revving out the bike riding it like you stole it.

RPMs and speed aren't the same. Revving is mandatory if you are on the little Ninja.

On the Ninja 250, if you ain't revvin' - you ain't movin'!

[Hero Danny]

Originally Posted by jkv45

RPMs and speed aren't the same. Revving is mandatory if you are on the little Ninja.

On the Ninja 250, if you ain't revvin' - you ain't movin'!

lol idk, when i rev her to 11-12k i look down and usually see me breaking laws

[choneofakind]

Bwahaha try a gear down then!

[Hero Danny]

I just checked my mileage, after running on the highway doing 90mph about 12k's for close to 5 minutes straight, and just hanging in the high revs in general. I got 59 mpg, lol

[SV Racing Parts]

Thanks for the chart,

Best regards,
Blair

[Hero Danny]

I tested the 300 personally and it has A LOT more power than the 250. I don't care what anyone says. It's a fantastic bike and I am so happy I'll be getting one soon!

[SV Racing Parts]

The 300 definitely has the leg up on the 250 in the power category.

BTW: I have a 300 Kit for the 250 that I never installed if anyone is interested,

Enjoy the ride, and best regards,
Blair

[cadd]

I wouldn't say "A LOT" more power. More like a little more power. Is it noticeable? Yes! Can you power wheelie it? Nope. At least I can't. I personally wouldn't upgrade from a 250 to a 300 unless this is the class you want to stay with. Because in another year, if you want more power again and can only have one bike, you'll get rid of the 300.

I personally upgraded from a 250 to a 300 because I know I want to keep a 250/300 size in my garage. If I decide to get another bike, it'll be an additional bike.

However, if I knew I can only have one bike, I would've went straight for a mid sized V twin for everyday practicality.

[SV Racing Parts]

"A Lot" is always a relative term, tuned and set up I think you will notice the difference,

I do agree with you that swapping out just for the sake of moving up 50cc is not something I would do. If you already own a 250 and it is in good shape then work with it a bit and maybe set up the suspension,

These are fun bikes to ride and in my area very popular at the track,

Best regards,
Blair

[Alex]

I didn't think moving to the 300 from a 250 was "change-your-life" power, but it's definitely quite noticeable. There is much more headroom for acceleration when already at freeway speeds, and it will cruise easily on partial throttle, at speeds that often require full throttle on the 250. I would think that a tuned 300 vs. a tuned 250 on track would be quite a difference, so I wonder how orgs can continue to tweak the rules/classes to keep both owners interested.

[tfkrocks]

I'd say it's a nice upgrade not necessarily for the power but just for the more modern features and styling.

[SV Racing Parts]

Some groups are going to set HP and Torque Limits to even out the 250 and 300 differences.

[Hero Danny]

I don't know, maybe my 250 lost a bit of power since it needed valves done or something, but I noticed a lot more power, look at the chart, I gained about 8 horse power (a 30% increase) and I FELT it for sure. Especially down low, I was giving her half throttle and I could feel her pulling my back into the seat... Amy never did that.

I mean, I've never been tainted by riding a large bike either. So a 250 is all I know, so a lot more power to me is completely different than someone who rides a 600 or bigger.

Amy was about as fast as most of the higher end cars (like accords and stuff) doing her 0-60 in the high 6's. But this 300 is actually faster than most cars, doing it's 0-60 in mid 5's.

[SV Racing Parts]

The most important thing is that you like your bike, 30% is significant, We race MininGP MR125 bikes and the difference when it is dyno tuned vs stock on those is 1.2HP basically a 12% gain and riders can feel it because on a small bike the differences are readily noticeable.

Have fun, and Enjoy the ride,

Best regards,
Blair

[choneofakind]

Accords are high end? Ha.