Subjective 250 vs 300 thread to help potential buyers

[cadd]

We've seen many comparisons already. Lots of data. Tons of numbers. But let's list bullet points for some "subjective" differences to help a potential buyer decide. No HP numbers, no MPG numbers, no torque numbers. Just difference you noticed while riding.

I'll update this post as I log on more mileage on the 300, along with including other members' comparisons.

I'll start (POV of '09 250R vs '13 300 ABS):

Originally Posted by cadd

- 250 headlights brighter. Especially with high beams on.
- 300 side stand initially "sinks in" a tad when first contacted with ground. There's no play on the 250's kickstand.
- Seat is more comfortable on the 250 (perhaps my butt is used to it?). However, I don't slide forward on the 300 like I do on the 250.
- Brake feel: 300 doesn't have as "crisp" of a feel as the 250. But stops perfectly fine.
- Clutch lever on the 300 has a slightly lighter feel.
- Seat height just a tad higher on the 300. But nothing you can't deal with unless you have a really short inseam.
- Engine braking more substantial on the 300.
- 300's mirrors fold in nicely. There's a notch on the mirror "levers???" that sets it back in place. No need to readjust your mirrors after you unfold them. Whereas, on the 250, that notch isn't there and you may need to readjust after you unfold your mirrors.
- The throttle feel on the 250 seems to be more "direct". It's easier to manipulate from a fully closed throttle to cracking open the throttle.
- 300 runs hotter than the 250. I can feel the heat (primarily right ankle area).

Originally Posted by tfkrocks

I like how the kickstand on the 300 does that. I like that I can feel it touching the ground much earlier before the weight settles all the way down. Always felt like I was just letting the bike drop down on the 250 kickstand and it made me feel uneasy.

Originally Posted by tfkrocks

- I didn't notice the difference in headlights that you mentioned.
- EFI is the ****. Basically my main reason for getting the 300; everything else is just a bonus.
- Digital display that has a clock is great. However, my screen cracked at some point without an obvious reason. Not sure if it's an actual defect or if there were other factors that caused it.
- Seat height is higher, but I think the seat itself is a bit narrower too so it kinda negates the additional height.
- Passing light trigger is kinda cool (unless your high beams don't work like mine lol)
- The grab handles under the passenger seat are great for moving the bike around or picking it up. I hated that I could never figure out a good place to grab the new-gen.
- Stock rear fender is less atrocious than the new-gen's.
- Comes with a rear hugger.

Originally Posted by ninjamunky85

Gotta say that I disagree with some of the comparisons made in the first post, but my only experience with the 250 is the pre-gen model.

-Compared to the pre-gen the 300 headlights put a lot more light on the road. I noticed the difference immediately when riding to work at night. Even with an upgraded bulb in the 250 the stock 300 headlight was brighter.

-I've never even noticed the "sinking" feeling from the 300 kickstand. I mean I guess it does move a little, but it never worried me. The one on my 250 moves some too, but maybe not as much.

-Don't the new gen 250 and the 300 have the same brakes? The stock pads on the 300 are nothing to write home about, but it's a cheap and easy swap for some better ones. The stock 300 brakes are adequate IMO.

-The 300 has some kind of "clutch assist". Not really sure what that means but it has a little easier pull than the 250. Not as light as the hydraulic clutch on my 450 though.

-I have no clue how anyone could think the carbed ninjetes have a better throttle feel. The EFI on the 300 is awesome, it never misses a beat and the throttle response is instant,.. with one exception, and that's the transition from on to off throttle

Going from on to off throttle, or off to on when you're moving can get a little jerky. It's not a problem for me except when cruising around town. Because of the down low torque of the 300 it's easy to cruise at around town speeds in 4th gear while barely opening the throttle.

If the car ahead of you slows down a little and you give it a little less throttle, well because you barely had the throttle on in the first place you just end up closing the throttle and start decelerating quickly. Then when you open the throttle again the bike jerks forward.

That's the one flaw with the 300's fueling, after they got the recalled ecu's replaced of course. After owning the 300 I seriously doubt that I will purchase another carbed bike. When I bought my 450 I searched high and low for something with EFI cause I love the instant throttle response, and dealing with carbs is a pain.

-Can't say that I think the 300 runs any hotter than my 250. In fact the heat off the 300 might be even less noticeable, due to the extra bodywork trapping the heat. Kawasaki's engineers really did a good job with the heat management system on the 300 IMO. Yeah, it does blow the hot air out of the bottom of the bike. I haven't figured where at yet though cause I've just never noticed it.

Both the 250 and the 300 put off very little heat though. Ride a SS bike with an undertail exhaust if you want to know what hot really is.

[Aufitt]

Is the 300's gearbox as bad as the 250?

that almighty bang that goes through the bike on clutchless upshifts, and occasionally jumping out of 5th?

[nbleak21]

Regarding Engine braking, does anyone know if the 300 utilizes DFCO (deceleration fuel cutoff?)

[Somchai]

Originally Posted by nbleak21

Regarding Engine braking, does anyone know if the 300 utilizes DFCO (deceleration fuel cutoff?)

Nick, if that would be the case then you could find it in big letters told from the marketing.

[nbleak21]

Originally Posted by Somchai

Nick, if that would be the case then you could find it in big letters told from the marketing.

Are OEMs marketing it now, these days? The tech has been integrated into many cars for 20+ yrs now, just don't know where the bike world stands, lol.

DFCO would be a big selling point for me, I don't engine brake with carbs

[cadd]

I use clutch less up shifts from 2nd to 6th. For me, it's smoother and quicker than using the clutch. I've never experienced jumping out of any gears on the 250. On my short 40 mile ride with the 300, the gearbox feels the same as the 250.

[Ninjinsky]

Originally Posted by cadd

I use clutch less up shifts from 2nd to 6th. For me, it's smoother and quicker than using the clutch. I've never experienced jumping out of any gears on the 250. On my short 40 mile ride with the 300, the gearbox feels the same as the 250.

Don't come crying to me when those little doggies are rounded off at 15k
I always dip the clutch, I've seen a couple of these in my time from 'racing shifts'
http://www.southbayriders.com/forums/attachments/74411/

[Alex]

My thoughts are in my 300 review here.

[Hero Danny]

You can always refer back to the chart I made, I'll link it here: https://www.ninjette.org/forums/showthread.php?t=194521

Nice job with your review though, I like how you tried to find things good about the 250, instead of just saying "300 is an overall improvement over the 250, aside from brakes" You actually put in other things people don't often think about such as the mirrors, head light and kick stand... now are those gonna make a break a deal? Probably not, but it's still good to list them.


I've never ridden a 300, and you have so your opinions obviously would be more factual than mine, but it doesn't make much sense to me that the 250's throttle would be more direct than the 300's.. I mean fuel injection should be more direct than carbs... someone correct me if I'm wrong.

[choneofakind]

Danny. It's a case of analog vs digital.

Carbs are directly connected by the throttle cable. The butterflies control the airflow, the airflow creates vacuum. The vacuum sucks in fuel. The jets control the amount of fuel flow. Therefore, there's direct control of the engine through the throttle hand.

Now look at efi. It's a digital control system. The throttle cable moves the butterflies. There is a sensor that reads how far the butterflies have been twisted. Then based on a whole series of maps and and other readings fr vacuum sensors and temp sensors and engine speed sensors, the injectors fire a predetermined amount of fuel to be mixed with the 'known' quantity of air coming in past the butterflies. However. Every sensor has a deadzone. Every sensor has a certain level of error and sensitivity. Every sensor also has a certain amount of feedback that creates its own error in the system. Additionally, because of the deadzone I mentioned, every sensor will have some threshold were it changes from reading 'off' to 'on' or vise versa.

Basically, digital is on or off. You can smooth it out through an entire control system, but at some point in the range of inputs, it will abruptly change from on to off or off to on. Theres an entire flavor of engineering based on making digit control systems. The most simple being things like windshield wipers and locks and stuff like that. Fuel injection is not a simple thing.

Compare that to carbs. It's a mechanical control system. It's less precise, but all analog. It's simpler, and all self controlled by the air flowing through the carb. Everything else works on vacuum, which is controlled physics and the amount of air flowing past the butterflies.

[cadd]

Originally Posted by Ninjinsky

Don't come crying to me when those little doggies are rounded off at 15k
I always dip the clutch, I've seen a couple of these in my time from 'racing shifts'
http://www.southbayriders.com/forums/attachments/74411/

Are we supposed to use the clutch to up shift?!?! I thought it was the norm to only use the clutch to downshift. I've been up shifting without the clutch since 2004! I also do this with my manual car as well!

Here's a vid of trying it out on the 250 when I first got it. No clutch up shift.

Link to original page on YouTube.

[choneofakind]

I mean... you don't HAVE to, but it's likely easier on the vehicle for the general masses. I find sport bikes easy to upshift clutchlessly, but cars very hard. I've only nailed it a few times in my Scion, but I also don't try often because it's my DD and I'd be very inconvenienced by it being down from something silly when I murdered a terrible upshift.

[Somchai]

Originally Posted by nbleak21

Are OEMs marketing it now, these days? The tech has been integrated into many cars for 20+ yrs now, just don't know where the bike world stands, lol.

DFCO would be a big selling point for me, I don't engine brake with carbs

As far as I know the oem's don't do it now, except BMW who's doing it.

You mustn't be "afraid" about engine-braking with carbs - it's working well.

[Somchai]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

Danny. It's a case of analog vs digital.

Carbs are directly connected by the throttle cable. The butterflies control the airflow, the airflow creates vacuum. The vacuum sucks in fuel. The jets control the amount of fuel flow. Therefore, there's direct control of the engine through the throttle hand.

Now look at efi. It's a digital control system. The throttle cable moves the butterflies. There is a sensor that reads how far the butterflies have been twisted. Then based on a whole series of maps and and other readings fr vacuum sensors and temp sensors and engine speed sensors, the injectors fire a predetermined amount of fuel to be mixed with the 'known' quantity of air coming in past the butterflies. However. Every sensor has a deadzone. Every sensor has a certain level of error and sensitivity. Every sensor also has a certain amount of feedback that creates its own error in the system. Additionally, because of the deadzone I mentioned, every sensor will have some threshold were it changes from reading 'off' to 'on' or vise versa.

Basically, digital is on or off. You can smooth it out through an entire control system, but at some point in the range of inputs, it will abruptly change from on to off or off to on. Theres an entire flavor of engineering based on making digit control systems. The most simple being things like windshield wipers and locks and stuff like that. Fuel injection is not a simple thing.

Compare that to carbs. It's a mechanical control system. It's less precise, but all analog. It's simpler, and all self controlled by the air flowing through the carb. Everything else works on vacuum, which is controlled physics and the amount of air flowing past the butterflies.

Very good description

[cadd]

Originally Posted by Alex

My thoughts are in my 300 review here.

Alex, did you notice that the side stand has a little "play" in it? To be honest, each time I put the bike on the stand, I'm afraid it'll buckle! Why did they design it like that? And the stand also seems to be a bit more forward compared to the new gen. (and shorter than the new gen as well)....yet doesn't look as beefy as the new gen's stand

[Alex]

No, I don't notice any play in the side stand. It is mounted a little differently on the 300 which gives a little more ground clearance, but it doesn't seem weaker or more wobbly on mine.

[cadd]

Your stand moves up if you put your toes under it and lift up like this?

Link to original page on YouTube.

[tfkrocks]

I like how the kickstand on the 300 does that. I like that I can feel it touching the ground much earlier before the weight settles all the way down. Always felt like I was just letting the bike drop down on the 250 kickstand and it made me feel uneasy.

[cadd]

Lol at ^

I guess I'm used to the solid "thump" of the 250 stand.

First time I put the 300 on the stand, and it sinked down 1/2", my heart skipped a best! I thought I must have not fully deployed the stand!

So this is normal, right?

[cadd]

Anyone have both bikes and want to add their bullet points about all the little details that are different? If so, I'll add it to the OP (giving you credit).

[tfkrocks]

You don't have to quote me into the OP lol.

- I didn't notice the difference in headlights that you mentioned.
- EFI is the ****. Basically my main reason for getting the 300; everything else is just a bonus.
- Digital display that has a clock is great. However, my screen cracked at some point without an obvious reason. Not sure if it's an actual defect or if there were other factors that caused it.
- Seat height is higher, but I think the seat itself is a bit narrower too so it kinda negates the additional height.
- Passing light trigger is kinda cool (unless your high beams don't work like mine lol)
- The grab handles under the passenger seat are great for moving the bike around or picking it up. I hated that I could never figure out a good place to grab the new-gen.
- Stock rear fender is less atrocious than the new-gen's.
- Comes with a rear hugger.

[Daks]

idk why anyone complains about the "sinking" side stand. On the old ninjettes it feels like it's halfway over by the time it sits.

[Ninjinsky]

Originally Posted by cadd

Are we supposed to use the clutch to up shift?!?! I thought it was the norm to only use the clutch to downshift. I've been up shifting without the clutch since 2004! I also do this with my manual car as well!

I'm not saying it can't be done just that using 3 little dogs to reconcile 500lbs of rolling mass against a several kg of crank spinning at 5000 rpm has a mechanical cost.
BTW (and this is counter intuitive) the dogs get rounded on the gear you are coming out of because the difference above is all taken by the corner of the dog at the last stage of disengagement. You cant engage at all until everything is sync'd so obvoiusly the shift "feels" smooth

[nbleak21]

Originally Posted by Somchai

As far as I know the oem's don't do it now, except BMW who's doing it.

You mustn't be "afraid" about engine-braking with carbs - it's working well.

Honda and Toyota (unsure of others) have been doing it since the 90's... Perhaps we are thinking in different terms? DFCO, in my reference means fuel injectors are cut off when the vehicle is in gear and decelerating (engine braking) bot my Hondas utilize DFCO from redline down to about 1500 rpms.

I'm not against engine braking on carbs, but If it's not going to save me fuel, I'd rather just stick to using the brakes... (I don't ride hard enough to worry about brake fade, etc.)

[Ducati999]

Originally Posted by Ninjinsky

I'm not saying it can't be done just that using 3 little dogs to reconcile 500lbs of rolling mass against a several kg of crank spinning at 5000 rpm has a mechanical cost.
BTW (and this is counter intuitive) the dogs get rounded on the gear you are coming out of because the difference above is all taken by the corner of the dog at the last stage of disengagement. You cant engage at all until everything is sync'd so obvoiusly the shift "feels" smooth

Not to hijack a great thread or disagree with what you are saying, but if you rev match there will be no more damage than when using the clutch. Bad shifting with the clutch is just as damaging. The gears on a motorcycle are cut straight (that is why you hear a whine from the gear box when riding) while a car has angle cut gears (car gear boxes are nearly silent) so they receive much more "load" when not shifted at a matching rpm. Shifting a bike properly (lowering the rpm slightly during clutcless upshifts) will not damage the gears. The same for down shifting, if you raise the rpm the proper amount it will not cause and additional wear. The problem is that most people cannot consistently match engine speed while braking or any number of situations on the street. When clutchless shifting is done incorrectly then YES the transmission has to absorb all/any extra power/speed which was not matched. The engagement dogs on the gears drag and get worn faster. So done correctly (takes lots of practice to get it right everytime) there is no damage done incorrectly (how most people do it) there will be damage over time.

[Somchai]

Originally Posted by nbleak21

Honda and Toyota (unsure of others) have been doing it since the 90's... Perhaps we are thinking in different terms? DFCO, in my reference means fuel injectors are cut off when the vehicle is in gear and decelerating (engine braking) bot my Hondas utilize DFCO from redline down to about 1500 rpms.

I'm not against engine braking on carbs, but If it's not going to save me fuel, I'd rather just stick to using the brakes... (I don't ride hard enough to worry about brake fade, etc.)

Only as a notice: BMW and VW had this system already round about 30 years ago with ---> carburetors.
And please I don't want to talk against any Japanese company, but in cars and also motorcycles the news come from Germany, or at least the most important.

[Hero Danny]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

I've only nailed it a few times in my Scion, but I also don't try often because it's my DD

What kind of Scion do you drive? I love Scions.

[choneofakind]

Originally Posted by Hero Danny

What kind of Scion do you drive? I love Scions.

A totally stock '06 tC with a Yakima roof rack to carry my bicycles. Just turned 90k on the odometer. I love it. I wish the gearing was a little taller in 5th gear, but overall it's a great little car. Handles decent for the weight. Accelerates enough to get out of it's own way but not bad on gas. The rear seats fold down and the hatch lets me carry lots of junk. Steering feels pretty good. Shifter throw is a little long. It's a fun car and does well as a comfortable and practical DD. I'm happy.

I want an FRS after college, but I may have to settle for the practicality of a newer tC with suspension/chassis stiffening mods or a Civic Si sedan. I think those all sound like good options.

[Hero Danny]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

A totally stock '06 tC with a Yakima roof rack to carry my bicycles. Just turned 90k on the odometer. I love it. I wish the gearing was a little taller in 5th gear, but overall it's a great little car. Handles decent for the weight. Accelerates enough to get out of it's own way but not bad on gas. The rear seats fold down and the hatch lets me carry lots of junk. Steering feels pretty good. Shifter throw is a little long. It's a fun car and does well as a comfortable and practical DD. I'm happy.

I want an FRS after college, but I may have to settle for the practicality of a newer tC with suspension/chassis stiffening mods or a Civic Si sedan. I think those all sound like good options.

Nice, I've been lusting over the FR-S for quite some time now, I drive an 03 celica GTS, I love Toyota's, they're wonderful cars.

I believe the Tc is what essentially replaced the celica, just a different name and upgraded body style.

[choneofakind]

Originally Posted by Hero Danny

Nice, I've been lusting over the FR-S for quite some time now, I drive an 03 celica GTS, I love Toyota's, they're wonderful cars.

I believe the Tc is what essentially replaced the celica, just a different name and upgraded body style.

The '05-'06 tC is the same platform as the Celica, but with the 2.4L motor out of the Camry. It also weighs in a good bit more than your GTS model, something like 2800-2900 lbs I think? The '07+ models are the same platform as the Corolla.

[Hero Danny]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

The '05-'06 tC is the same platform as the Celica, but with the 2.4L motor out of the Camry. It also weighs in a good bit more than your GTS model, something like 2800-2900 lbs I think? The '07+ models are the same platform as the Corolla.

The celica is a beautiful amazing car and is highly praised from it's owners. Sad to see it discontinued

The Fr-s is really a beautiful looking car, plus it's RWD pushes 200hp and handles like a dream. Definitely glad to see it on the streets.

[Jiggles]

The 300 crashes really well

So does the 250

[Hero Danny]

Originally Posted by Jiggles

The 300 crashes really well

So does the 250

lol what does that even mean?

[allanoue]

Jiggles is the resident pov video expert for spectacular crashes of both bikes

[choneofakind]

It means the expensive parts like the frame are nicely protected by fairings. The most likely things to get damaged are levers/mirrors/plastics/handlebars/footpegs, not engine case/twisted frame/etc. Within reason. They slide well and take small drops well.

I slid on the track at ~50 and I have to replace a fairing bracket, rearset, one bar, and one lever. The engine doesn't have a single scrape on it, the forks are fine, and so is the frame. Crashes like a tank.

[cadd]

Edited OP. 300 runs hotter than 250.

[cadd]

Originally Posted by Aufitt

Is the 300's gearbox as bad as the 250?

that almighty bang that goes through the bike on clutchless upshifts, and occasionally jumping out of 5th?

Is this you by the way?

Link to original page on YouTube.

[CycleCam303]

Haha, all that heavy breathing after almost ass packing everyone you KNOW he needed to change his pants.

[cadd]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

Basically, digital is on or off. You can smooth it out through an entire control system, but at some point in the range of inputs, it will abruptly change from on to off or off to on.

This is exactly it!

Also from my pov, it becomes really transparent during rev matching downshifts, particularly from 2nd to 1st at 10mph when coming to a stop at a red light. While in 2nd gear, throttle is completely closed. When I blip to downshift into first, the ECU isn't quick enough to react in time (we're talking split seconds here). And the bike doesn't blip at all!

I found the work around to be being more aggressive with the throttle when blipping to downshift, especially from 2nd to 1st.

Anyone else experience this coming from a carb bike to EFI? This is the first EFI bike I've ever owned. My previous bikes were mid to late 90s bikes with carbs.

[choneofakind]

If you get a Power Commander or have someone mess with the ecu, you can have some of that adjusted and make the throttle more responsive to small inputs. Or you could just cheat and get a bigger throte tube to pull more cable and give it more throttle input for the same amount of wrist twist while blipping.