2nd thoughts about this bike

[karlosdajackal]

Is it just me or is it not all its made out to be, I'm thinking of selling it and picking up a 636 and as a legal requirement restricting the 636 to the same 33bhp the ninja 250 has so apart from power this is what i'd get.

I mean I could probably get a 2004 636 for less than the 2009 250 would sell for, with the 636 wet weight is 170kg, the ninja 250 wet is also 170kg. I get fully adjustable front suspension, dual brake rotors with 4 pot calipers, same size fuel tank, 180 rear tire, slipper clutch from the 2005 model.

I can get a 2007 for €1,000 more than the 250 cost me new

Anyway just a thought, also weird combo of rake/trail on the 250r, is it just me or does the bike fall into slow turns far to quick, and falls into fast turns far to slow. I know all bikes/vehicles do that but it seem very exaggerated on the 250. My test is a couple months away after which, i might sell the 250 and get a 636 and a new pc with the proceeds

[SteveL]

Why don’t you pass your test on the 250 and then do the necessary to go to an unrestricted bike. I test road a GSX that was restricted, very disappointing looks the business but doesn’t deliver, mine unrestricted is a whole new world and worth waiting for.

Steve

[karlosdajackal]

Originally Posted by SteveL

Why don’t you pass your test on the 250 and then do the necessary to go to an unrestricted bike. I test road a GSX that was restricted, very disappointing looks the business but doesn’t deliver, mine unrestricted is a whole new world and worth waiting for.

Steve

the only way to get unrestricted is pass test and wait two years from your pass date, either way the question is about features and value for money with both having the same power.

[CC Cowboy]

This is all over my head. You can restrict a 636 to 33 hp? I would do that over a 250 any day, do to the suspensions and other benefits.

[cnichols79us]

Banana in the Tail Pipe? Is that considered "Restriction"?

[Flashmonkey]

Originally Posted by karlosdajackal

Is it just me or is it not all its made out to be

I'm not sure what the 250 is supposed other than a small displacement motorcycle built to a price point?

Marketing hype aside, the 250 is a great beginner bike, and it's a great all-around city bike. Depending on your size, build, and overall needs, it could be the only bike you'd ever need to buy....but it obviously won't be for everybody.

Ultimately it's your decision what you get out of a particular motorcycle. If you want to upgrade to a larger, sportier motorcycle then go for it....just make sure you're being honest with yourself regarding your reasons, because a 636 is a different animal to tame...even if it is restricted.

[ScraitT]

Well if you have to own the bike for 2 years, I would just go with the 250r. I've never owned one to compare, but from what I have read, 600s are much more costly on maintenance then the 250. I looked up some youtube videos and speed wise they look to be about the same as the 250s (0-60 in 7 secs or so).
Also, I don't know how it is there, but here, the value of 600s and 1000s PLUMMET. The 250r holds its value much better. If your buying a used bike, you can probably find an 08 250r cheap although that when you well it you won't loos any more. And for 600s, it would have to be over 5 years old to buy and sell without loosing a ton of money over 2 years (at least here).

The 600 definitely has benefits, but unless your tracking it, I don't think you really need all that on such a low powered bike. The 250r is cheaper to maintain and for most people is more comfortable. The only true benefit of the 600 to me would be the ability to remove the restrictors in 2 years without going through the hassle of buying a new bike.

[DEXSPEED]

the 250 is perfect for some riders but if you feel it's not good enough for you then do what's best for you.dont' knock the 250 down.

[cwb48]

Originally Posted by CC Cowboy

This is all over my head. You can restrict a 63 to 33 hp? I would do tht over a 250 any day, do to the suspensions and other benefits.

These guys are talking about European license restrictions- another world to us in the U.S., in which most states have few restrictions on what kind of motorcycle you can legally ride and when. And since most bikes these days have E.F.I., it wouldn't be that difficult to upload a new map to limit horsepower in compliance with your license level.

Chris

[karlosdajackal]

Originally Posted by ScraitT

Also, I don't know how it is there, but here, the value of 600s and 1000s PLUMMET. The 250r holds its value much better.

This is the point I could sell the 250r now, and with the money get a 636 that has lost most of its value and won't fall any further, if i keep the 250r it keeps devauling.

Originally Posted by DEXSPEED

the 250 is perfect for some riders but if you feel it's not good enough for you then do what's best for you.dont' knock the 250 down.

Not knocking it, i have a critisim that I think is valid, for the same money I get higher spec machinery that handles better how is that knocking the 250?

Originally Posted by CC Cowboy

This is all over my head. You can restrict a 63 to 33 hp? I would do tht over a 250 any day, do to the suspensions and other benefits.

You can restrict anything for a cost of about €200, friend of mine is getting a bmw 650 dakar and doing the same.

Originally Posted by Flashmonkey

I'm not sure what the 250 is supposed other than a small displacement motorcycle built to a price point?

Marketing hype aside, the 250 is a great beginner bike, and it's a great all-around city bike. Depending on your size, build, and overall needs, it could be the only bike you'd ever need to buy....but it obviously won't be for everybody.

Ultimately it's your decision what you get out of a particular motorcycle. If you want to upgrade to a larger, sportier motorcycle then go for it....just make sure you're being honest with yourself regarding your reasons, because a 636 is a different animal to tame...even if it is restricted.

Both will have 33bhp and weigh 170kg, the 250 all at the top end, the 636 should have the power spread out more evenly even restricted. Both will have similar 0-60 and top speeds with me on them. 636 will handle better and be more adjustable and have better brakes.

[adouglas]

The 250 (at least over here) loses value very slowly. I bough my 08 used last April for $3000. I could probably get that much for it right now. Loss of value just isn't a real issue compared to the utility of the bike.

Regarding "better" spec...

Aside from looking good on paper, what do things like four-pot brakes, dual rotors and fat tires actually do for you if you've only got 33 hp?

I'm not saying the 636 won't handle better... obviously it will. The 250 is equipped the way it is because the components are adequate for its design purpose. It is not built with the track in mind, the way 600 supersports are. If the 250 meets your needs, then higher-end components are not necessary.

The advantages of the 250 don't seem to be what you're interested in. Namely:

- Low purchase price
- Low insurance cost
- Low maintenance cost
- High economy
- Good resale value
- Small size (important for those of us who are small in stature)
- Flickability compared to heavier bikes

Those are the reasons to buy a 250. If none of them are important to you, then go get what you're really after.

It really sounds like you've talked yourself into the derated 636 already, so why not just do it?

[CC Cowboy]

Originally Posted by karlosdajackal

Both will have 33bhp and weigh 170kg, the 250 all at the top end, the 636 should have the power spread out more evenly even restricted. Both will have similar 0-60 and top speeds with me on them. 636 will handle better and be more adjustable and have better brakes.

The major plus for the 636 is you can un-restrict it when you're ready.

[cwb48]

I think jackel's idea makes a lot of sense- in Ireland. Some of you Americans are forgetting that he can't legally ride a bike over a certain HP for a specified period of time. Here, if you wanted the 636, you could have legally bought, registered, insured and rode with any state license endorsed for motorcycles from the day you passed the test, whatever it might be. Insurance for it, however, depending on your age, would be quite a bit more than for the 250, and overall cost, including purchase, would be greater. Oh, and the chance that you would destroy yourself would be signifigantly higher.

The only thing I question is whether a relative beginner can accurately analyze the handling of the 250R, when most of us know that these things, regardless of the lack of suspension adjustability, can out corner almost anything on the road, right out of the box. I hate to be an old fart bringing anybody down, but my feeling is that if you are new to motorcycles, and overly concerned with "handling", you might be watching too much MotoGP, and you are headed for a fall.

As always, I would advise caution, knowing that the advice will probably fall on deaf ears.

Chris

[karlosdajackal]

Originally Posted by adouglas

- Low purchase price - 250 cost more, none on 2nd hand market here
- Low insurance cost - both bikes cost same due to same power
- Low maintenance cost - ok fair point
- High economy - my car gets pretty close to it, it ain't that good
- Good resale value - hoping to exploit this while i can
- Small size - I fit most bikes
- Flickability compared to heavier bikes - 636 is the same weight

Apart from service cost (minor point considering positives the 636 has) I don't see what all the fuss is about the 250r.

[Flashmonkey]

Originally Posted by karlosdajackal

Apart from service cost (minor point considering positives the 636 has) I don't see what all the fuss is about the 250r.

Well as mentioned above, the biggest advantage the 250 has over a restricted 636 is that it's a lot cheaper to run. It's cheaper on insurance (in north america anyway), a lot better on gas, the tires are cheaper and last longer, and it's a hell of a lot easier to ride.

I'm not talking about just raw power and controllability of the throttle here. I'm talking about general ease of riding. The standard seating position and tiny stature of the bike make it easier to ride at low speeds. That's just simple physics.

If you haven't already, I suggest trying to ride a buddy's 600cc supersport around a parking lot (when nobody's looking....). Even though the two bikes practically weigh the same, you'll be using more body english to maneuver the 636 around. Say goodbye to tight u-turns as well.

[Rayme]

Originally Posted by karlosdajackal

Apart from service cost (minor point considering positives the 636 has) I don't see what all the fuss is about the 250r.

You are kinda right, but to be fair you should consider the price of a new 250R and a new zx6r...don't compare old bikes to new, obviously you can get a great used bike for cheap if you look around much longer. I mean I could go buy a new miata for 30 000$ ..or a 97 corvette for a bit less... ? Which has greater value? Consider the age my friend.

[CC Cowboy]

Originally Posted by Flashmonkey

Well as mentioned above, the biggest advantage the 250 has over a restricted 636 is that it's a lot cheaper to run. It's cheaper on insurance (in north america anyway), a lot better on gas, the tires are cheaper and last longer, and it's a hell of a lot easier to ride.

I'm not talking about just raw power and controllability of the throttle here. I'm talking about general ease of riding. The standard seating position and tiny stature of the bike make it easier to ride at low speeds. That's just simple physics.

If you haven't already, I suggest trying to ride a buddy's 600cc supersport around a parking lot (when nobody's looking....). Even though the two bikes practically weigh the same, you'll be using more body english to maneuver the 636 around. Say goodbye to tight u-turns as well.

I haven't see a major different between the 250 and the 1000 I'm riding. The 250 was always way up the RPM chart and I just lug the 1000, at the same speed. I get close to 50MPG on the 1000 unless I'm having illegal speed limit fun. I get about 5000 miles from the tires, unless it goes to the track, I paid $215 for 2 Pirelli Diablos resently, I use body English on any bike I ride (Spanish when with the ladies), so I don't see a big difference.

I think it just comes down to experience and HP. If you can restrict a 636 to 33hp it should be cheap to run.

[Flashmonkey]

Originally Posted by CC Cowboy

I haven't see a major different between the 250 and the 1000 I'm riding. The 250 was always way up the RPM chart and I just lug the 1000, at the same speed. I get close to 50MPG on the 1000 unless I'm having illegal speed limit fun. I get about 5000 miles from the tires, unless it goes to the track, I paid $215 for 2 Pirelli Diablos resently, I use body English on any bike I ride (Spanish when with the ladies), so I don't see a big difference.

I think it just comes down to experience and HP. If you can restrict a 636 to 33hp it should be cheap to run.

You get 50MPG on a 1000? Wow....must be a fuel injection thing. My 750 gets 30MPG on average. Geeez....

And experience definitely comes into play when it comes to how you ride a motorcycle, but transitioning from a 250 up to a supersport, restricted or not, there are a number of differences that the OP may or may not be prepared to encounter.

I'm not trying to talk Karl out of getting the bike he wants, but there is more to consider than just comparing prices and suspension components.

[CC Cowboy]

Originally Posted by Flashmonkey

You get 50MPG on a 1000? Wow....must be a fuel injection thing. My 750 gets 30MPG on average. Geeez....

\\I find I'm riding between 3 grand and 3500 RPMs around town. I was shocked to find the mileage so good. It's not as good when I'm riding with a group but never as bad as 30MPG.

[Flashmonkey]

Originally Posted by CC Cowboy

\\I find I'm riding between 3 grand and 3500 RPMs around town. I was shocked to find the mileage so good. It's not as good when I'm riding with a group but never as bad as 30MPG.

Well my 750 is pretty damn old...so that may have something to do with it. I ride that bike like an old woman, so it's definitely not me!

[karlosdajackal]

Originally Posted by Rayme

You are kinda right, but to be fair you should consider the price of a new 250R and a new zx6r...don't compare old bikes to new, obviously you can get a great used bike for cheap if you look around much longer. I mean I could go buy a new miata for 30 000$ ..or a 97 corvette for a bit less... ? Which has greater value? Consider the age my friend.

Fair point, but i'm comparing them as the money I could get selling my slightly used 250 is equal to the cost of a 636 from about 2004 (or a 2003 with enough change left over that i could get a new PC too). I looked for used ninja 250s for the last 9 months, and there are none on the market at all. I think all of Dublin gets 32 new ninjas a year and they sell out, so since 2008 a total of 64 would be sold, and most of those to people on a 2 year restriction, so none have hit the 2nd hand market yet. I found 2 but both where new models pre registered, so instead of selling for 5,500 with a 3 day wait for delivery, they sold for 5,300 and could be driven straight home.

(Edit: its also the case at the moment, that people in other EU countries are buying 2nd hand bikes from Ireland and the UK as the used market prices are low here, and taking them to countries where used prices are almost twice as much, so what sells for 4k here, could go for 8k in a scandanvian country, so a nice bike is gone in seconds, people make a business of this.)

The other point is my ninja that i got 09/09/09 is loosing value quickly, a 2004 zx6 with 15,000 miles has lost most of its value, so its not going to loose much more value and any value it looses will be at a much slower rate. So if i dislike it after 6 months I can get rid of it for practially what it cost me.

As for being harder to ride, I'd say its easier to ride at high speeds as it will turn faster at higher speeds, more availble grip from the larger tires for the same amount of weight, better feel and bite from the brakes, the 250r turns fast at low speed and slow at high speed. The 636 should be more consistent. As for U-turns, well the 636 can do a full circle in 3.3m (11 feet). I don't ever do U turns in the real world, maybe once every time I get it serviced, certainly not enough to be an important factor when it comes to a purchasing choice. Yea if I was buying an older MV f4 with zero steering lock, it might be a problem worth considering.

Leaving the restriction to one side, if i went to do a track day (private roads) I could get the bike de-restriced for that even while I wait out my 2 years.

I don't know the 250r is a fine bike, rated 4/5 in most magazine even though its an old design with cheap parts it seems to add up to more than the sum of its parts. But if time went back to 09/09/09 and you put a new 250r and a slightly used 2004 636 in front of me for the same money, i'd take the 636 with its fancy parts, future usefullnes, low depreciation and modern tech over the nice but basic 250r built on 25 year old tech, less upgrade potentinal and "higher" depreciation.

Anyway, test is at least 2 months away then i'd have to find a buyer, and a nice example of the 636. So just an idea at the moment. But it suprises me how much people spend on exhausts for 250s for minimal gain, they complain about the lack of digital gauges, they put on clipons and rear sets, spend hours on carbs and all for minimal gains, swap out forks and swingarms even to put better tires and brakes on, with big time/costs invovled.

But you could have a bike with all that good stuff on it already for the same money you'd get selling a nice stock barely used 250r. Heck i found a Yamaha Radian for €500, simlar technology to the ninja, better tires, 600cc motor can be restricted, same riding position and comfortable, great sound too. Don't get me wrong I like the bike, and probably for a first bike (bought with heart not head) it works well enough. But if I look back and say to myself was that sensible? Was it the best option? I'm not so sure

[foxpaws]

it sounds like the question you should ask (at this point, since you already own a ninjette) is what you can sell your ninjette for *now* and buy the 636(of what year, make, etc) that you want, vs. what you can sell your ninjette for *in two years* and buy a 636(ofwhatyearmakeetc) that you _might_ like. and maybe *that* should determine your decision...not just what's available right this second, but what's coming down the pipeline/recently launched and how that compares. if i understand your explanation right, it seems like if you went to the trouble of selling your used ninjette on the mainland - even two years from now - you'd be able to get a nice chunk of change, hopefully enough to justify the extra (?) hassle and time.
for myself, i based my decision to go ninjette on my experiences as a beginner riding an old-gen ninjette and a suzuki 650 - i absolutely liked everything about the 650 better: except for handling the thing when the wetware had a newbie panic. wetware panic on the 650 was pretty disastrous for the bike, which already had a salvage title and some questionable fixes, or i'd own that thing..... Wetware panic on the old-gen just meant my feet hit the ground rather regularly.
Maybe this helps? maybe not? more information is rarely bad, at any rate. Plus, it sounds like you're taller than my wetware

[Betlog]

Originally Posted by karlosdajackal

But it suprises me how much people spend on exhausts for 250s for minimal gain, they complain about the lack of digital gauges, they put on clipons and rear sets, spend hours on carbs and all for minimal gains, swap out forks and swingarms even to put better tires and brakes on, with big time/costs invovled.

For me, one of the reasons why I am modding my bike is as a hobby. I love tinkering with things and being able to do so with my 250r is fun for me. It's great to see the bike evolve as I own it and personalize it to myself.

[sombo]

Originally Posted by karlosdajackal

I don't know the 250r is a fine bike, rated 4/5 in most magazine even though its an old design with cheap parts it seems to add up to more than the sum of its parts. But if time went back to 09/09/09 and you put a new 250r and a slightly used 2004 636 in front of me for the same money, I'd take the 636 with its fancy parts, future usefulness, low depreciation and modern tech over the nice but basic 250r built on 25 year old tech, less upgrade potential and "higher" depreciation.

First off the model you are talking about is a new design, not old. It only came out in 2008, with only about 30% of the old motor making it onto the new design. EVERYTHING else is brand new design. Perhaps you should learn more about the bike before making such statements. Not sure where you got your numbers but the 636 weighs closer to 190kg+ wet, not 170kg. Also a fatter tire usually means slower turning rather then faster turning because it takes longer to make the lean with a larger surface area. This is one reason why in the mountains here in the US the 250 with an expert rider will stomp on a 636 all day long in the twists and turns but lose in the straights.

I don't know what the prices over there are, but here in the states the 250 you have now will depreciate extremely slowly. I still see 2005 EX250's going for more then some of the 636's.

Originally Posted by karlosdajackal

Anyway, test is at least 2 months away then I'd have to find a buyer, and a nice example of the 636. So just an idea at the moment. But it surprises me how much people spend on exhausts for 250s for minimal gain, they complain about the lack of digital gauges, they put on clipons and rear sets, spend hours on carbs and all for minimal gains, swap out forks and swingarms even to put better tires and brakes on, with big time/costs involved.

But you could have a bike with all that good stuff on it already for the same money you'd get selling a nice stock barely used 250r. Heck i found a Yamaha Radian for €500, similar technology to the ninja, better tires, 600cc motor can be restricted, same riding position and comfortable, great sound too. Don't get me wrong I like the bike, and probably for a first bike (bought with heart not head) it works well enough. But if I look back and say to myself was that sensible? Was it the best option? I'm not so sure

For people that are doing all those mods most of the time it is actually cheaper then getting a bigger bike. Also there's more to it then just getting the bigger better thing. If you got a little sport coupe would you try to personalize it to your taste or just sell it for something else in the hopes it's what you REALLY want? People mod the 250 to personalize the bike to them, make it their own. Sure they could go out and get a bigger bike, but that's not the point nor what they want. They want the 250 the way they picture in their mind, the way it's comfortable or fun for them. So they make it that way just like thousands do with little sport coupes round the world.

Ok, lets say all these modders get a bigger bike and decide they want to mod that to suite their needs. Now they will have to shell out tons more then they would have for the 250 to get it to where they want and in the end would gain a smaller % of improvement. Oh sure they could get another 20hp over getting another 8hp (if you're lucky) out of the 250. However that would be 20hp more on a 130hp motor, a gain of about 15%. While on the 250 if you can squeeze out another 8hp on a 26hp motor you gain 30% for less money then it took on the 636.

These are great little bikes that are built for a purpose and do that job better then anything else out on the market. They also have more aftermarket parts available then just about any other bike on the planet. In some countries they can either spend a couple grand on doing crazy mods to the 250 or they could spend over $30-$40k on a bike like the 636 because of their country's regulations on any bike bigger then 250cc.

I hope I shed some light on the subject for you as to why people do what they do with the 250. If you think the 636 is what you want just for the better parts then I hope you are right. But I would suggest making sure the bike is a good fit for you on comfort and handling. That bike is a major change in ergonomics and comfort from the 250. Many have thought it would be the better bike for them only to find it was too uncomfortable to truly enjoy. That is my only real advice in looking at the 636, just make sure it's comfortable enough for you to enjoy. Otherwise it will just be a waste. Good luck with whatever you decide to do.

[Racer x]

Just my 2 cents
I was looking at a 636 before I bought my 08. I may get one in the future.BUt I picked the 250 . If I did not I would have a moded 636
You can definitely get one for 4000 dollars.It will be 6 years old motorcycle.Tires ,brakes scratches.
That is all good . But HOW will you restrict it to 33 hp. Also how will you prove it to the authorities. You cant just hammer the exhaust shut and go to the constable and say look.I would think they go by factory rating on HP .

[ScraitT]

Originally Posted by Racer x

But HOW will you restrict it to 33 hp. Also how will you prove it to the authorities. You cant just hammer the exhaust shut and go to the constable and say look.I would think they go by factory rating on HP .

Over there, since they are restricted to 33hp for two years, a LOT of bikes have restrictors for 33hp on them. I'm not sure entirely how they do it, whether its a chip or reprogramming the computer.

Look on youtube for like 33hp 600 or restricted 600 and stuff, you'll find a ton of videos showing 0-60 times (oddly enough a lot are SLOWER then the ninja to 60).

The main problem I saw when I was reading about it the other day is that a lot of the 600s don't like being restricted and run horrible.

[backinthesaddleagain]

Originally Posted by ScraitT

Over there, since they are restricted to 33hp for two years, a LOT of bikes have restrictors for 33hp on them. I'm not sure entirely how they do it, whether its a chip or reprogramming the computer.

Look on youtube for like 33hp 600 or restricted 600 and stuff, you'll find a ton of videos showing 0-60 times (oddly enough a lot are SLOWER then the ninja to 60).

The main problem I saw when I was reading about it the other day is that a lot of the 600s don't like being restricted and run horrible.

I would agree any motor restricted to about 1/4 to a 1/3 of its power would run horrible. Think of all the variables that go into designing a motor - intake valve size, exhaust valve size, bore * stroke (square, oversquare, or undersquare), airbox volume, exhaust pipe shape and volume, camshaft timing (when the valves open, how long they stay open, how far they open), carburetion size (or F.I. size), and lastly the electronic chip that impacts F.I. spray and ignition timing. Now we know that making an exhaust system that flows freer (or freer flowing intake system for that matter) will usually uncork a few HP, but how do you take one of these variables, cut engine output below 50% of its intended design, and still run reasonably well? Maybe reprogramming the chip will do it but how good can it be. It is more than just NASCAR restrictor plate racing keeping a few MPH down.

[addy126]

You may save money on the purchase of this 636 but as I've said before you are in a world of hurt for parts when it comes time to repair, finding anyone that will touch it for repairs (if you don't do it yourself), and find that it will be in the shop more often than any model 250. A friend of mine has one (2009-636) and wishes they could just dump the thing over the tallest bridge around. Sure the "Ducati" is a status symbol for most... but then unless you have a deep wallet, and patience to ride because its in the shop more often than not waiting for parts, and enjoy long rides in a very "humped" up style.... lol go for it

[backinthesaddleagain]

Addy I thinkyouare talking about a Duc monster 696. Not a ninja 636.
Posted via Mobile Device

[DEXSPEED]

almost everybody knows the pro's and con's of the 250 nobody need's to defend it.if you bought a 250 you pretty much know what you are getting.

[ninja250]

Probably should have bought a real bike but now I'm stuck with this 250 for a bit. Not so bad really.

Better than no bike at all, even if it's a lil bent now compared to how I bought it.
Now I know that if I bought another used 600 I could just tear the whole thing apart myself to make sure it's in tip top shape. Only reason I sold my other used 600's is because they had problems I was afraid to work on myself. That was dumb.

I didn't really like my R6 either. I didn't like flickability after coming from a GSXR. I actually called the R6 small and squirrely in comparison and sold it. About 90% sure another GSXR 600 or better is in my future. I probably don't need anything more powerful that that, although I wouldn't mind trying a 1000 for a few minutes.

I've been run down by punks on the freeway on the 250 that I wish I had the power to toast. Can't exactly flip someone off on this bike for almost killing you and then get away from them almost killing you again. lol

[sombo]

Originally Posted by ninja250

Probably should have bought a real bike but now I'm stuck with this 250 for a bit. Not so bad really.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. A REAL bike? Sorry but that is exactly the sort of statement we DON'T want on these forums. That is the exact attitude we don't appreciate about other too-macho-for-the-250 punks on 600's that annoys most of us.

If the bike isn't what you want, that's fine. But statements like that should NEVER be made on a forum that is here to prove such statements as arrogant, wrong, and misleading.

The 250 IS a real bike and I'm truly sorry you are unable to see, feel, or enjoy that. I ask that you refrain from saying such things in the future. Thank you.

[ninja250]

lol

That was designed for you.

You know better, that I respect this bike.

However, It's far from the bikes I've had.

I see I've been taking an economy bike a bit too seriously without the full mod job (and skills apparently ), for one.

I wish it were as easy as being asked to refrain from one's opinion.

[sombo]

Originally Posted by ninja250

lol

That was designed for you.

You suck right now. Just thought you should know that.

[ninja250]

Don't worry I'm just cranky I crashed.

[CC Cowboy]

Originally Posted by ninja250

lol

That was designed for you.

You know better, that I respect this bike.

However, It's far from the bikes I've had.

I see I've been taking an economy bike a bit too seriously without the full mod job (and skills apparently ), for one.

I wish it were as easy as being asked to refrain from one's opinion.

You could have crashed a 600 and no longer be here with us (then we would have no one to pick on).

Originally Posted by ninja250

Don't worry I'm just cranky I crashed.

I thought you might have your period!

Seek help!

Stop flippin off ppl!

Be thankful you're alive!

Go to Church!

Get back on your meds!

Drink to excess!

Go drive your car (then the 250 will feel like fun again)!

[ninja250]

lol I don't know why but I actually respect you for some reason.

[CC Cowboy]

Originally Posted by ninja250

lol I don't know why but I actually respect you for some reason.

Fool, I say fool. I only pull you in to eventually bring you down. It's cruel, but I have to laugh.

Only kidding (or am I)!

[karlosdajackal]

Originally Posted by sombo

First off the model you are talking about is a new design, not old. It only came out in 2008, with only about 30% of the old motor making it onto the new design. EVERYTHING else is brand new design. Perhaps you should learn more about the bike before making such statements. Not sure where you got your numbers but the 636 weighs closer to 190kg+ wet, not 170kg. Also a fatter tire usually means slower turning rather then faster turning because it takes longer to make the lean with a larger surface area. This is one reason why in the mountains here in the US the 250 with an expert rider will stomp on a 636 all day long in the twists and turns but lose in the straights.

Its may be a new design, but its not new technology, its old technology. Steel frame for one, standard forks for another (not even upside down forks). The suspension does not cope very well with bumpy roads, and its not adjustable for anything other than preload on the rear.

The 636 has more aggressive steering geometry, its not just about the tire, rake and trail are different. It also has way better brakes and more grip for braking and a slipper clutch. Fully adjustable front and rear suspension.

Originally Posted by addy126

You may save money on the purchase of this 636 but as I've said before you are in a world of hurt for parts when it comes time to repair, finding anyone that will touch it for repairs (if you don't do it yourself), and find that it will be in the shop more often than any model 250. A friend of mine has one (2009-636) and wishes they could just dump the thing over the tallest bridge around. Sure the "Ducati" is a status symbol for most... but then unless you have a deep wallet, and patience to ride because its in the shop more often than not waiting for parts, and enjoy long rides in a very "humped" up style.... lol go for it

The 2009 Kawasaki is not a 636 its a 600, also its not that expensive to repair and its not a Ducati either Ducati's don't cost that much to look after in Europe.

[addy126]

Originally Posted by backinthesaddleagain

Addy I thinkyouare talking about a Duc monster 696. Not a ninja 636.
Posted via Mobile Device

Oops you are right... lol.. thats what I get for speed posting when I am at work