Me too! Me too! CBR300R announced

[subxero]

obviously prices on left overs, end of year promotions are going to affect prices that's why sticking with MSRP for each example is just easier

[Aggrotech]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

^you realize that you can get a brand new 600SS from the big 4 for a lot less than 11k right?? I was at a dealer over the summer and they were selling a 636 for a lot less than that. Like 9500 OTD iirc. Or maybe 9500+fees

what years..? Everywhere around here anything 600 related is easily 11k.

Unless, ofc..its used with a good amount of miles on them.

[lgk]

Holding my breath for the yamaha

[Byakkotai]

Seems like the stroked out 286cc thumper everyone's talking about.

Linky to Motorcycle.com

[Sirref]

hmm, seems like ~30hp and ~20ftlbs torque
that's fairly reasonable for an entry level sport bike as opposed to just a commuter like the cbr250r was. this could do reasonably well though I'll be sticking with my N300

[choneofakind]

Originally Posted by Aggrotech

what years..? Everywhere around here anything 600 related is easily 11k.

Unless, ofc..its used with a good amount of miles on them.

Brand. Spanking. New. 2013 636. Not a left over, a brand new 2013 bike. Price tag definitely did not say 11k, and this was in late July or early August, I don't remember which.

[caineroad]

this look awful, just like the 600 and 1000 CBR.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by Sirref

hmm, seems like ~30hp and ~20ftlbs torque
that's fairly reasonable for an entry level sport bike as opposed to just a commuter like the cbr250r was. this could do reasonably well though I'll be sticking with my N300

For comparison's sake, the CBR250R was rated at 19.4 kw / 26 hp at the crank, and dynos on stock bikes showed 21 - 22 hp at the rear wheel. Everything else being equal, that means this 22.7 kw/ 30 hp means 25-26 hp at the rear wheel, just about what the new-gen Ninja 250R's made. It's still way down on the 34 hp that the Ninja 300 is making at the rear wheel.

[caineroad]

Originally Posted by Alex

For comparison's sake, the CBR250R was rated at 19.4 kw / 26 hp at the crank, and dynos on stock bikes showed 21 - 22 hp at the rear wheel. Everything else being equal, that means this 22.7 kw/ 30 hp means 25-26 hp at the rear wheel, just about what the new-gen Ninja 250R's made. It's still way down on the 34 hp that the Ninja 300 is making at the rear wheel.

I heard the lower hp yields them higher torque, meaning it can pull away faster than the ninja 250 (if ninja 250 vs cbr250) and also ninja 300 vs cbr 300?

[massacremasses]

Originally Posted by Aggrotech

what years..? Everywhere around here anything 600 related is easily 11k.

Unless, ofc..its used with a good amount of miles on them.

thats why you buy used silly.


Looking for a 636? Im just a short drive up...

[Sirref]

Originally Posted by Alex

For comparison's sake, the CBR250R was rated at 19.4 kw / 26 hp at the crank, and dynos on stock bikes showed 21 - 22 hp at the rear wheel. Everything else being equal, that means this 22.7 kw/ 30 hp means 25-26 hp at the rear wheel, just about what the new-gen Ninja 250R's made. It's still way down on the 34 hp that the Ninja 300 is making at the rear wheel.

true but it is designed with a focus on torque rather than horsepower and it has around a 3 ft lbs torque advantage on the N300. now if the hp turns out to be legitimately 30hp the torque advantage should negate the hp deficit in terms of overall power.

with that said, the fact that it beats out the old ninja 250 on power raises it to a legitimate small displacement sport bike option for track use, as I can't imagine that any organization that allowed the N300 would turn down this cbr.

Now if only there was a small displacement exotic with undertail exhaust (think cbr600rr styling). I would buy and love that bike.

[Aggrotech]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

Brand. Spanking. New. 2013 636. Not a left over, a brand new 2013 bike. Price tag definitely did not say 11k, and this was in late July or early August, I don't remember which.

Lucky. theyre 11k here in fresno. Closer to 12k MSRP actually.

Originally Posted by massacremasses

thats why you buy used silly.


Looking for a 636? Im just a short drive up...

id love to have a 636 but i just got fired. Might actually lose my 250 D:

[Sirref]

Originally Posted by caineroad

I heard the lower hp yields them higher torque, meaning it can pull away faster than the ninja 250 (if ninja 250 vs cbr250) and also ninja 300 vs cbr 300?

while this is true the n250 would shortly pass and crush the cbr250r

I can't say for sure with the N300 and cbr300 but I believe it will end the same way stock.

I think the real winner here for honda is that the cbr300r now has enough power for people to not be terrified on highways by the fact that they struggle to accelerate more as cars are flying by them at 80+mph.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by Sirref

true but it is designed with a focus on torque rather than horsepower and it has around a 3 ft lbs torque advantage on the N300. now if the hp turns out to be legitimately 30hp the torque advantage should negate the hp deficit in terms of overall power.

But it won't. That spec sheet is almost certainly at the crank.

Originally Posted by Sirref

with that said, the fact that it beats out the old ninja 250 on power raises it to a legitimate small displacement sport bike option for track use, as I can't imagine that any organization that allowed the N300 would turn down this cbr.

But it doesn't beat out the old ninja 250 on power; it matches it.

Originally Posted by Sirref

I think the real winner here for honda is that the cbr300r now has enough power for people to not be terrified on highways by the fact that they struggle to accelerate more as cars are flying by them at 80+mph.

[Sirref]

Originally Posted by Alex

But it doesn't beat out the old ninja 250 on power; it matches it.

even matching the old N250 on power the new cbr300 has all the amenities that the N250 never had. abs/fuel injection/etc. those advantages alongside the equal power leads to the cbr300 being a much better value though its real competition is the ninja 300.

now obviously power is not everything, or else we would all be riding gsxr1000s and zx-14rs so the N300's power advantage is not the only factor in play over the cbr300. the cbr (I'm assuming of course, honda reputation and all) should have a much more intact package so owners shouldn't have to worry about loose fairings and the like. I wouldn't be surprised at all if honda puts decent brakes on stock unlike the N300 where the braking feels weak. the suspension is another question mark though the cbr250r had a rather loose suspension honda may have made it a bit stiffer for the cbr300. maintenance is likely to be painless much like the cbr250r and the cb500r with long service intervals. I'd be surprised if it loses out to the N300 in terms of fuel economy. clutch feel is likely advantage to kawi with the slipper clutch.

with everything I can think of off the top of my head I think the cbr300r is welcome competition for those people who want a nice looking small displacement sport bike.

[keeblerkhan]

Originally Posted by Sirref

if they made an I4 300cc bike with ...

Not gonna happen. No major OEM is going to put that amount of complexity into an engine for a budget bike. 300cc just doesn't warrant 4 cylinders unless you want to rev it to the moon and back. Parallel twin or even a thumper is just right for the size. I agree that honda's attempt at a thumper for the 300 will probably feel flat, but look at KTM's singles...they rock...it can be done.

[Aufitt]

If they made a quality 4cyl 250 like a modern cbr250rr (which would cost as much as 600 anyway)... Americans would be the first to complain about the US$10,000 price tag.

Over here in 1996 an MC22 retailed for $9990, the same as the 600's of the Era.

I'll never understand the USA consumers (and comments), no wonder they missed out on so many decent small bikes the rest of the world has had.

[ninja250r81]

Instead of increasing cc by increments and just hurry up and build a inline 4 400cc that will have the fight to equal or beat Honda cb400. Adjustable front, rear suspension. Restricted for learner licence holders, looks like zx6r, gold painted suspension, twin front rotors

[Aufitt]

Originally Posted by ninja250r81

Instead of increasing cc by increments and just hurry up and build a inline 4 400cc that will have the fight to equal or beat Honda cb400. Adjustable front, rear suspension. Restricted for learner licence holders, looks like zx6r, gold painted suspension, twin front rotors

Not sure what gold suspension does?

but I see you are in Australia, just buy an RVF400, because if such a new 400 lams bike existed you (or other lams buyers) would not like the $15k pricetag.

[Joshorilla]

Originally Posted by Sirref

I believe aprillia does this with their rs125, it's quite a step up from other 125s as the bike has pretty close to the same horsepower as the ninja 300 (2 strokes for the win) and is quite obviously a joy to own in europe

Quite obviously?

I owned a 2stroke rs125, they sell for about £1000 less than a ninja 250r here, they make less power and they seize up after a few years as they were simply too highly tuned.

They look great, but are sold as a bike for kids that look cool, but aren't expected to last more than five years, that's why you pretty much can't find a 2stroke one any more, and if you do, it will need rebuilding.

And as for cheapening the brand, if you were to plot cc on one axis, and price on another, and input data from every bike on the market today, a funny thing happens...

[adouglas]

Originally Posted by keeblerkhan

I agree that honda's attempt at a thumper for the 300 will probably feel flat, but look at KTM's singles...they rock...it can be done.

Indeed. Moto3 race bikes are KTM thumpers.

[subxero]

Originally Posted by Joshorilla

Quite obviously?

I owned a 2stroke rs125, they sell for about £1000 less than a ninja 250r here, they make less power and they seize up after a few years as they were simply too highly tuned.

They look great, but are sold as a bike for kids that look cool, but aren't expected to last more than five years, that's why you pretty much can't find a 2stroke one any more, and if you do, it will need rebuilding.

they seize cuz people are stupid and lazy and don't like to put time and money into maintenance

Originally Posted by Joshorilla

And as for cheapening the brand, if you were to plot cc on one axis, and price on another, and input data from every bike on the market today, a funny thing happens...

perhaps a bit of a stretch

[choneofakind]

No, I think josh is right for the most part. People associate displacement with cost. Clearly bigger is better and better can bring more money.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by adouglas

Indeed. Moto3 race bikes are KTM thumpers.

KTM does make an engine for Moto3, but so do many other manufacturers. Here's the current approved list. It's only the moto2 class that has a spec engine, and that is currently built by Honda, and very closely related to the CBR600RR motor.

[subxero]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

No, I think josh is right for the most part. People associate displacement with cost. Clearly bigger is better and better can bring more money.

i did not say i didn't agree, just that his statement of "every single bike in the world" was maybe a bit exaggerated.

just one example

Ninja 1k - msrp $11,400
GSXR 750 - msrp $12,200

per motorcyclist, online

[backinthesaddleagain]

New 636 in Rhode Island going for 8K and change.

[backinthesaddleagain]

A seized 2 stroke race bike is worse to fix than a broken 4 stroke.

[backinthesaddleagain]

Saw a seized cbr250. A friends kids bike. Rode it to school. Shut it off 10 minutes. Restarted it and it seized. Covered by warranty.

[backinthesaddleagain]

Originally Posted by subxero

obviously prices on left overs, end of year promotions are going to affect prices that's why sticking with MSRP for each example is just easier

Yup. Here u can get a new 2011 zx10r with abs for 11K.

[CycleCam303]

The aprilia rs125 is a piece of crap. What I mean is that it has the looks of a cool bike but the suspension is garbage like the ninja 250 and the motors aren't that strong. They have steel sub frames and at its core its just a cheap street bike. It's not that the little priller is bad. It's no race bike. It's a slightly better platform than a ninja 250. Which compared to a real race bike... It's a toy.

I'm talking about a honda rs125. A gp bike for kids. The 145 lbs moto 3 equivalent. They aren't cheap. Even the inferior 1994 models still command 4 grand for a clean model. The moriwaki four stroke 250 is 12k new and the honda nsf 250, which is about as close to a moto 3 bike as the public can get runs just over 20 grand.

Go check out a motorcycle race. It's what all the rich dads buy their kids.

My point was that stuff is extremely niche and pretty expensive. I think the nsf 250 is a cool track bike. But no. I'll take a 600 or liter bike any day of the week when it comes to my hard earned money.

[backinthesaddleagain]

I was at a wet trackday last week where a guy and a kid were screaming on Honda rs125 in the rain. On slicks! It was a blast to watch them going at it.

[ninja250r81]

Originally Posted by Aufitt

Not sure what gold suspension does?

but I see you are in Australia, just buy an RVF400, because if such a new 400 lams bike existed you (or other lams buyers) would not like the $15k pricetag.

Looks like Ohlins.

$10,500 for the LAMS cb400 with 38kw/52hp @ 195kg

Well under $15k

if kawasaki made the 400cc inline it would have 42kw/56.3hp

I would buy that

[Geardrivencam250RR]

Up until this spring, I owned a 2011 CBR250R. I still think it's a great bike. However, I find myself preferring the character and excitement of higher revving small displacement rides. And I'm becoming a little concerned with Honda's new direction of "heavy, low redline, torquey, and inexpensive"...which invariably comes across as "boring and uninspired". I wonder if that's one reason why the Ninja 300 seems to be competing well with the CBR500R in comparison tests. It's simply more fun and exciting to ride. Kudos Kawasaki.

I think the Ninja 300 is a fantastic bike. A friend and I almost bought one each at our local dealer while we were there a couple of weeks ago. They had a green one and a white one (2014s) - still in crates. What stopped me - besides concerns over my sudden impulsively? Wet weight. I just think Kawasaki could have done a better job in this area. To me, it needs to lose about 30 lbs. The new Yamaha MT-07 689cc twin for instance, is only about 9 lbs heavier (wet). Yamaha seems to be on the right track recently with their lighter weight designs. A great way to improve performance and fuel-economy at the same time - while keeping the bike interesting - without having to resort to low redlines. Listening Honda?

From what I have gathered, the stock Ninja 250R produced - on average - about 2.5 hp more at the rear-wheel than the CBR250R based on online magazine comparison test dyno runs (see below). I think that with the lighter weight of the CBR300R (about 30lbs), and what may be a 2 hp and 5 ft-lb increase over the Ninja 250R (at the rear wheel), the CBR300R will definitely have the advantage in terms of performance, and likely in terms of fuel economy as well (most magazine tests show the CBR250R netting between 15 and 24 more mpg than the Ninja 250R). But it's a little late. The CBR300R in my opinion is the bike Honda should have released originally to complete with the Ninja 250R.

How competitive will the CBR300R be against the Ninja 300? Not very - at least in terms of performance. I suspect the CBR300R may have a slight advantage up to 8500RPM (more torque, equal hp at this RPM, and 30lbs less weight). But anywhere north of 8500RPM (where the fun begins) the Ninja 300 will simply sprint away from the CBR.

So why buy the CBR300R over the Ninja 300?

1. Cheaper to purchase.
2. Considerably better fuel economy (not that the Ninja 300 is a slouch in this department either).
3. Umm.....I'm still thinking....

The above factors may hold considerable appeal in developing countries. If that's Honda's intent - good for them. They may sell a lot of them. But in in many other nations - it would be like comparing a Toyota Corolla with a Mazda Miata. The Corolla is a very reliable, fuel-efficient, and practical vehicle. But which one would you find yourself dreaming more about? Which would be more fun to own? Toyota does sell a lot of Corollas. But I think people generally expect more excitement from the bikes they ride.


Motorcycle.com

Ninja 250R....................CBR250R

HP 24.9........................HP 22.6

Cycleworld.com

Ninja 250R..................CBR250R

HP 25.5......................HP 23.7

Motorcyclist

Ninja 250R..................CBR250R

HP 24.6......................HP 22.3

Sport Rider Magazine

Ninja 250R..................CBR250R

HP 24.6......................HP 22.3

Motorcycle Consumer News

Ninja 250R..................CBR250R

HP 26.09......................HP 21.92

Rider Magazine

Ninja 250R..................CBR250R

HP 25.9......................HP 23.8


Average across these tests? 2.5 hp.

Ninja250R........25.3HP

CBR250R.........22.8HP

Mike

[Sirref]

Originally Posted by Geardrivencam250RR

Wet weight. I just think Kawasaki could have done a better job in this area. To me, it needs to lose about 30 lbs. The new Yamaha MT-07 689cc twin for instance, is only about 9 lbs heavier (wet). Yamaha seems to be on the right track recently with their lighter weight designs. A great way to improve performance and fuel-economy at the same time - while keeping the bike interesting - without having to resort to low redlines. Listening Honda?

damn, I didn't realize just how lightweight the MT-07 is, if only it was coming stateside so I could buy it.

on the point of the honda being more focused on fuel economy and low revving torque I think that is a result of the market that honda is aiming for. I believe that the market for the cbr250r/300r is people who want a bike that is as cheap as possible to own/maintain most likely as a primary vehicle used for commuting. The torque is easy to live with in urban areas as well where you rarely get out of second or third gear anyway.
so really N300 is built for the back country roads/mountain roads.
cbr300r is built for urban/suburban roads.
of course each can do both but they're best in their own element.

[dark_beaverezt]

Not to be outdoned, HONDA released the CBR3OOR..happened to find an article on the asphaltandrubber website...

[dino74]

Originally Posted by dark_beaverezt

Not to be outdoned, HONDA released the CBR3OOR..happened to find an article on the asphaltandrubber website...

You might want to check out

http://www.ninjette.org/forums/showthread.php?t=154690

[Alex]

/merged

[voidrider]

Originally Posted by keeblerkhan

Not gonna happen. No major OEM is going to put that amount of complexity into an engine for a budget bike. 300cc just doesn't warrant 4 cylinders unless you want to rev it to the moon and back. Parallel twin or even a thumper is just right for the size. I agree that honda's attempt at a thumper for the 300 will probably feel flat, but look at KTM's singles...they rock...it can be done.

I know this is an older post, but google ZX-2R and ZXR 400. Kawasaki already came out with these bikes. The redlines were insane. The consideration you have totally correct is "budget bike".

Reading on several forums there are plenty of people who would LOVE a solid, technically proficient smaller displacement bike with powerful engine and good suspension...but that definitely blows the "budget" part of the equation. Also, while there are plenty of people who say they want such a bike, the reality is that they are a pretty small fraction of the motorcycling community which is in itself, a pretty slim consumer group.

[EsrTek]

Anyone think Kawi will up the cc on Baby Ninja to counter Honda?
Is that Honda even comin to US market (if not I doubt we see any changes)

[Treosfnb]

I give it 2 years before someone makes a 350cc, sexy bike but starting to close the gap between small and midsize bikes.