2007 Kawasaki bikes

Message

#21 Post by **Jamers!** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 12:47 pm

Sevulturus wrote:
What is the proper classification of the blue one?

small sized sport-bike

JWF

VermilionX · #22 Post by **VermilionX** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 12:48 pm

blue one?

to me they're just standard bikes w/ sport style fairings bec of the upright seating position.

but who cares what i think.

#23 Post by **Jamers!** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 12:50 pm

VermilionX wrote:
to me they're just standard bikes w/ sport style fairings bec of the upright seating position.

so seating position determines bike clasification? The Sv650s is what then, its got a non-up right seating postion but cant compete with bikes in the sterotypical 'sportbike' class. . .

JWF

V4underme · #24 Post by **V4underme** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 12:50 pm

snwbrdr wrote:Im gonna open my mouth here and say something that could be wrong, no i will not take the time to check myself either....

The 650 isnt a ninja, the 600 and 636 are. (also referred to as the ZX-6R, and the ZX-6RR respectively)

Sure it is (read the url and the fairing) http://www.ninja650.com/EX650A6F_40099_B.jpg

ZX14 and the 10R are two bikes designed for two distinctly different purposes. 10R is a race/track bike, the 14 is a sport tourer (emphasis on sport). The price dif doesn't surprise me at all since they fill different niches.

VermilionX · #25 Post by **VermilionX** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 12:52 pm

JWF505 wrote: so seating position determines bike clasification? The Sv650s is what then, its got a non-up right seating postion but cant compete with bikes in the sterotypical 'sportbike' class. . .

JWF

why yes, the SVS models are sportbikes to me but not supersports, just like the katana.

Sev · #26 Post by **Sev** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 12:52 pm

VermilionX wrote:blue one?

to me they're just standard bikes w/ sport style fairings bec of the upright seating position.

but who cares what i think.

ZZR has a fairly agressive riding posture. Not so agressive as a 636 by way of example, but it allows for an easy full tuck. At what point does one become the other?

VermilionX · #27 Post by **VermilionX** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 12:54 pm

Sevulturus wrote: ZZR has a fairly agressive riding posture. Not so agressive as a 636 by way of example, but it allows for an easy full tuck. At what point does one become the other?

to me... sportbikes are setup so that even when you are not tucked in, your back is still hunched. but that's just me so who cares.

#28 Post by **Jamers!** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 12:55 pm

VermilionX wrote:
JWF505 wrote: so seating position determines bike clasification? The Sv650s is what then, its got a non-up right seating postion but cant compete with bikes in the sterotypical 'sportbike' class. . .

JWF
why yes, the SVS models are sportbikes to me but not supersports, just like the katana.

you can full tuck on a ex500. its not a perfect tuck nor is it needed, but you can.

JWF

V4underme · #29 Post by **V4underme** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 12:55 pm

Sevulturus wrote:
VermilionX wrote:blue one?

to me they're just standard bikes w/ sport style fairings bec of the upright seating position.

but who cares what i think.
ZZR has a fairly agressive riding posture. Not so agressive as a 636 by way of example, but it allows for an easy full tuck. At what point does one become the other?

having fun swatting the toy around? lol

VermilionX · #30 Post by **VermilionX** » Mon Jun 19, 2006 1:02 pm

JWF505 wrote:
with no job atm im living off of workers comp and savings, i dont have the cash to throw at a bike i wont be riding, when im all healed up ill take a look at whats out and go from there.

JWF

again, sorry to hear that.

get well soon and good luck!