Total Motorcycle Community Forums

hi-side wrote:The only "sport" series brand I haven't raced has been Yamaha. Each one has its own characteristics and fit. My last 5 years racing, I was on a Honda 600RR and it fit me the best of any previous bike. The cbr 600RR was also the most reliable of all the race bikes I've owned.

I blew the motor on a Kawasaki ZX-6R and Suzuki SV-650. I also had a transmission go in a GSXR-750. I never had those kinds of problems with my Hondas even with the same severe duty that racing implies. All but one were brand new off the showroom floor before being race-prepped.

I have ridden a race prepped R-6 which did have good power in the mid-range but it didn't fit my riding style like the CBR did.

And none of my cbr 600's were under-powered at the top end. The R-6 certainly had more mid-range, but at the top, there was very little difference.

I can go much faster on a bike that I'm comfortable on than one that has more HP, even alot of HP. I'm actually faster on a 600 where corner speed counts than on a big bike, where its all point and shoot.

That hp, I was talking about 1000cc bikes. 2007 CBR-1000rr has 147 horsepowers and the 10R, R1000, and the R1 have 154~159 horsepowers.

pujolshomerun wrote:

hi-side wrote:The only "sport" series brand I haven't raced has been Yamaha. Each one has its own characteristics and fit. My last 5 years racing, I was on a Honda 600RR and it fit me the best of any previous bike. The cbr 600RR was also the most reliable of all the race bikes I've owned.

I blew the motor on a Kawasaki ZX-6R and Suzuki SV-650. I also had a transmission go in a GSXR-750. I never had those kinds of problems with my Hondas even with the same severe duty that racing implies. All but one were brand new off the showroom floor before being race-prepped.

I have ridden a race prepped R-6 which did have good power in the mid-range but it didn't fit my riding style like the CBR did.

And none of my cbr 600's were under-powered at the top end. The R-6 certainly had more mid-range, but at the top, there was very little difference.

I can go much faster on a bike that I'm comfortable on than one that has more HP, even alot of HP. I'm actually faster on a 600 where corner speed counts than on a big bike, where its all point and shoot.

That hp, I was talking about 1000cc bikes. 2007 CBR-1000rr has 147 horsepowers and the 10R, R1000, and the R1 have 154~159 horsepowers.

How many people are even capable of wringing out 10/10ths performance from a motorcycle. In the REAL world, does the 10HP difference really apply. Does 10 HP make a difference riding on a challenging road? Except for an expert in drag racing, I doubt that the average owner of a liter bike could even tell the difference of 147 versus 157 horsepower.

Ride-ability is more than the maximum horsepower of the bike. Back in the old 2 cycle days, the Kawasaki Triples were some of the most powerful motors on the road. However, the frames and riding geometry made them difficult to ride at high speed. They wallowed in the corners and wobbled and had horrible tank slappers. A less tuned motor with a more capable chassis is sometimes faster and more comfortable overall.

If raw HP is the only reason to pick a motorcycle model, then you probably don't own a Honda. But if you want a reasonable power, comfortable to ride motorcycle, Honda is a good choice.

Forgive me for the mistake. It is late in my day and I didn't reference back to make sure of a lack of errors.

I have sat on an R1. For it is shiny and pretty and I like to touch it and its cousins when I am at the shop. Forgive me for thinking aggression meant style. So much of this discussion is about taste and style.

Yes it is more aggressively leaned over. The CBR may be more comfortable. I like the ninja out of them all. Oddly enough, I made my decision based on the fact that my motorcycle is also a daily driver. As much as I adore the super sports, they don't do it for me in the end.

However, hp charts as you wish, what difference does that 10 hp make to the riders of this bike. We have some racers but for the most part we quote numbers. The same numbers we quote when we buy cars we will never be able to use the potential to. The same numbers we quote when we buy computers or look at the next television set.

We like bigger, better, faster, longer, newer, shinier. But in truth, people are also attracted to what they are attracted to. They want safe, comfortable, reliable, reassuring. Will 10hp make a difference. Will a lack of 'character' make a difference? Will one exhaust note to the next matter? Especially on such a changeable thing.

Honda has a name. That name is reliability, results for your money, comfort, good service, nice looks. When someone drops out money, these things are major factors to their choice. Mix that with some personal taste and fanaticism is born.

That's like complaining that your Aston Martin isn't as great as your Ferrari. Where else other than the track can you possibly take a CBR-1000 anywhere close to its potential?

I drove an Acura RSX-S for three years and that's a a fairly low end coupe at about 200hp -- and I barely ever got the chance to use all of the power that thing had. It certainly wasn't "low end" for me. It's not that I don't like going fast - it's that there aren't a lot of places where you can really do that.

pujolshomerun wrote:And CBR series usually have 10bhp less power than other bikes in its class. I think Honda looks TOO NORMAL. But I don't know why they dominate the market.

What do you ride?

Septimus wrote:That's like complaining that your Aston Martin isn't as great as your Ferrari. Where else other than the track can you possibly take a CBR-1000 anywhere close to its potential?

I drove an Acura RSX-S for three years and that's a a fairly low end coupe at about 200hp -- and I barely ever got the chance to use all of the power that thing had. It certainly wasn't "low end" for me. It's not that I don't like going fast - it's that there aren't a lot of places where you can really do that.

Even on the track you're going to have trouble wringing full potential out of a liter bike. Most bike tracks won't have a long enough straight Hahaha

I remember reading a very very old review of the Honda CB750 when it first came out. It was a glowing review, about how powerful the bike was, how great the brakes were, how stable it was, how rider friendly it was and how there was nothing like in on the road at the time......at the end of the review, the writer stated that because of all of good things about the bike, it had to be one of the most boring bikes he had ever ridden.

The majority of my bikes have been Honda's and I like them, you just cannot beat them for reliability and riding manners. However, I do have two complaints about every Honda I have owned, first is their seats have got to be the most uncomfortable ones going, especially for long trip and second, the factory left hand grips always try to slide off.

ceemes wrote:I remember reading a very very old review of the Honda CB750 when it first came out. It was a glowing review, about how powerful the bike was, how great the brakes were, how stable it was, how rider friendly it was and how there was nothing like in on the road at the time......at the end of the review, the writer stated that because of all of good things about the bike, it had to be one of the most boring bikes he had ever ridden.

The majority of my bikes have been Honda's and I like them, you just cannot beat them for reliability and riding manners. However, I do have two complaints about every Honda I have owned, first is their seats have got to be the most uncomfortable ones going, especially for long trip and second, the factory left hand grips always try to slide off.

I remember reading the very same review for the Honda 919 when they did a naked bike shootout last year in one of the mags. It did everything right, but still came out "boring"

Believe me when I say that after a few thousand miles "boring" will really grow on you.