Cycle World CBR / NINJA 250 comparison
- Thread starter bombdefuzer
- Start date
No shit sherlock. I knew you would bite. The point is the review showed more than CBR's crashing.TonyBKK;278287 wrote: That review is a year old mate
It's not "just an opinion" - it's Cycle World's opinion which carries some weight and influences lots of potential buyers.
But these two bikes are so different from each other that it's not really difficult to choose.
The "redline brigade", people who like sports bikes, like the twin because it revs higher and performs better on the highway.
The CBR is better around town, for everyday riding, and especially the choice for beginners.
That's not a bad thing, the CBR offers better mileage and the new engine has something like 27 patents.
I owned two Ninjas in the 90s, great little bikes, but these days I'd take the CBR over the Ninja even though I never even sat on one.
Actually for around here the CRF250L would be my choice. Even better: a supermoto version with longer gearing and better brakes!
But these two bikes are so different from each other that it's not really difficult to choose.
The "redline brigade", people who like sports bikes, like the twin because it revs higher and performs better on the highway.
The CBR is better around town, for everyday riding, and especially the choice for beginners.
That's not a bad thing, the CBR offers better mileage and the new engine has something like 27 patents.
I owned two Ninjas in the 90s, great little bikes, but these days I'd take the CBR over the Ninja even though I never even sat on one.
Actually for around here the CRF250L would be my choice. Even better: a supermoto version with longer gearing and better brakes!
In the west they are both noob bikes, and yes, the Honda is even more noob-friendly than the Kwacker, but other than it being easier for beginners to ride and more fuel efficient I can't think of anything that's better on the Honda. For people who like to whack it, the Kwacker twin is bulletproof while the new Honda single is proving to be a bit fragile.
There are two good reasons to buy the CBR in Thailand: Honda has two thirds of the market share, dealerships on every other corner, and their products have a high resale value. The CBR is also cheaper than the Kawasaki, you could buy an aftermarket exhaust, tires of your choice and still have some gas money left.
An interesting fact is that even though the Ninja has 2-3hp more they only kick in above 10,000 rpm. Up to 9,000 rpm the Honda has more power and torque but then peters out.
I've always pereferred bikes that make power down low and in the midrange over screamers with a redline at 14,000 rpm.
But that's me!
An interesting fact is that even though the Ninja has 2-3hp more they only kick in above 10,000 rpm. Up to 9,000 rpm the Honda has more power and torque but then peters out.
I've always pereferred bikes that make power down low and in the midrange over screamers with a redline at 14,000 rpm.
But that's me!
Oh my, it seems I've struck a nerve haven't I? :roll:
I'm just expressing my opinions and I don't try to pass off my opinions as fact like some folks
There are some FACTS, like price and horsepower and power-to weight, etc. that can be quantified, but mostly when we compare bikes like these entry-level Kawa and Honda 250 road bikes we're just expressing our opinions and I would hope everyone can express their OPINION on this forum without hurling insults or resorting to childish name calling.
At least I've ridden both bikes. Have you?
It's funny that the OP chooses one of the rare reviews out there, a year out of date, that gives the nod to the Honda. The majority of the press reviews haven't been so kind to the new Honda CB'r' and it's actually a bit amazing that the old Ninja 250R which has been around since 1983 still beats the new Honda in most reviews.
Let the Good Times ROLL!
Tony
I hate to call anyone a liar but.... maybe you're just not good at math? ;-)
-- 2012 Australian Motorcycle Sales
-- Top Ten Road Motorcycles
[TABLE=class: style4, width: 95%, align: center]
[TR]
[TD]Model[/TD]
[TD]YTD 2012[/TD]
[TD]YTD 2011[/TD]
[TD]% Change[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Honda CBR250R[/TD]
[TD]729[/TD]
[TD]135[/TD]
[TD]+440[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Honda CT110X[/TD]
[TD]462[/TD]
[TD]538[/TD]
[TD]-14.1[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Kawasaki Ninja 250R[/TD]
[TD]388[/TD]
[TD]354[/TD]
[TD]+9.6[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Info from Australian Motorcycle News.
http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/156/9136/Motorcycle-Article/2011-Kawasaki-Ninja-250R-Comparison.aspx
"By virtue of a 3-1 decision among testers, we have to give the Kawasaki the nod as shootout winner; surprising considering how much older the basic technology is. But Kawasaki has had over two decades to get it dialed in, and when it comes to the lightweight sportbike market, it’s done its homework. The real winner in this are beginner sportbike riders all over the world, as now there are more than one high-performance quarter-liter options, which will hopefully encourage more people to share in the sport we all love so dearly."
Need a tissue?
Exactly, everyone's definition of "better" varies. The Honda is newer, cheaper, is a single, less powerful, more fuel efficient and easier for noobs to ride. The Kwacker is a bit faster, high revving twin, likes to have it's neck wrung and is a bit "old skool" in its styling and has been refined and proven over the last 20 some years. Choose the bike that best fits your needs and budget. Ride on!
Same here- putting fairings on a thumper and calling it a "CBR" is disingenuous but judging by the sales figures, this marketing ploy is effective. (And Kawasaki is guilty of the same as they are happy to use and abuse the "Ninja" moniker on the EX250 and EX650).
Personally I'd much prefer a naked CB250.
There are a few around Bangkok that look really nice, like this one from Stadium-
Yes Tony
I must agree with that article you wrote I wish I had said that in that way.
I rode the Honda 250 and was surprised how slow it was.
It is a fuel efficient single and looks OK and a cinch to ride but lacks the great free revving engine of the Kawasaki and is quiet a bit slower.
Even a big bike seasoned rider can have fun on this great little high spirited Kawasaki.
The Honda is definitely a learner bike and will attract new riders with its good looks and ease to ride so as you say choose the bike that suits you and Ride on.
I must agree with that article you wrote I wish I had said that in that way.
I rode the Honda 250 and was surprised how slow it was.
It is a fuel efficient single and looks OK and a cinch to ride but lacks the great free revving engine of the Kawasaki and is quiet a bit slower.
Even a big bike seasoned rider can have fun on this great little high spirited Kawasaki.
The Honda is definitely a learner bike and will attract new riders with its good looks and ease to ride so as you say choose the bike that suits you and Ride on.
Hey Tony, maybe this 250 Honda would be your cup of tea!
http://www.bahtsold.com/en/view/honda-cb250f-hornet-very-rare-bike--98143?doqs=1
http://www.bahtsold.com/en/view/honda-cb250f-hornet-very-rare-bike--98143?doqs=1
This kind of bike would be my cup of tea too, just not that one in particular ( fair condition only and being ex-rental)...they had one listed before which was sold right away and besides of the red rims it looked pretty fine.KZ25;278428 wrote: Hey Tony, maybe this 250 Honda would be your cup of tea!
http://www.bahtsold.com/en/view/honda-cb250f-hornet-very-rare-bike--98143?doqs=1
KZ25;278428 wrote: Hey Tony, maybe this 250 Honda would be your cup of tea!
http://www.bahtsold.com/en/view/honda-cb250f-hornet-very-rare-bike--98143?doqs=1
OMG that poor old hornet's had more owners than I've had bar girls, or maybe not... :lol-sign:
What do they do when they run out of pages in the green book? Issue a new one or add pages?
The Honda Hornet 250 is a fantastic bike that will blow the pants off any of Honda's newer 250 creations. It's a reminder of a time when Honda built class leading bikes in EVERY category.
