When I first seen the 2013 CBR600RR, I was reminded of this...
Shudders....
But it could be worse, I would rather castrate myself with a piece of rusty barbed wire then ride this thing... But back in the day a tail piece that looked to be the size of a log was with hot and hip thing to do...
And a member made talk of people claiming 600's were almost as fast as 750's. Dude you have no idea the crap talk I got from these little thuggy boys on Gixxer 600's. I used to hear it all the time, "I got power commander and full exhaust and two teeth up back one teeth down, i'll roll away and leave you." Maybe you guys see a different thing, but in north alabama, it is just, idiocy for lack of a better word. I doubt a 600 supersport with all the stuffings could hold against a stock GSX-R 750.That 600 definitely has the ability to generate alot of work with that horsepower, but that 750 and 1000 has alot more torque throughout the powerband to boot and more horsepower up top, lol
I finally got sick of hearing it and put the theory to the test in a 20 mph roll against the young boy. The results were laughable. It is like putting a stock C6 Corvette in a race against a Corvette ZR1. We did it again and again and again, until he realized that, being generous to his bike, his 120 rwhp (I doubt it has that) was still 30 short of my dyno tested 150 rwhp.
But none the less, 600's are fast machines and I can't stand people that recommend them as newby bikes. I may as well be giving a child a loaded gun and letting him play with it unattended. Yah yah, I hear folks saying it is all about throttle control, but lets be straight. Most people who have never gotten a chance to ride a bike that does the 1/4 in the 10's, especially if they are young and full of sauce, are gonna wanna do one thing, open it up and watch the digits fly high. Lets be honest, the odds are not in their favor even if they start on a Ninja 250R. Odds are they will lay it down due to rider error in the first year of owning it, lets not increase the odds by suggesting they start on a bike that does 160+ mph.
I have a 2002 Corvette C5 with LS6 ported polished heads, streetable cam, full exhaust, full intake, 11:5-1 compression, built to go fast and it put down 450 rear wheel horsepower and 450 ft-lbs of torque. Needless to say, I would not give it to the hands of a teenager or new driver of a fast car. With drag radials, it runs the 1/4 in 11.3 at 128 mph.
Guess what, a bone stock CBR600RR is faster in the 1/4... But I hear people saying all the time that it is an excellent starter bike, lol, they should be shot for suggesting such nonsense.
Woah, we have a thinking adult here. I laugh when I hear people talk about their bike being faster than someone else's... on the street. Straight line highway roll ons are for retards. Grown men with child's brains. Now people racing in particular classes that speak of one bike being inherently faster than another have something to talk about. There it matters as you may be limited to the extent you can modify or to compete you may have to spend more to modify to be competitive. On the street? Please. A 600 in the right hands can smoke all comers in anything but flat open highways. Hell a well sorted 25 year old Hawk GT can smoke 600's and literbikes in the tight twisties. This I know.
Hell a well sorted 25 year old Hawk GT can smoke 600's and literbikes in the tight twisties. This I know.
I love when people say things like this. Aside from my 600rr, I own several restored mid 80's bikes of various displacements and even with modern upgraded suspension they are not even close to a 600 from the last 10 years. Hell my stock '86 600 handles better than my 350 (which weighs 80lbs less) with full aftermarket suspension. I've had several people come up to me telling me my very modified 350 must smoke 600s they act surprised when I tell them its not even close.
As for a hawk gt beating ( and I have ridden a modified hawk gt) 600s in particular; it weighs the same as a 600rr, has a longer wheelbase, way worse frame, suspension, brakes, that weight is much less centrally located and it has less than half of the power. In every way it is inferior, so where is that advantage coming from? In what way is it better?
Even when you upgrade the suspension and brakes on these old bikes you get to the point where you feel frames flexing on you and that is the limiting factor.
The Following User Says Thank You to mike6001 For This Useful Post:
I honestly don't like the look of it at all. Dosnt look aggressive enough to me. I may be different, but i enjoy the look of bikes that "look" fast while standing still.
I think the new bike is super sick!! I'm kinda not feeling the lights but that'll grow. And for me, the bike looks super tiny in the videos for some reason. Maybe it was ridden by a bigger dude; but all in all, I like it. I also think the repsol, red and HRC colors are pimp!!!
I wonder if the rims will fit my 07?
And is anyone going to trade their 600 in for a new one?
I love when people say things like this. Aside from my 600rr, I own several restored mid 80's bikes of various displacements and even with modern upgraded suspension they are not even close to a 600 from the last 10 years. Hell my stock '86 600 handles better than my 350 (which weighs 80lbs less) with full aftermarket suspension. I've had several people come up to me telling me my very modified 350 must smoke 600s they act surprised when I tell them its not even close.
As for a hawk gt beating ( and I have ridden a modified hawk gt) 600s in particular; it weighs the same as a 600rr, has a longer wheelbase, way worse frame, suspension, brakes, that weight is much less centrally located and it has less than half of the power. In every way it is inferior, so where is that advantage coming from? In what way is it better?
Even when you upgrade the suspension and brakes on these old bikes you get to the point where you feel frames flexing on you and that is the limiting factor.
Excellent point, I think the original poster was referring to riding skill, but even that statement about hawk GT may be overstated...
Now i have seen some experienced cafe racers on Triumph Thruxton Bonnevilles at barber that could really put a beating on your newby's riding mordernized supersports. Keep in mind however, these Thruxtons definitely weren't stock and had pricey Ohlin suspension components R compound tires, everything to maximize its performance for a 2001-2012 Triumph Bonneville.
Ok, looking at the rest of the line up something stood out to me. Why is it that on the 1000RR, the can either make the swingarm and frame all silver or all black but in the 600RR they can't?
Hell, even on the 2013 250R they figured out that all black looks better than random silver on the bike.
I don't see why they can't do this to the 600RR. Either make it all silver like the 2012 red/white was or do it all black like the Graffiti or Phoenix where. The silver swingarm and black frame always looked weird to me.
I'm leaning towards the MV Agusta 675 F3, but considering another RR as the refresh instead of redesign disappointed me, but still I'm imagining it is more refined, stable and less violent than the lightweight, mostly hand-assembled F3. Then there's the new 636 as another possibility. I'm not very tall or heavy so I like the size and narrow seat height of the F3. But the 2007+ 600RR isn't too bad of a seating position for me either.
Right now I'm just trying to convince myself the F3 with it's compact size, titanium valves and counter rotating crankshaft is all worth the extra cash. I'm hoping and looking forward to some Supersport comparison tests which also include the middle weight F3.
Honestly, Honda screwed up big time. Even though underneath the bike is still the same (and thus awesome), most of us will now buy a bike for the aesthetics.
Why couldn't they make this?
Whoever designed this handed Honda a beautiful concept on a silver platter. I'd ride that!!!
Honda, you suck!
07-12 will remain the best looking 600, even with the new 13 on the street.
IMHO, this is the sexiest bike ever, my 09 Limited Edition!
Why Honda couldn't you just listen to what we wanted?
And no slipper... Really???
I'm leaning towards the MV Agusta 675 F3, but considering another RR as the refresh instead of redesign disappointed me, but still I'm imagining it is more refined, stable and less violent than the lightweight, mostly hand-assembled F3. Then there's the new 636 as another possibility. I'm not very tall or heavy so I like the size and narrow seat height of the F3. But the 2007+ 600RR isn't too bad of a seating position for me either.
Right now I'm just trying to convince myself the F3 with it's compact size, titanium valves and counter rotating crankshaft is all worth the extra cash. I'm hoping and looking forward to some Supersport comparison tests which also include the middle weight F3.
In a recent super sport shoot out they took the mv Augusta 675 and pitted against the Triumph Daytona 675R. Victor? You guess it, Daytona 675R, in nearly every way. Price, beat it. Lap time, yep that too. Brakes? Better...
What it is with these pricey boutique European brands that advertise themselves leaders of the segment, but fall short every way yet demand a premium over Japanese and now "British" counterpart.
2011-2012 triumph Daytona 675R with Ohlin suspension, brembo brakes, and a arsenal of trick carbon fiber pieces is your bike. Beautifully styles and a knockout performer in its class...
I wil admit MV Augusta 675 is a lovely
Bike, though editors claim its sharp around the edges, the best bike I hear the praises of is the apparently well polished BMW S1000RR.
God help us if BMW decide to build a middleweight supersport.
Y'all need to go back to this time in '06 and read the responses to our first look at the '07. It was HATED.
I like the new bike, especially the red.
Although I agree a lot of this is just a 'change from the known/norm' reaction, the 07 600RR was a lot more of an improvement from the previous model than the 2013 is from its previous model. I remember that time and which members bought new 07s, the threads that were started, etc.
2007 was a new bike. 2013 isn't exactly a new bike. (Not saying it's bad. but not apples to apples comparison.)
The video does the bike a lot more favors than the website release I've seen thus far.
I'm not turned off from the bike but I'm not particularly turned on. Not in a way that would make me go out and put my 09 on the market so I can have a '13/
What I think is, Honda is playing it smart. If there are riders riding smaller displacement bikes, the 600RR is a likely step up for them. But most current 600RR owners (or 600 class bikes, period) are not going to be blown away with the new bike. But it didn't cost Honda much more than designing some new fairings, and a few updates... Which compared to a whole new design (engine, frame, swingarm, etc), didn't cost them much of anything. Unlike in 07 when a lot more 600RR owners were likely to change up to the new bike. But the market and economy was different then.
In short, most current 600RR owners are not going to be buying this bike. Many non 600RR owners might. And those odds are played by Honda with little cost to them (relatively)
The video does the bike a lot more favors than the website release I've seen thus far.
I'm not turned off from the bike but I'm not particularly turned on. Not in a way that would make me go out and put my 09 on the market so I can have a '13/
What I think is, Honda is playing it smart. If there are riders riding smaller displacement bikes, the 600RR is a likely step up for them. But most current 600RR owners (or 600 class bikes, period) are not going to be blown away with the new bike. But it didn't cost Honda much more than designing some new fairings, and a few updates... Which compared to a whole new design (engine, frame, swingarm, etc), didn't cost them much of anything. Unlike in 07 when a lot more 600RR owners were likely to change up to the new bike. But the market and economy was different then.
In short, most current 600RR owners are not going to be buying this bike. Many non 600RR owners might. And those odds are played by Honda with little cost to them (relatively)
This is probably the best way to sum up the new bike and what people will do.
2007 was a new bike. 2013 isn't exactly a new bike. (Not saying it's bad. but not apples to apples comparison.)
I disagree. It didn't have anything to do with other enhancements, it was all about the looks. People hated the fact that it didn't look like a Honda anymore and vowed to NEVER get rid of the RR they had.
__________________ The world doesn't revolve around me, but it certainly knows I'm here.
I quite like the look of the new one, no complaints there. New and or improved suspension is never a bad thing... so another tick in the box there. And if the power numbers really have improved as they say they have then it's pretty much all good...
It just would have been nice to get a bit more electrikery on it... traction control isn't really necessary given the lower power output, but it certainly wouldn't have hurt, it would have been really really good to be able to switch between multiple maps - economy and fun...
So really, the only thing I find a little disappointing is the lack of development on the ECU side of things. The rest of it is all good...
now yes i post these mainly for porn, but you all notice the end of the swingarm there...they're starting to join it, i didnt pay attention really but my 08 swingarm only comes together bottom(goes under the chain) and that bar that goes over right at the ends...if you notice the motogp bikes always look like the swingarm is more of a solid piece of metal...looks like it goes back many years but where it starts to join top and bottom appears to be creeping forward
I wil admit MV Augusta 675 is a lovely
Bike, though editors claim its sharp around the edges, the best bike I hear the praises of is the apparently well polished BMW S1000RR.
God help us if BMW decide to build a middleweight supersport.
I've seen the comparisons of the MV vs. the Triumph and yes the Triumph overall seemed to come out on top. But for me being 5'7" and weighing under 140 Lbs., I felt MUCH more stable sitting on the F3 completely flat footed, vs. the Triumph which reminded me of the first 2005-2006 600RR when I had to tippy toe.
If BMW released a Supersport anytime soon it'll likely be class leading I think, because right now it appears the CBR 1KRR & S1000RR are the top Bikes in their class.
I disagree. It didn't have anything to do with other enhancements, it was all about the looks. People hated the fact that it didn't look like a Honda anymore and vowed to NEVER get rid of the RR they had.
Okay but then owner reviews and magazine tests helped turn that around. The new bike isn't going to have that effect since it's mostly still the same bike.
Not sure if this video has been posted by anyone yet but figured I would upload it real quick just to show you what we see as dealers as far as info goes on the 2013 CBR600RR.
According to this review, the odd headlights are suppose to channel air into the airbox creating a Ram Air effect. I don't mind that look as much knowing that info. Function over form is better.
__________________ 2012 CBR600RR
OEM: Solo Seat Cowl ; CBR1000RR Turn Signal Lenses (for Fronts & Rears) Akrapovic: Slip-On (Open Version) TechSpec: Snake Skin Tank Grips ; Tank Pro #2 Tripage: LED Pegs (40 per peg) ; Knight Rider Third Light ; Brake Flasher
According to this review, the odd headlights are suppose to channel air into the airbox creating a Ram Air effect. I don't mind that look as much knowing that info. Function over form is better.
I agree.
I don't mind the front of the bike too much. I just wish they gave it a more sharper look.
Build thread coming soon ....
Deciding.
Updated 3/28/13 
