Honda CBR 600RR Forum banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
wel no kiddn the 636 is faster. get the ZXRR in there. dubl R's with dbl R's.
whats a 749 doing in a 600 shootout? not that it matters apperently.
if the Zuk wasn't so bloody ugly.
and as for Yamaha, well i wanted one but they were sold out. ;-)
but seriously the Honda could use a diet. I like the power right where it is, thank you, and wouldn't trade reliability for a few more horses.
I'm out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
450 Posts
so... the rr losted because of storage space and hard seat? thats weak! i thought it was a "SUPERSPORT shootout" not "Most comfortable sportbike" so they should of tested lap times, breaking, etc.
storage space? why was that even considered?
i think the r6 is a good bike, but i just dont feel that it should of got 1st.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
549 Posts
Good article...I thought it was interesting that they noted the blue puff of smoke (in the caption to one of the picts) which comes from the RR during decelerating. I have the same problem. I'm carefully measuring oil consumption over this oil change.
 

·
Ya'll betta RECKOGNIZE!!!!
Joined
·
2,926 Posts
and in the final review of all the bikes..

for what we all use them for and what conditions we ride in, "BUY WHAT YOU WANT TO AND DONT LISTEN TO THESE MAGAZINES RANKINGS"

seriously we are not professional riders, we never use the bike to its full potential, so why worry about who has better times, who has this and doesnt have that..

hands down for what we use these bikes for the CBR 600RR is the best in the class for actual applicable riding for what we use them for..

that is all it comes down too.

also.. why the heck is a 749 doing being compared to any 600? might as well throw the GSXR-750 in that test as well then..seriously sometimes its just stupid
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
998 Posts
Not a bad article. I would like to see more articles of this type so that maybe Honda'll decide to turn up the heat, and turn down the weight in 2005 (just in time for me to get a new one :D). Otherwise, I dare anyone to say they're gonna beat me on my RR just because they have a ZX6R or the R6...see ya at da track foo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
624 Posts
Well, all things considered, my trusty RR serves me well. I fight with Suz 750s on the track and manage to place respectfully....most times. But yes, perhaps Honda will step up and knock some weight off the next generations and put a bit more oomph in the midrange. I'll keep my fingers crossed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
I agree with the criticisms against the RR. They don't make me want a different bike, but I think Honda could do better on the weight and midrange with the lack of midrange my biggest complaint.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
494 Posts
Just got done reading the article in its entirety. I felt this paragraph deserved a comment:

But others weren't so sure about the CBR; it was ranked in fourth place by three testers. Complaints were few (like a hard seat and lack of on-board storage), but they were as loud as an Incubus concert when speaking of the Honda's relative dearth of low-end and midrange power. Whether riding on the street or the track, the CBR rider needs to put extra effort into being in the right gear at exactly the right time or it will get walked. The extra amount of time we spent riding these bikes in street situations this year over last magnified the problem, which is one of the key reasons why the CBR dropped in our rankings compared with our 2003 comparo.
It's pretty funny how a hard seat and little storage capacity can earn this bike a bad rating. They do mention the lack of low end and midrange power, but that holds true for all of these 600's. Whatever they're smoking, I want some. I ride with a couple other RR's, an '04 R6, and an '04 GSXR 600. We've done 3-wide races between the RR, R6, and GSXR, and it comes down to who gets the best launch every single time. Anyone who says the RR is lacking power comapred to the other supersport 600's is just plain wrong.

That said, I would like to reiterate my point that all the new supersports are so damn close in performance that buying one should come down to personal preference. My opinions on all the SS's that I've ridden:

The RR is the best looking (in my opinion) because of the center-mount undertail exhaust. Its forward weight distribution makes it a track bike more than anything (hence the "RR"), and because of that some people might not like its street manners. It has a hard seat for a reason -- to let the rider move around easier for turns. The riding stance is comfortable but somewhat aggressive.

The R6 produces a bit more top end power than the other bikes (I'm talking '04 here, '03s were slower). The riding stance is more comfortable than the RR, but that also makes it harder to get down and ready to turn for a corner. The seat is hella soft, which is nice for street use. The instrument panel is pretty worthless as far as I'm concerned. There is NO fuel gage, only a "low fuel" light that comes on when you have about 10 miles left on your tank. The shift light is huge and annoyingly bright, and I think if I rode an R6 I would have it set to come on after redline just so I wouldn't ever have to be blinded by it at night. The gas tank was raised a bit to contour better to the rider's legs, but in order to do this they formed a huge hump near the back of the tank. Leaning down on this hump is NOT fun and my chest was sore after riding a canyon on this bike.

The GSX-R comes with a lot of extra stuff that the other bikes don't have. It includes hazard lights and a courtesy passing light (push a button and your headlights flicker). The programmable shift light is pretty cryptic, and my friend (who has worked at a Honda/Yamaha/Suzuki dealer for 8 years) still hasn't figured out how to permanently set his. He has to set his shift light everytime he starts his bike. The riding stance is EXTREMELY aggressive, as per the norm for the GSXR's. The powerband is nearly identical to the 600RR and I couldn't tell a difference.

I've never ridden a Kawi or Ducati so I don't have anything to say about those (other than JESUS CHRIST the kawi's are ugly).

My $.02 and a bit more. Hopefully I said something you guys didn't already know :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,434 Posts
umgrad76 said:
Good article...I thought it was interesting that they noted the blue puff of smoke (in the caption to one of the picts) which comes from the RR during decelerating. I have the same problem. I'm carefully measuring oil consumption over this oil change.
umgrad76,
It's most likely not oil smoke. I saw the same thing when I had my bike on the Dyno for the first time. Took a hand full of smoke and smelled it...it's fuel! Not oil. The ECU is just dumping raw fuel in the mix. Did you find any oil usage in your search?

As far as these "Experts" opinions;

"But others weren't so sure about the CBR; it was ranked in fourth place by three testers. Complaints were few (like a hard seat and lack of on-board storage), but they were as loud as an Incubus concert when speaking of the Honda's relative dearth of low-end and midrange power. Whether riding on the street or the track, the CBR rider needs to put extra effort into being in the right gear at exactly the right time or it will get walked."

1) The seat will soften in time. If this bothers you, buy a Goldwing.
2) I didn't buy a motorcycle for storage! :wtf:
3) The HP curve shows all of the bikes to be almost identical up to 7k rpm and only a slight difference after 7k rpm. So their complaint of the lack low-end and midrange power is baseless by their own Dyno. If there was such a vast difference in power between these bikes, why is it there's only a 0.34 second difference between first and last place in the 1/4 miles times?
4) Their complaint of corner exit speed is ridiculous! That's why Honda gave us 6-speed transmissions and not 1-speed! Downshift you dumbass!!! :bitchslap:

I'm all for fair comparison's based on objective and unbiased opinions. But this article is clearly slanted and corrupt. I bet you if you gave these "Experts" $10k and told them they could buy themselves any 600 they wanted without anyone esle knowing, every one of them would have a 600RR in their garage.

Uuuh. Why is the Ducati 749 in there?? :wtf:

IMO, HP will only carry you so far. Being able to carry your speed into and out of the corner and being consistant is what wins races. And that is what the 600RR was built for. Having the most HP doesn't win races.

Motorcycle-USA Article .... :thumbdown: :thumbdown:

Tim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
494 Posts
NewRedRider said:
3) The HP curve shows all of the bikes to be almost identical up to 7k rpm and only a slight difference after 7k rpm. So their complaint of the lack low-end and midrange power is baseless by their own Dyno. If there was such a vast difference in power between these bikes, why is it there's only a 0.34 second difference between first and last place in the 1/4 miles times?
Not only that, but how did they only run an 11.11 @ 128 on the RR?? I ran an 11.7 @ 116 at 6000 feet. There have been countless other reviews that have run a 10.6 @ 130 on these bikes. Learn to launch, Motorcycle USA!
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top