Kawasaki Z900RS

[flynrider]

Thanks, Guth! The more I see, the more I like!

[Ulvetanna_imp]

Thanks, Guth! The more I see, the more I like!

If you plan on hanging on to your CB1100, the Kawasaki will make a good companion.

I bought the 2017 Z900R in March. 3500 miles so far, it's a beast, very quick revving/steering and very fast, no traction control. A true supernaked in every sense. Looks pretty good next to the Street Cup in my garage, sort of like old and new. Call me crazy, but I like both styles.

The RS version promises to be a somewhat muted version of the same bike; substantially lower compression ratio, milder cams, heavier flywheel, lower gearing but with traction control (Kawasaki's K-TRIC is fantastic, BTW), more relaxed riding position.

Now, if Honda would hurry up and come out with its air-cooled CB900RS, I'd have to make room somewhere for it.

I've been following the forum here from time to time, and it does appear -- regrettably -- as if the CB1100 is going to truly become a collector's bike. Posts are fewer and farther between, many of the old members who were so active seem not to be contributing at all any longer. Anyone who really appreciates it and cares to keep that bike going, year after year, is sort of preserving a little of Honda's history. Every example is a kind of rolling advertisement for the company's innovation and contributions to motorcycling.

I believe my old bike has gotten into some good hands. I look for it from time to time, but sadly, CB1100s of any color or year are rarely seen any longer in my area. I have one riding buddy who owns a 2013, and that's the only one I've seen in some time.

My advice to anyone considering the new Kawasaki: It's gonna be great, but hold on to your CB1100 if you can. Or at least find it a good home.

[Ulvetanna_imp]

Saw one today at the hangout. Very well finished. Owner said zero fueling issues, great handling.

The $2600 price difference between the R and RS is because the RS is made in Japan, R in Thailand, like the Triumphs, etcetera. No difference in quality or reliability, just labor costs.

A few finish differences, gloss black frame, "finning" on the engine is polished very nicely, some other cosmetic touches.

A whole gaggle of old guys just materialized around the thing when he rode in on it.

[Ulvetanna_imp]

So, Adam Waheed weighs in:

https://www.ridersdomain.com/magazine/mo...rs-review/

His take on the throttle sounds very accurate. The engine is rowdy like a Kawasaki should be, and it picks up very quickly right off the bottom, but nothing a smooth throttle hand cannot deal with.

I was a little surprised to hear he was noting the too-soft rear suspension. No such issue on the Z900, it has more than enough range to cover the needed damping. I am running mine at about half the available range. Rebound and compression are combined in one circuit with a stepless screw adjuster.

Since I know Waheed is a pretty accomplished track rider, I have to take him at his word about the brakes being "adequate". I would not be surprised if they were toned down from the R model. Radial mounting is cosmetic only. The binders on the R are very, very powerful by comparison.

He also notes the footpegs are more forward and lower than the R, in keeping with the more cruiser/standard/retro mission.

There's a lot of interest but also a lot of competition. Mainly from Triumph in the Thruxton, but let's face facts, no Thruxton will come close to this Kawasaki anywhere with equal riders, if outright performance is the issue.

But it usually isn't with this type of bike and I am not altogether sure that many buyers won't continue to put the Triumphs at the top of the list of possibilities. Do ya really need 111 HP? Well, do ya?

[Cormanus]

So, Adam Waheed weighs in:

https://www.ridersdomain.com/magazine/mo...rs-review/

His take on the throttle sounds very accurate. The engine is rowdy like a Kawasaki should be, and it picks up very quickly right off the bottom, but nothing a smooth throttle hand cannot deal with.

I was a little surprised to hear he was noting the too-soft rear suspension. No such issue on the Z900, it has more than enough range to cover the needed damping. I am running mine at about half the available range. Rebound and compression are combined in one circuit with a stepless screw adjuster.

Since I know Waheed is a pretty accomplished track rider, I have to take him at his word about the brakes being "adequate". I would not be surprised if they were toned down from the R model. Radial mounting is cosmetic only. The binders on the R are very, very powerful by comparison.

He also notes the footpegs are more forward and lower than the R, in keeping with the more cruiser/standard/retro mission.

There's a lot of interest but also a lot of competition. Mainly from Triumph in the Thruxton, but let's face facts, no Thruxton will come close to this Kawasaki anywhere with equal riders, if outright performance is the issue.

But it usually isn't with this type of bike and I am not altogether sure that many buyers won't continue to put the Triumphs at the top of the list of possibilities. Do ya really need 111 HP? Well, do ya?

No.

[Stichill_imp]

[url=https://www.revzilla.com/common-tread/2018-kawasaki-z900rs-first-ride-motorcycle-review]Lemmy's take on the Z900RS.

[Banned_imp]

I just noticed on one of the close ups in Lemmy's review (Lemmy is the man!) that the tank has a flange - wasn't that one of the cardinal sins of the 1st gen CB1100s?? Why isn't it an issue here?

I have been reading the comments on the article - Lemmy says he prefers the 1st gen CB1100 quote "To my eye, the first-gen CB1100 with the less-swoopy tank is the perfect reissue of a bike. That said, I know they are reputedly a bit underpowered. Given my fetish for super-old junkers, that might not bug me, but I could see someone else not digging that.

The air-cooling on that bike goes a long way, and the amount of work Honda invested in making the experience similar to that of riding an old CB is considerable; but it also came with a considerable price tag. I suspect that is the bike I would prefer compared to the RS, but most mainstream riders would not." Good ol' Lemmy.

[Guth_imp]

I never think about tank flanges/seams or whatever it is the people call them. Didn't notice it on the Z900RS when I first looked at it. (I haven't even bothered to go back and look fort since reading about it, lol.) I didn't notice it on the original CB1100 either. I'm far more concerned about the overall shape of the tank. This is why I'll never warm up to the tank on the new CB1100 EX even though there is no flange/seam. To each their own.

Maybe there are some guys out there that really like the Z900RS but will not buy it because of this, which is fine. I've long felt that it's best to know what you like (not what someone else likes) and purchase accordingly. This is what I try to do, and probably whey I end up hanging on to things like my vehicles for such a very long time. I totally get the appeal of a new bike (or a new car, new truck, etc.). But when I watch guys that go through bike after bike after bike or car after car after car, I wonder if they are every really happy with any of them or if they're just trying to convince themselves that they're happy after each new purchase only to discover that once the excitement wears off, that really isn't the case.

[nhawk7504_imp]

I never think about tank flanges/seams or whatever it is the people call them. Didn't notice it on the Z900RS when I first looked at it. (I haven't even bothered to go back and look fort since reading about it, lol.) I didn't notice it on the original CB1100 either. I'm far more concerned about the overall shape of the tank. This is why I'll never warm up to the tank on the new CB1100 EX even though there is no flange/seam. To each their own.

Maybe there are some guys out there that really like the Z900RS but will not buy it because of this, which is fine. I've long felt that it's best to know what you like (not what someone else likes) and purchase accordingly. This is what I try to do, and probably whey I end up hanging on to things like my vehicles for such a very long time. I totally get the appeal of a new bike (or a new car, new truck, etc.). But when I watch guys that go through bike after bike after bike or car after car after car, I wonder if they are every really happy with any of them or if they're just trying to convince themselves that they're happy after each new purchase only to discover that once the excitement wears off, that really isn't the case.

I'm not sure why, but I didn't care for the original 2010 CB1100 tank (2010 - it was actually designed and first sold in Japan). The uneven bottom line of the tank, and boxy look, just does not do it for me. - I don't notice the flange on the RS because the tank looks retro, flange and all, and I like the 69 CB tank better than the 80s versions. - For many people, the RS has one shock that works better than twin shocks (aging backs), and upside down forks, and is light, relatively speaking. But there is no one size fits all. I saw the new CB1100EX in person at a dealer in New Hampshire and it is stunning.

I just noticed on one of the close ups in Lemmy's review (Lemmy is the man!) that the tank has a flange - wasn't that one of the cardinal sins of the 1st gen CB1100s?? Why isn't it an issue here?

I have been reading the comments on the article - Lemmy says he prefers the 1st gen CB1100 quote "To my eye, the first-gen CB1100 with the less-swoopy tank is the perfect reissue of a bike. That said, I know they are reputedly a bit underpowered. Given my fetish for super-old junkers, that might not bug me, but I could see someone else not digging that.

The air-cooling on that bike goes a long way, and the amount of work Honda invested in making the experience similar to that of riding an old CB is considerable; but it also came with a considerable price tag. I suspect that is the bike I would prefer compared to the RS, but most mainstream riders would not." Good ol' Lemmy.

Lots of guys get killed on these retro big motor bikes. They have too much power for the weight/chassis/stopping/tires/brain of an older guy. So I like the torque vs horsepower CB1100. As for power, I bought my old VFR750 because I knew it had been raced and could handle the power it did have and I did 90 mph a LOT on that bike because it would go fast. Traffic was dangerous in clusters so I rode out ahead of the cluster. - I like motorcycles, period. Ninja 250, TU250, Sportster, CB1100, VFR and sport bikes. Here in the USA people drive literally crazy and I need to know the bike will get me out of trouble when I don't expect it; people swerving, cutting out in front, drifting lanes, stopping suddenly, they do it all here.

[Guth_imp]

I never think about tank flanges/seams or whatever it is the people call them. Didn't notice it on the Z900RS when I first looked at it. (I haven't even bothered to go back and look fort since reading about it, lol.) I didn't notice it on the original CB1100 either. I'm far more concerned about the overall shape of the tank. This is why I'll never warm up to the tank on the new CB1100 EX even though there is no flange/seam. To each their own.

Maybe there are some guys out there that really like the Z900RS but will not buy it because of this, which is fine. I've long felt that it's best to know what you like (not what someone else likes) and purchase accordingly. This is what I try to do, and probably whey I end up hanging on to things like my vehicles for such a very long time. I totally get the appeal of a new bike (or a new car, new truck, etc.). But when I watch guys that go through bike after bike after bike or car after car after car, I wonder if they are every really happy with any of them or if they're just trying to convince themselves that they're happy after each new purchase only to discover that once the excitement wears off, that really isn't the case.

I'm not sure why, but I didn't care for the original 2010 CB1100 tank (2010 - it was actually designed and first sold in Japan). The uneven bottom line of the tank, and boxy look, just does not do it for me. - I don't notice the flange on the RS because the tank looks retro, flange and all, and I like the 69 CB tank better than the 80s versions. - For many people, the RS has one shock that works better than twin shocks (aging backs), and upside down forks, and is light, relatively speaking. But there is no one size fits all. I saw the new CB1100EX in person at a dealer in New Hampshire and it is stunning.

I just noticed on one of the close ups in Lemmy's review (Lemmy is the man!) that the tank has a flange - wasn't that one of the cardinal sins of the 1st gen CB1100s?? Why isn't it an issue here?

I have been reading the comments on the article - Lemmy says he prefers the 1st gen CB1100 quote "To my eye, the first-gen CB1100 with the less-swoopy tank is the perfect reissue of a bike. That said, I know they are reputedly a bit underpowered. Given my fetish for super-old junkers, that might not bug me, but I could see someone else not digging that.

The air-cooling on that bike goes a long way, and the amount of work Honda invested in making the experience similar to that of riding an old CB is considerable; but it also came with a considerable price tag. I suspect that is the bike I would prefer compared to the RS, but most mainstream riders would not." Good ol' Lemmy.

Lots of guys get killed on these retro big motor bikes. They have too much power for the weight/chassis/stopping/tires/brain of an older guy. So I like the torque vs horsepower CB1100. As for power, I bought my old VFR750 because I knew it had been raced and could handle the power it did have and I did 90 mph a LOT on that bike because it would go fast. Traffic was dangerous in clusters so I rode out ahead of the cluster. - I like motorcycles, period. Ninja 250, TU250, Sportster, CB1100, VFR and sport bikes. Here in the USA people drive literally crazy and I need to know the bike will get me out of trouble when I don't expect it; people swerving, cutting out in front, drifting lanes, stopping suddenly, they do it all here.

Lots of guys get killed on motor bikes.