Kawasaki Z900RS

[Capo]

I'm reasonably certain that the higher price tag for the RS is the reason Honda didn't bring it to America. Honda is already struggling to sell the best-looking (by a country mile) retro here, in large part because the $12,199 cost of admission combined with relatively modest spec-sheet numbers position the EX beyond the means of all but its most ardent admirers. Now they're faced with trying to sell a less purely beautiful, more expensive version of the same thing, only this version is marketed as a higher-performance alternative, even though it really isn't. Nevertheless, because they gave it Ohlins-look suspension, radial brakes, and lower bars, this bike will be pitted against higher-performance competitors like the Z900RS, the numerous R-Nine-T variants, a couple-few Triumphs, a smattering of Ducatis, and a few other classy-looking, sporty machines.

Lacking similar performance, the RS just isn't going to pan out for Honda, not in modern American showrooms, where UJMs historically go to die.

Instead, yep, they have the CB1000R ready to enter that particular fray, while the CB1100 EX holds down the classic-retro fort.

There's really just nothing in it for Honda, by bringing the RS here. The RS and EX would only cannibalize sales from each other, dividing an already very small niche market.

Now, what doesn't make any sense at all is Honda's decision to ditch both CB1100 models for the U.S. market in 2018. Pairing the EX or even the RS with the CB1000R seems like a no-brainer, since the CB1000R buyer isn't the CB1100 buyer. Those are two very different age groups/types of riders. There is no reason for Honda not to offer both the CB1000R and at least one of the CB1100 air-cooled retros.

It's really not that much money. Any competitor is at least that much or more. Even the Kawasaki is within $1000 or so. And seriously, while the Honda is not as powerful, it's just so much better-looking, and is dramatically more accurate as a sport-heritage or retro machine. You put that RS or EX next to the Z900RS, game over. As far as looks go, anyway. Both great bikes, but the essence, Honda has it.

You can't touch a Thruxton for less than $12K, nor even the lowly RNineT Pure. $12K puts it right in the game.

No, I just don't get it at all. It's really beginning to irritate me because I have no interest in the Z900RS at all, and even LESS interest in any European retro.

I would go for an EX if the CB1100RS was a no-show but I wanna wait and see.

It's really not that much money. Any competitor is at least that much or more. Even the Kawasaki is within $1000 or so. And seriously, while the Honda is not as powerful, it's just so much better-looking, and is dramatically more accurate as a sport-heritage or retro machine. You put that RS or EX next to the Z900RS, game over. As far as looks go, anyway. Both great bikes, but the essence, Honda has it.

You can't touch a Thruxton for less than $12K, nor even the lowly RNineT Pure. $12K puts it right in the game.

No, I just don't get it at all. It's really beginning to irritate me because I have no interest in the Z900RS at all, and even LESS interest in any European retro.

I would go for an EX if the CB1100RS was a no-show but I wanna wait and see.
Looks are subjective. If the Honda was considered broadly to be that much better looking, or with specs and performance that held up to its price, it would sell. It doesn’t. All the money, engineering and joy that Honda put into the bike has been undercut by zero marketing, few accessories, 50- 70 extra pounds, and tepid performance. And that’s from people who LOVE the bike!

Of course we here in the forum don’t really care, but the broader bike public have voted with their wallets. That being said, Honda could easily afford to keep the CB going, even at modest sales levels, if it chose to. I agree, they are looking for the new CB1000R as the main event in this space.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk