07-24-2019, 10:44 PM
I just recently traded my Z900RS for the CB1100 EX.
Let me say that both bikes have their positives and both are worthy of ownership. I put just over 2k on the Z900RS before letting it go. IMHO the 2 bikes are quite different.
First, the bikes character as it relates to how they deliver power are at opposite ends. The Z900RS is "agitated" and ready to go. The RPMs come quicker and get higher as the bike nudges the rider to get to the next gear. That is not to say that gears aren't tall enough - except for 1st gear, I found 3rd-6th very usable and forgiving. The complaint of "snatchy throttle" are valid on the Z as I installed a throttle tamer which helped a bit. To me the bigger issue (or equally challenging) is the engine braking (deceleration). The bike really cut fuel out of the equation when rolling off the throttle sending you a bit forward as the bike front dips. This was the case even in 6th gear cruising at 60mph - remove your throttle hand to adjust the mirror and you were met with a nudge forward.
Secondly, height and weight distribution are pretty different. The Z900RS has a tall seat height. I am just under 5 10 with 32 inseam and opted for the shorter seat as I could really only grab the road with the toes and maybe the front part of the foot. The stock seat is comfortable - the short seat not so much - in fact I found that about after 45-60 minutes I would start cramping and need to stretch. The center of the bike seemed to be up high (just under the seat) think more "V" like. This made leaning a bit different for me as I came from a cruiser.
Lastly, I feel the materials on the Honda CB1100 are more substantial and heavy in build and design. Its not to say the Kawasaki is cheap or inferior in build quality - I just believe they designed for a light weight (470 compared to 560).
I have only had my CB for a few days and have not pushed hard on it, but I already know that the bike's center is lower, the control at lower speeds is better, the bike is heavier, much shorter seat height, there are absolutely no issues with fuel delivery (snatchiness), and I do feel some vibration thru the bars.
The Z900 was light and nimble, it took bumps pretty well with the stock seat, and I really never felt any vibrations in the grips or footpegs.
My final decision to trade was really about the bike geometry - if the z900 was about 1-1.5 inches lower, I would have sent the ECU out for a flashing to help solve engine braking behavior and held on for a bit more
Hopes this helps you
Kurt
Let me say that both bikes have their positives and both are worthy of ownership. I put just over 2k on the Z900RS before letting it go. IMHO the 2 bikes are quite different.
First, the bikes character as it relates to how they deliver power are at opposite ends. The Z900RS is "agitated" and ready to go. The RPMs come quicker and get higher as the bike nudges the rider to get to the next gear. That is not to say that gears aren't tall enough - except for 1st gear, I found 3rd-6th very usable and forgiving. The complaint of "snatchy throttle" are valid on the Z as I installed a throttle tamer which helped a bit. To me the bigger issue (or equally challenging) is the engine braking (deceleration). The bike really cut fuel out of the equation when rolling off the throttle sending you a bit forward as the bike front dips. This was the case even in 6th gear cruising at 60mph - remove your throttle hand to adjust the mirror and you were met with a nudge forward.
Secondly, height and weight distribution are pretty different. The Z900RS has a tall seat height. I am just under 5 10 with 32 inseam and opted for the shorter seat as I could really only grab the road with the toes and maybe the front part of the foot. The stock seat is comfortable - the short seat not so much - in fact I found that about after 45-60 minutes I would start cramping and need to stretch. The center of the bike seemed to be up high (just under the seat) think more "V" like. This made leaning a bit different for me as I came from a cruiser.
Lastly, I feel the materials on the Honda CB1100 are more substantial and heavy in build and design. Its not to say the Kawasaki is cheap or inferior in build quality - I just believe they designed for a light weight (470 compared to 560).
I have only had my CB for a few days and have not pushed hard on it, but I already know that the bike's center is lower, the control at lower speeds is better, the bike is heavier, much shorter seat height, there are absolutely no issues with fuel delivery (snatchiness), and I do feel some vibration thru the bars.
The Z900 was light and nimble, it took bumps pretty well with the stock seat, and I really never felt any vibrations in the grips or footpegs.
My final decision to trade was really about the bike geometry - if the z900 was about 1-1.5 inches lower, I would have sent the ECU out for a flashing to help solve engine braking behavior and held on for a bit more
Hopes this helps you
Kurt