Kawasaki Z900RS

[SportsterDoc]

I realize that discussion of other brands is healthy, but I sure appreciate the air cooled, low RPM grunt motor of the CB1100. So, just a few more rambling thoughts -

My 2016 Moto Guzzi V7II came with anti-lock brakes and traction control.

It did not activate in the almost 7,000 miles I had it. It would have made flushing the brake systems more complicated and the flashing lights on startup were a distraction.

One of the most fun bikes I have owned was a 2002 Harley-Davidson Sportster 1200 Sport.

Stock, it was rated 79 foot pounds of torque at 4,000 RPM. I don't do dyno testing, but expect that at stage one, it was close to 85 foot pounds. Harley does not talk much about horsepower, but stock it was probably 70 HP at 5700, maybe 75 HP stage one.

So, with 73 foot pounds, the Kawasaki Z900RS would have an acceleration advantage in regards to weight (my 1200S at 501 dry and 537 pounds wet was very close to the CB1100) and RPMs above the Sportster's or CB1100 redlines.

In the drag race video recently posted, the CB1100 pulls the Yamaha FZ09 off the line and through early gears. Then the FZ09 pulls the CB1100 as RPMs build. But, higher RPM horsepower does not have the same feel as raw torque.

I rarely go over 90/95 MPH, then typically short bursts for passing. One time, getting on highway 126 in Ventura, CA, a vehicle in a merging lane accelerated hard..on the 1200S I went through the first 4 gears to the max and had not cleared the on ramp by much, when I shifted to 5th, at 110 MPH, with said vehicle rather small in my mirrors.

My 1976 CB750F was rated 122 MPH, per Honda, but only once do I recall possibly going over 110 MPH on it. My 2012 Bonneville was at 112 MPH when a sudden gust of wind blew me from the center of my lane to the center of the opposing lane on the Extraterrestrial Highway.

So, having the CB1100 allegedly governed at 110 MPH does not matter to me. The more than ample torque for acceleration is quite pleasing and highway cruising, even at higher speeds, is excellent for a naked bike.

 

[Ulvetanna_imp]

I realize that discussion of other brands is healthy, but I sure appreciate the air cooled, low RPM grunt motor of the CB1100. So, just a few more rambling thoughts -

My 2016 Moto Guzzi V7II came with anti-lock brakes and traction control.

It did not activate in the almost 7,000 miles I had it. It would have made flushing the brake systems more complicated and the flashing lights on startup were a distraction.

One of the most fun bikes I have owned was a 2002 Harley-Davidson Sportster 1200 Sport.

Stock, it was rated 79 foot pounds of torque at 4,000 RPM. I don't do dyno testing, but expect that at stage one, it was close to 85 foot pounds. Harley does not talk much about horsepower, but stock it was probably 70 HP at 5700, maybe 75 HP stage one.

So, with 73 foot pounds, the Kawasaki Z900RS would have an acceleration advantage in regards to weight (my 1200S at 501 dry and 537 pounds wet was very close to the CB1100) and RPMs above the Sportster's or CB1100 redlines.

In the drag race video recently posted, the CB1100 pulls the Yamaha FZ09 off the line and through early gears. Then the FZ09 pulls the CB1100 as RPMs build. But, higher RPM horsepower does not have the same feel as raw torque.

I rarely go over 90/95 MPH, then typically short bursts for passing. One time, getting on highway 126 in Ventura, CA, a vehicle in a merging lane accelerated hard..on the 1200S I went through the first 4 gears to the max and had not cleared the on ramp by much, when I shifted to 5th, at 110 MPH, with said vehicle rather small in my mirrors.

My 1976 CB750F was rated 122 MPH, per Honda, but only once do I recall possibly going over 110 MPH on it. My 2012 Bonneville was at 112 MPH when a sudden gust of wind blew me from the center of my lane to the center of the opposing lane on the Extraterrestrial Highway.

So, having the CB1100 allegedly governed at 110 MPH does not matter to me. The more than ample torque for acceleration is quite pleasing and highway cruising, even at higher speeds, is excellent for a naked bike.

Agree with all the above. I traded my 2013 at 10,000 miles for something else but had it just long enough to get it as good as it could be for me. Galfer stainless lines, EBC HH pads, Ikon shocks, and the CB500 handlebars. It was sporty, handled very well, but had a few niggles that have, I think, been corrected with the EX version. We'll see.

I never had an issue with power regarding the CB1100. Plenty of it. And FUN to ride at or near redline. That may be frowned upon by some but it is very much a part of the character of the bike and more than a few CB1100 owners enjoy riding the bike hard, especially when it surprises riders on pure supersports or supernakeds. The bike teaches one to be smooth.

Also as you mention, the CB1100 is stupidly stable. It held its line (once I got the Ikons on and good rubber as in Continental Classic Race tires) better than anything else I had other than the ZX-10R, which was built to be stable at high speeds and moreover, is fitted with a very good steering damper.

But the CB1100 is never going to be wildly popular. The Triumphs and now the new Z900RS are going to be more appealing for lots of reasons.

In the end, what difference does it make why someone buys a bike, anyway? We've all filled out those surveys and it is plain to see that for many if not most riders, "vanity" is a huge factor in making the purchase.

I hold nothing against someone for buying a bike because they like the looks, or they think it'll help define their style. We all ride for different reasons.

 

[SportsterDoc]

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 agree. A bit off topic, but there was a contributor to Motorcycle Consumer News a few years ago who continually wrote articles about which items made his bike Iron Butt worthy. He kept using the term "farkle," which I despise. Anyway, the first article was about his new GL1800 and all of the aftermarket items he added to it. A few months later he wrote about his new K1200LT and all of the aftermarket items he added to it. A year later he wrote about his new FJR1300 and all of the aftermarket items he added to it, and finally a few months later he wrote about his new K1600GTL and all of the aftermarket items he added to it.

I wrote a letter to the editor pointing out how silly this had become. Each bike had purportedly been optimized for superior long range touring but each was always superseded by the next new thing requiring further out of pocket expenditures to somehow improve it. I suggested the contributor would never be happy and should instead reflect inwardly and try to find satisfaction with what he has. They printed my letter but offered no editorial response.

I agree. A bit off topic, but there was a contributor to Motorcycle Consumer News a few years ago who continually wrote articles about which items made his bike Iron Butt worthy. He kept using the term "farkle," which I despise. Anyway, the first article was about his new GL1800 and all of the aftermarket items he added to it. A few months later he wrote about his new K1200LT and all of the aftermarket items he added to it. A year later he wrote about his new FJR1300 and all of the aftermarket items he added to it, and finally a few months later he wrote about his new K1600GTL and all of the aftermarket items he added to it.

I wrote a letter to the editor pointing out how silly this had become. Each bike had purportedly been optimized for superior long range touring but each was always superseded by the next new thing requiring further out of pocket expenditures to somehow improve it. I suggested the contributor would never be happy and should instead reflect inwardly and try to find satisfaction with what he has. They printed my letter but offered no editorial response. I am laughing my tail off at this. I just could not concur more fervidly (that means "I'm with ya, buddy" in plain talk).

I really don't like to use terms because they've become Internet memes. "Farkle" is one of 'em. It just isn't very specific, that's all. No offense intended to anyone who farkles.

But then again, isn't that what most of us do? Hardly anyone leaves his or her bike stock. We have to change it up, make it our own. What's the first question anyone asks at the roadhouse?

"What've ya done to it?"

These days, my answer is usually, "I rode it."

People just pursue hobbies with different kinds of vigor. For most people, "farkling" gets them closer to their machine, keeps them in contact with the object of interest, and every change renews the relationship. New grips? Gotta go for a 400-mile ride to see how they work. New seat? Ditto. Change the suspension setting? At least a 200-miler to check that out. Even a shift in tire pressure settings warrants a half-day jaunt up to the Razorback and home.

Motorcycling is a freaking obsession on many levels and I've never seen anyone "outgrow" it.

"It is a dream." Soichiro would be pleased to hear that!

Yeah, I freakin' hate to admit it to myself, but I am trying to find a way to convince my logical mind I can still successfully manage the weight.

Not that I ever dropped my 2013, far from it, really, but it's always a factor. No way could I ever pick ANY bike up now. One hernia surgery, which acted up and got me an ambulance ride a couple of weekends ago, convinced me of that folly. And I could probably use a second for the left side if I'm not careful.

OTOH, since I can't pick up any weight of bike, what difference does the weight make?

The CB1000R looks great, but really, what is that going to do for me that I can't already do with the Z900R? Nothing.

I like the Street Cup but it's no all-day bike.

Methinks the CB1100EX, at a nice discount, might be just the thing for this 60-year-old man. Because it's still the real thing.

I am 70, almost 71, weigh 175-180 and at 540 wet, the CB1100 is my heaviest bike, yet, but only by a small margin.
2014 CB1100 standard, 540 wet
Yamaha XT250 293 wet, picked up 3 times in less than two months
Motor Guzzi V7II 417 pounds
TW200 278 pounds, wet
2012 Triumph Bonneville 495 pounds
2002 H-D Sportster 1200S 537 pounds
2003 H-D XLH883 518 pounds, picked up once (fire road miscalculation)
1976 CB750F 502 pounds dry, picked up once
I do not have weights handy for the CB360, SL350, Cl 350, Cl160, CB160 or CA110, but the three Yamaha enduros were around 230 pounds and picking them up was to be expected!

When I sold the Bonneville in 2013 (medical expenses for daughter #2), my wife thought I was done with motorcycles, so I eased her concerns and started back, a year ago, with an under 70 MPH dual sport. I quickly started running out of dirt roads/trails to explore and ended up taking it on 160 mile highway day rides. I told her when I bought it, that I did not expect to keep it long. It was easy to move around in the garage, but the narrow seat was painful, for distance.

I then found a smoking deal on the V7II, but fueling issues and change of dealer ownership prompted me to trade it for the XT250 and I found a few more trails. I also hoped that I couild take it 220 miles to our ranch, since the last 8 miles is a rocky dirt road and the last 3/4 mile a Jeep trail. (Took the Bonneville there, once, not do do it again) The XT250 would cruise at 70 MPH, although buzzy, hit just over 80 MPH indicated, but not reasonable for a 600 mile round trip to my youngest daughter. I also found myself pushing it beyond my capabilities and dropped it 3 times. Not a good thing when riding solo, in a remote area, with no cell service. The almost upside down in a gully was a bit of a challenge to get it back up, but the bike was designed to be dropped and no damage, other than minor scratches.

So, I said farewell to offroad exploring and focused on the street. The CB1100 is everything I wanted. It is not light, but if you back up to the bike and lift with your legs, one person should get it up. Might need to be careful to not let it go over the opposite direction.

BTW, the CB1100 turns tighter than the V7II, which helps moving it around in the garage.

Moral of this story is that I would not be concerened about the CB1100 weight. Just remember to put the side stand down, before getting off! Never done that, but seen it done.

BTW, I fractured my spine in my first M/C crash, circa April, 1963, which does make me careful about lifting.

 

[Ulvetanna_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 agree. A bit off topic, but there was a contributor to Motorcycle Consumer News a few years ago who continually wrote articles about which items made his bike Iron Butt worthy. He kept using the term "farkle," which I despise. Anyway, the first article was about his new GL1800 and all of the aftermarket items he added to it. A few months later he wrote about his new K1200LT and all of the aftermarket items he added to it. A year later he wrote about his new FJR1300 and all of the aftermarket items he added to it, and finally a few months later he wrote about his new K1600GTL and all of the aftermarket items he added to it.

I wrote a letter to the editor pointing out how silly this had become. Each bike had purportedly been optimized for superior long range touring but each was always superseded by the next new thing requiring further out of pocket expenditures to somehow improve it. I suggested the contributor would never be happy and should instead reflect inwardly and try to find satisfaction with what he has. They printed my letter but offered no editorial response.

I agree. A bit off topic, but there was a contributor to Motorcycle Consumer News a few years ago who continually wrote articles about which items made his bike Iron Butt worthy. He kept using the term "farkle," which I despise. Anyway, the first article was about his new GL1800 and all of the aftermarket items he added to it. A few months later he wrote about his new K1200LT and all of the aftermarket items he added to it. A year later he wrote about his new FJR1300 and all of the aftermarket items he added to it, and finally a few months later he wrote about his new K1600GTL and all of the aftermarket items he added to it.

I wrote a letter to the editor pointing out how silly this had become. Each bike had purportedly been optimized for superior long range touring but each was always superseded by the next new thing requiring further out of pocket expenditures to somehow improve it. I suggested the contributor would never be happy and should instead reflect inwardly and try to find satisfaction with what he has. They printed my letter but offered no editorial response. I am laughing my tail off at this. I just could not concur more fervidly (that means "I'm with ya, buddy" in plain talk).

I really don't like to use terms because they've become Internet memes. "Farkle" is one of 'em. It just isn't very specific, that's all. No offense intended to anyone who farkles.

But then again, isn't that what most of us do? Hardly anyone leaves his or her bike stock. We have to change it up, make it our own. What's the first question anyone asks at the roadhouse?

"What've ya done to it?"

These days, my answer is usually, "I rode it."

People just pursue hobbies with different kinds of vigor. For most people, "farkling" gets them closer to their machine, keeps them in contact with the object of interest, and every change renews the relationship. New grips? Gotta go for a 400-mile ride to see how they work. New seat? Ditto. Change the suspension setting? At least a 200-miler to check that out. Even a shift in tire pressure settings warrants a half-day jaunt up to the Razorback and home.

Motorcycling is a freaking obsession on many levels and I've never seen anyone "outgrow" it.

"It is a dream." Soichiro would be pleased to hear that!

Yeah, I freakin' hate to admit it to myself, but I am trying to find a way to convince my logical mind I can still successfully manage the weight.

Not that I ever dropped my 2013, far from it, really, but it's always a factor. No way could I ever pick ANY bike up now. One hernia surgery, which acted up and got me an ambulance ride a couple of weekends ago, convinced me of that folly. And I could probably use a second for the left side if I'm not careful.

OTOH, since I can't pick up any weight of bike, what difference does the weight make?

The CB1000R looks great, but really, what is that going to do for me that I can't already do with the Z900R? Nothing.

I like the Street Cup but it's no all-day bike.

Methinks the CB1100EX, at a nice discount, might be just the thing for this 60-year-old man. Because it's still the real thing.

I am 70, almost 71, weigh 175-180 and at 540 wet, the CB1100 is my heaviest bike, yet, but only by a small margin.
2014 CB1100 standard, 540 wet
Yamaha XT250 293 wet, picked up 3 times in less than two months
Motor Guzzi V7II 417 pounds
TW200 278 pounds, wet
2012 Triumph Bonneville 495 pounds
2002 H-D Sportster 1200S 537 pounds
2003 H-D XLH883 518 pounds, picked up once (fire road miscalculation)
1976 CB750F 502 pounds dry, picked up once
I do not have weights handy for the CB360, SL350, Cl 350, Cl160, CB160 or CA110, but the three Yamaha enduros were around 230 pounds and picking them up was to be expected!

When I sold the Bonneville in 2013 (medical expenses for daughter #2), my wife thought I was done with motorcycles, so I eased her concerns and started back, a year ago, with an under 70 MPH dual sport. I quickly started running out of dirt roads/trails to explore and ended up taking it on 160 mile highway day rides. I told her when I bought it, that I did not expect to keep it long. It was easy to move around in the garage, but the narrow seat was painful, for distance.

I then found a smoking deal on the V7II, but fueling issues and change of dealer ownership prompted me to trade it for the XT250 and I found a few more trails. I also hoped that I couild take it 220 miles to our ranch, since the last 8 miles is a rocky dirt road and the last 3/4 mile a Jeep trail. (Took the Bonneville there, once, not do do it again) The XT250 would cruise at 70 MPH, although buzzy, hit just over 80 MPH indicated, but not reasonable for a 600 mile round trip to my youngest daughter. I also found myself pushing it beyond my capabilities and dropped it 3 times. Not a good thing when riding solo, in a remote area, with no cell service. The almost upside down in a gully was a bit of a challenge to get it back up, but the bike was designed to be dropped and no damage, other than minor scratches.

So, I said farewell to offroad exploring and focused on the street. The CB1100 is everything I wanted. It is not light, but if you back up to the bike and lift with your legs, one person should get it up. Might need to be careful to not let it go over the opposite direction.

BTW, the CB1100 turns tighter than the V7II, which helps moving it around in the garage.

Moral of this story is that I would not be concerened about the CB1100 weight. Just remember to put the side stand down, before getting off! Never done that, but seen it done.

BTW, I fractured my spine in my first M/C crash, circa April, 1963, which does make me careful about lifting.

I am 70, almost 71, weigh 175-180 and at 540 wet, the CB1100 is my heaviest bike, yet, but only by a small margin.
2014 CB1100 standard, 540 wet
Yamaha XT250 293 wet, picked up 3 times in less than two months
Motor Guzzi V7II 417 pounds
TW200 278 pounds, wet
2012 Triumph Bonneville 495 pounds
2002 H-D Sportster 1200S 537 pounds
2003 H-D XLH883 518 pounds, picked up once (fire road miscalculation)
1976 CB750F 502 pounds dry, picked up once
I do not have weights handy for the CB360, SL350, Cl 350, Cl160, CB160 or CA110, but the three Yamaha enduros were around 230 pounds and picking them up was to be expected!

When I sold the Bonneville in 2013 (medical expenses for daughter #2), my wife thought I was done with motorcycles, so I eased her concerns and started back, a year ago, with an under 70 MPH dual sport. I quickly started running out of dirt roads/trails to explore and ended up taking it on 160 mile highway day rides. I told her when I bought it, that I did not expect to keep it long. It was easy to move around in the garage, but the narrow seat was painful, for distance.

I then found a smoking deal on the V7II, but fueling issues and change of dealer ownership prompted me to trade it for the XT250 and I found a few more trails. I also hoped that I couild take it 220 miles to our ranch, since the last 8 miles is a rocky dirt road and the last 3/4 mile a Jeep trail. (Took the Bonneville there, once, not do do it again) The XT250 would cruise at 70 MPH, although buzzy, hit just over 80 MPH indicated, but not reasonable for a 600 mile round trip to my youngest daughter. I also found myself pushing it beyond my capabilities and dropped it 3 times. Not a good thing when riding solo, in a remote area, with no cell service. The almost upside down in a gully was a bit of a challenge to get it back up, but the bike was designed to be dropped and no damage, other than minor scratches.

So, I said farewell to offroad exploring and focused on the street. The CB1100 is everything I wanted. It is not light, but if you back up to the bike and lift with your legs, one person should get it up. Might need to be careful to not let it go over the opposite direction.

BTW, the CB1100 turns tighter than the V7II, which helps moving it around in the garage.

Moral of this story is that I would not be concerened about the CB1100 weight. Just remember to put the side stand down, before getting off! Never done that, but seen it done.

BTW, I fractured my spine in my first M/C crash, circa April, 1963, which does make me careful about lifting. You and I have very, almost eerily, similar histories. I also experience compression fractures to several vertebrae about 30 years ago. I have to be very cautious about that, and now the hernias of course.

I should mention here that I owned a 2013 CB1100 for three years and put a little over 10,000 miles on it, so I am about to become a repeat offender.

I was riding with someone a few months ago who did not put the side stand down quite properly. The person broke two small bones in the left foot, not seriously, but it still required two months and quite a bit of limping around to heal. One thing I noticed about that is that not everyone has developed those dirt biker instinct where they will automatically lift their foot out of the way if the bike starts to fall, and push off. This rider just let the bike fall without making any effort to avoid the falling bike. I imagine most riders would have done the same. After having dirt bikes fall over on me a number of times I learned to jump the heck out of the way. We all discussed that incident in depth and I started triple checking my side stand after that.

At some point if you want to stay healthy you gotta minimize certain risks. However, with respect to the CB1100, I wouldn't be able to pick it up any more easily than any other bike I own. If I drop a bike, I call the Auto Club. It stays where it lays. It's insured and a lot easier to fix than a hernia or blown disk.

I'm even considering getting a satellite GPS locating device (Satellite Messenger) that works anywhere on the planet regardless of cell service. If I dump a bike or get into a problem someone can find me or I can get help from anywhere. These are about $100 or less, but the subscription is $200/year. Then again, how much is your life worth? Cheap insurance.

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 agree. A bit off topic, but there was a contributor to Motorcycle Consumer News a few years ago who continually wrote articles about which items made his bike Iron Butt worthy. He kept using the term "farkle," which I despise. Anyway, the first article was about his new GL1800 and all of the aftermarket items he added to it. A few months later he wrote about his new K1200LT and all of the aftermarket items he added to it. A year later he wrote about his new FJR1300 and all of the aftermarket items he added to it, and finally a few months later he wrote about his new K1600GTL and all of the aftermarket items he added to it.

I wrote a letter to the editor pointing out how silly this had become. Each bike had purportedly been optimized for superior long range touring but each was always superseded by the next new thing requiring further out of pocket expenditures to somehow improve it. I suggested the contributor would never be happy and should instead reflect inwardly and try to find satisfaction with what he has. They printed my letter but offered no editorial response.

I agree. A bit off topic, but there was a contributor to Motorcycle Consumer News a few years ago who continually wrote articles about which items made his bike Iron Butt worthy. He kept using the term "farkle," which I despise. Anyway, the first article was about his new GL1800 and all of the aftermarket items he added to it. A few months later he wrote about his new K1200LT and all of the aftermarket items he added to it. A year later he wrote about his new FJR1300 and all of the aftermarket items he added to it, and finally a few months later he wrote about his new K1600GTL and all of the aftermarket items he added to it.

I wrote a letter to the editor pointing out how silly this had become. Each bike had purportedly been optimized for superior long range touring but each was always superseded by the next new thing requiring further out of pocket expenditures to somehow improve it. I suggested the contributor would never be happy and should instead reflect inwardly and try to find satisfaction with what he has. They printed my letter but offered no editorial response. I am laughing my tail off at this. I just could not concur more fervidly (that means "I'm with ya, buddy" in plain talk).

I really don't like to use terms because they've become Internet memes. "Farkle" is one of 'em. It just isn't very specific, that's all. No offense intended to anyone who farkles.

But then again, isn't that what most of us do? Hardly anyone leaves his or her bike stock. We have to change it up, make it our own. What's the first question anyone asks at the roadhouse?

"What've ya done to it?"

These days, my answer is usually, "I rode it."

People just pursue hobbies with different kinds of vigor. For most people, "farkling" gets them closer to their machine, keeps them in contact with the object of interest, and every change renews the relationship. New grips? Gotta go for a 400-mile ride to see how they work. New seat? Ditto. Change the suspension setting? At least a 200-miler to check that out. Even a shift in tire pressure settings warrants a half-day jaunt up to the Razorback and home.

Motorcycling is a freaking obsession on many levels and I've never seen anyone "outgrow" it.

"It is a dream." Soichiro would be pleased to hear that!

Yeah, I freakin' hate to admit it to myself, but I am trying to find a way to convince my logical mind I can still successfully manage the weight.

Not that I ever dropped my 2013, far from it, really, but it's always a factor. No way could I ever pick ANY bike up now. One hernia surgery, which acted up and got me an ambulance ride a couple of weekends ago, convinced me of that folly. And I could probably use a second for the left side if I'm not careful.

OTOH, since I can't pick up any weight of bike, what difference does the weight make?

The CB1000R looks great, but really, what is that going to do for me that I can't already do with the Z900R? Nothing.

I like the Street Cup but it's no all-day bike.

Methinks the CB1100EX, at a nice discount, might be just the thing for this 60-year-old man. Because it's still the real thing.

I am 70, almost 71, weigh 175-180 and at 540 wet, the CB1100 is my heaviest bike, yet, but only by a small margin.
2014 CB1100 standard, 540 wet
Yamaha XT250 293 wet, picked up 3 times in less than two months
Motor Guzzi V7II 417 pounds
TW200 278 pounds, wet
2012 Triumph Bonneville 495 pounds
2002 H-D Sportster 1200S 537 pounds
2003 H-D XLH883 518 pounds, picked up once (fire road miscalculation)
1976 CB750F 502 pounds dry, picked up once
I do not have weights handy for the CB360, SL350, Cl 350, Cl160, CB160 or CA110, but the three Yamaha enduros were around 230 pounds and picking them up was to be expected!

When I sold the Bonneville in 2013 (medical expenses for daughter #2), my wife thought I was done with motorcycles, so I eased her concerns and started back, a year ago, with an under 70 MPH dual sport. I quickly started running out of dirt roads/trails to explore and ended up taking it on 160 mile highway day rides. I told her when I bought it, that I did not expect to keep it long. It was easy to move around in the garage, but the narrow seat was painful, for distance.

I then found a smoking deal on the V7II, but fueling issues and change of dealer ownership prompted me to trade it for the XT250 and I found a few more trails. I also hoped that I couild take it 220 miles to our ranch, since the last 8 miles is a rocky dirt road and the last 3/4 mile a Jeep trail. (Took the Bonneville there, once, not do do it again) The XT250 would cruise at 70 MPH, although buzzy, hit just over 80 MPH indicated, but not reasonable for a 600 mile round trip to my youngest daughter. I also found myself pushing it beyond my capabilities and dropped it 3 times. Not a good thing when riding solo, in a remote area, with no cell service. The almost upside down in a gully was a bit of a challenge to get it back up, but the bike was designed to be dropped and no damage, other than minor scratches.

So, I said farewell to offroad exploring and focused on the street. The CB1100 is everything I wanted. It is not light, but if you back up to the bike and lift with your legs, one person should get it up. Might need to be careful to not let it go over the opposite direction.

BTW, the CB1100 turns tighter than the V7II, which helps moving it around in the garage.

Moral of this story is that I would not be concerened about the CB1100 weight. Just remember to put the side stand down, before getting off! Never done that, but seen it done.

BTW, I fractured my spine in my first M/C crash, circa April, 1963, which does make me careful about lifting.

I am 70, almost 71 60, almost 61 here.

Almost exactly a decade apart. Keep riding.

 

[nhawk7504_imp]

Lottery? I'll just take an EX, an RS, a Z900 Café and a CB1000R. Everyone can come over the house on Sunday during the long winter and talk about them over coffee. How many times have I stopped at a café and guys say, "They don't make a bad motorcycle these days." Everyone makes great points. 474 lbs wet for the RS. 485 for my old 919. The EX has beauty and class. In person it's stunning. The nice lazy ride. It's not about zooming which the RS is moreso for sure. I would say the RS is for a little younger crowd. See the ads. But you can't go wrong. Here you get pings. There you get mono shock and TC. Tell a friend to get the one you don't have and switch off halfway.

 

[SportsterDoc]

In the seventies, I had a car, a truck, a street bike (CB750F) and 3 Yamaha enduros (mine, wife's and a spare). I got tired of servicing them all!

 

[Henrik_imp]

I just got to see a black Z900RS in the flesh yesterday. It certainly looks much better in real than on pictures as I always thought something was off with the proportions. High quality finish all around, and a very nice sparkly black paint. Sitting on it I got to try the standard and the low seat. For me being quite tall, the standard seat is the obvious choice, but the low seat looks better.

Early next year my dealer friend will have all versions available for test rides so I will be able to come back with some more details.

So far I like what I see!

 

[hb9400_imp]

Saw some you tube videos of the black version delivered to the US and by far that would be the color I would choose. Was glad they came out with the bike. Those old Kawi guys have their retro now. Did find it interesting that the turn signals are not led lights as they appear in other parts of the world. I've owned quite a few bikes, some more than twice and for different reasons so I can't say anything about other people's choices. Even now with 3 different styled bikes in the garage there isn't a clear cut 1st choice. I like to ride when I can, mostly its 16 mile commutes and short stints on the weekends so I'll never rack up a ton of miles for probably another 8 years when hopefully retirement will still mean something. The motorcycle industry wants us to continue to flip our rides and especially bring in newer, younger riders. I try to do my part by encouraging others to ride. A Merry Christmas to you all!

 

[Ulvetanna_imp]

I just got to see a black Z900RS in the flesh yesterday. It certainly looks much better in real than on pictures as I always thought something was off with the proportions. High quality finish all around, and a very nice sparkly black paint. Sitting on it I got to try the standard and the low seat. For me being quite tall, the standard seat is the obvious choice, but the low seat looks better.

Early next year my dealer friend will have all versions available for test rides so I will be able to come back with some more details.

So far I like what I see!

Yeah, the bike is absolutely beautiful. No detail was overlooked.

As compared to the Supernaked R version, while the quality of the pieces is the same (that deep gray and black two-tone metallic paint scheme is very well rendered, for example), there are no plastic covers, and every area that could be dressed up or provided with a finished look was treated. Gloss black is used throughout, the frame and swingarm are very nicely done. Footpegs, forks, engine covers...everything is first rate. So that bike will definitely be something an owner could pore over in the garage when it's not being ridden.

Some details are interesting, like the plastic see-thru reservoir for the front brakes compared with the standard metal item with a small window on the R. The brake disks themselves are circular on the outside rather than having the high-performance "petal" style as Kawi's sport bikes use. But the braking performance is said to be more toward the middling side. Not bad, but not ultra-powerful, which is what I'd call the Z900R's binders. And so on.

Item for item, I can't see any difference between the bike made Thailand and the one made in Japan except the attention to extra detail. You'll pay for that, though.

 

[tate_imp]

will believe it when i see it but believe the retro market will always be
" mostly " for the ones who grew up in that era .
not calling an of you geezers old mind you !

That Kawasaki Z900RS looks amazing I might just have to have me one of those I'm a Honda guy but love this bikes look...:biker:

 

[Ulvetanna_imp]

I noticed the bike has a traditional helmet lock. Not only is this dang convenient, it really does add to the traditional look.

Top Five Hippest Cool Features of the New Kawasaki Z900RS

 

[jedd_imp]

This might be old news, but what's interesting to me is how strong and forceful Kaw's Marketing efforts have gone down for this bike. ever since June, I've been trying to keep up w/ all the latest buzz on it.

Even more impressive is how quickly production got ramped up from showcasing it to the public (mid OCT) to being on the US dealer's show room.

I didn't have a CLUE that the CB1100 had been in production for 2 yrs before I first found out about it by accident (right about this time 2 yrs ago). So, in hindsight, I think Kaw's marketing debut is going to pay off HUGE (vs. Honda's CB1100 debut).

 

[Ulvetanna_imp]

This might be old news, but what's interesting to me is how strong and forceful Kaw's Marketing efforts have gone down for this bike. ever since June, I've been trying to keep up w/ all the latest buzz on it.

Even more impressive is how quickly production got ramped up from showcasing it to the public (mid OCT) to being on the US dealer's show room.

I didn't have a CLUE that the CB1100 had been in production for 2 yrs before I first found out about it by accident (right about this time 2 yrs ago). So, in hindsight, I think Kaw's marketing debut is going to pay off HUGE (vs. Honda's CB1100 debut).

The fact that the Z900RS is still truly a high-performance motorcycle in pretty much every way means the press is going to love it. The CB got very lukewarm reviews due to its performance limitations. Nonesuch exist for the Kawasaki.

In truth there is not much between the RS and R; good riders will run generally a comparable pace on either.

Yes, the R will pull up the front wheel quite easily but that is more a thrill thing. It don't have traction control, and the RS does, which means the rider can really give it full stick whenever (within reason, of course).

It's just a very different machine with a lot of curb and sex appeal (which the CB1100 has, naturally) but that extra 25 HP and 80-pound weight difference will attract a lot more buyers.

Still and all I will be looking for a CB1100EX next year.

 

[the Ferret]

"but that extra 25 HP and 80-pound weight difference"

more like 15 hp (stock CB dynos about 85 rwhp the new RS will dyno about 99 rwhp... the full bore Z900 only dynos 113 rwhp or 28 hp more than the CB)

the weight difference is 70 pounds (CB 545 lbs... RS 475 lbs)

 

[Ulvetanna_imp]

"but that extra 25 HP and 80-pound weight difference"

more like 15 hp (stock CB dynos about 85 rwhp the new RS will dyno about 99 rwhp... the full bore Z900 only dynos 113 rwhp or 28 hp more than the CB)

the weight difference is 70 pounds (CB 545 lbs... RS 475 lbs)

Honda says 540 on its website. Honda shows no difference between the weights of the Standard and Deluxe models which is likely an error since the Deluxe holds more fuel and has twin exhausts. The EX has even beefier suspension and holds even more fuel than the Deluxe, another half-gallon. None of that weight seems to be taken into account, so I think Honda have not updated the specs correctly, since two reviewers using independent scales are coming up with 562 and 570 lbs, respectively.

Motorcycle.com says 562 pounds in its review. They use their own scales.

[url=https://rideapart.com/articles/2014-honda-cb1100-deluxe-review]Rideapart says 570 pounds for the CB1100 Deluxe, 2015 model. They also use their own scales.

Horsepower, yes, I gave a rough number, I am speaking of crankshaft horsepower claimed, not dyno numbers. Dynos vary from day to day and bike to bike so I don't put much stock in those values. The use of a dyno is mainly to chart changes and make sure the bike is running properly, those numbers are all over the place.

Dyno threads are worse than oil threads on the high-performance bike websites...

So, Honda are claiming 88 HP or 89 PS for the EX, Kawasaki are claiming 110 HP or 111 PS for the RS model. So, the difference is 22 HP at the crank. The buyer considering either will surely take these values into account and figure out what they mean for him or her. But the "motojournalist" on the CB1100EX who is getting left well behind is bound to comment on the performance gap.

If that's important, the choice is more obvious. If not, the CB1100 might be a contender.

If I didn't already own a Z900R I'd be a prime candidate for the RS but that not being the case, another CB1100 (EX this time) might be in the cards.

 

[Banned_imp]

"but that extra 25 HP and 80-pound weight difference"

more like 15 hp (stock CB dynos about 85 rwhp the new RS will dyno about 99 rwhp... the full bore Z900 only dynos 113 rwhp or 28 hp more than the CB)

the weight difference is 70 pounds (CB 545 lbs... RS 475 lbs)

Ok, for you guys with far more experience than me, how much can you actually feel that difference in power?

I mean my HD dynoed at 86 rwhp and 92ft/lbs tq, my Buell is listed at 103hp, 84ft/lbs tq (at the crank I suppose) and whatever the CB is and I'll be honest - I can't really tell that much of difference between them.

 

[Lord Popgun]

The ‘14 service manual lists:
2013 as 540lbs, ABS model as 549lbs
2014 as 545lbs and the dlx as 571lbs

 

[the Ferret]

Ok first off rideapart was wrong because there was no 15 DLX and there are likely no more than 300 14 dlxs (the only year it was made) in North America

The CB has been dynoed by many magazines and many members here so 85 rwhp is a figure I feel confident using (NOT at the crank).

http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/photo-gallery/2013-honda-cb1100-second-ride/

I have not seen a dyno on a 900RS yet, but if the std 125 hp Z900 loses 12 hp on the dyno to the rear wheel and comes out at 113, that's what I am going to figure on (ie: a 12 hp loss). Surely the detuned RS isn't going to rate only 2 hp less. Using someone else's actual dyno charts is the only measure we can use isn't it? Can't trust the manufacturers to tell us the truth since they don't compare apples to apples. (rwhp vs crank hp for example.. dry weight, vs curb weight vs wet weight for another example) so we rely on magazines to weigh and dyno and quarter mile them for us and compare those figures.

Google Search:

I used the 545 pounds weight from from the standard 13 and 14 models (yes the dlx is 30 pounds heavier but like I said, it was a one off model and there aren't enough of them in the country to use as a fair comparison)

I don't care what numbers you use, the Kaw is lighter and has more hp, but the difference is not as large as some would make it out to be. But in the REAL world, where we actually ride the motorcycles daily, FEW of us (at least few of us on this board from what I have read) are going to notice the difference in HP between the two (except maybe on rare occasions). If the CB's dyno chart shows more horsepower in the rpms I ride in and the RS's dyno shows a hp advantage only in the upper regions of the tach near the red zone where I don't ride, then the CB will actually be the more powerful bike in my hands. And even if the Kaw shows a couple hp advantage in that 3500-5000 rpm range, that really doesn't mean squat does it? That is exactly the situation I was in with my Gen 1 FZ-1 I was riding when the CB came out. The CB made more hp than the FZ in the 3500-5000 rpm zone I ride, but once the FZ hit 8000 rpms. there was a steep rise in HP up to the 13,000 rpm redline where it smoked the CB... but I never rode it there. For me, the CB was the more powerful bike.

Some guys (you maybe) like to ride around banging them off the rev limiter, but I would say generally speaking those that would buy this type of bike are of a certain demographic that got that out of their system many years ago.

 

[Aussieflyer]

Probably been said a zillion times ... the CB1100 is not a performance bike by todays standards and any comparison based on HP / torque / weight or any other 'performance measure' is about as productive as peeing into the wind. Ride it for what it is and 99 times out of 100 you'll be smiling.

 

[LongRanger_imp]

^ Yep! +100