I've owned all three and can honestly say they're all very good bikes.
First things first - the engine. On paper, and probably back to back, the performance of all the bikes are extremely similar - on the road, the differences between each model will be marginal. However, I don't ride with my eyes transfixed on the speedo, so I ride by feel. There is a big difference between the feeling of the V4 engined RVF and VFR and that of the inline CBR. The CBR is a bit of a screamer - a rev or nothing motor which really needs thrashing to get the best of (or anything that constitutes acceleration) - the trick is to stay above 10,000rpm for best progress, where the some reasonable 'power' can be felt. Great for backroad scratching, not so good on the trip to work.
The V4s feel as if they're a bit slower revving - 7,000rpm (70mph in 6th) feels like the bike's idling - which is great for cruising down bypasses (even if you need to keep more of an eye on the speedo - speed is deceptive). The V configuration engine comes into play here, as they feel like a mini-twin of some sort. They also have a delivery which actually gives a relative midrange - nice and torquey when over 6,000rpm, so you don't need to dance on the gear lever as much than on the CBR. In my opinion, the V4s also sound better (the louder the exhaust the better) - they've got such a carasmatic flat drone to them (with a bit of a rasping bark when hacking on) - it's really like hooning around on a mini Isle of Man TT racer (albeit at legal(ish) speeds). Because the engine feels so under stressed in comparison to the CBR, I found I not only could settle for a brisk pace without trying, but when putting the effort in, actually covered ground quicker. They don't feel like they've got the top end of the CBR, but this is just the 'feel' from the engine - infact, as the delivery is a lot linear, the top end is more or less the same (NC30s a little more infact). This plays divedends, as when I rode the CBR, I had to put a lot of effort into making the thing go (constant gearchanges to keep it on song) whereas, I could ride the V4s at 80% and still cover ground as quickly.
Chassis wise - the V4s feel a little heavier than the CBR, but more planted when in a corner. They have a lower center of gravity, which requires a little more effort to turn (suspectly down to the NC30's 18 inch rear wheel as well), using more body/hip movement helped drop them into corners. The CBR feels sustantially lighter, many a time I was picking the bike up mid-corner as I was heading for the apex too early. Coupled with the engine's lack of bottom end torque, it felt as if you're hovering above the ground. Out of the two, I'd say that the CBRs got the handling edge as stock - I only had the bike for 2 months or so (missed the V4s, different story) in the middle of winter - but was still confident to push the bike off the edges of the rear tyre. The V4s have a slightly better brake setup, but a lot of this is down to condition - I uprated them anyway with Nissin Sintered Pads and Braided Lines.
Comfort - the V4s are slightly larger, coupled with their more weighty feel, I found them better covering larger distances. I'm 5'8 on a good day, but found the CBR cramped and tiring on the commute to work - especially with that buzzy engine.
Looks - no contest in my opinion. V4s all the way - single sided swingarms, RC30 and 45 clones will always look better than a Fireblade-wannabe. The CBR's okay, but the tail unit seems out of proportion with the rest of the bike - my CBR looked especially unbalanced with its double bubble screen (not my choice) Best finished bike is the NC30, followed by the CBR (those fold out pillion pegs are pretty cool). The RVF's very good, but there's a few areas where it looks a bit scruffy - rubber gasket for rear seat lock for instance, lack of rad. grill, welding on the exhaust, etc. Get inside a V4 and you'll find it's a very intricate and well put together motorcycle - everything looks so right (early mass centralisation) and seems to 'click' together - bitch to work on though.
VFR-RVF. Not much difference here, other than the obvious cosmetics. Basically:
VFR has 18 inch rear, NC35 (RVF) has 17 inch - marginally better choice of tyres, but I'd usually recomend H rated tyres for 400s anyway - and the popular ones come in both 17 and 18 inch guises.
30 has bigger carbs than the 35 - which usually means a little more power at the expense of midrange drive. I found the difference to be marginal though, but the 30s do feel as if they pull better at the high end from standard.
Looks - same engine, very similar frame, but the main difference between each model is looks. Which looks best is a matter of opinion - 35 is basically a slightly modernised (to mid 90s fashion) 30 - with rounded/fatter bits. 30 has better attention to detail and finish.
Forks - 30 has right way up forks, 35 has upsidedownies. The internals from latter 30s and for 35s are very similar, so you're only really getting a cosmetic tweak. However, some riders claim the 35's front end is a lot better - I failed to find a massive advantage. Bars do feel closer on the 35, or maybe that's just because I'd been riding a Gullarm too long between the 30 and 35.
Price - good 35s are usually a grand or more than good 30s. You don't really get much for that grand, apart from 'uprated' looks. If I was to buy another 400 (which I will), I'd rather spend my money on a cheaper 30 - more change for restoring/tweaking that way. Besides, I'm a sucker for the original, being somewhat of a purist. Difference in speed is marginal - both are good for around 135, quarter mile in 13 or so seconds.
Go blag a ride on a couple of fine examples (opt for ones of similar condition for a fair test if possible), then see which you prefer. If it was my decision (and I'm thinking of returning to 400s soon with a second bike), I'll opt for a good, clean, original NC30. Happy hunting. |
Help & FAQs
Search BCF
Members
Groups
Events Calendar
rating
rating