The latest Sports Bikes

[JAMSXR]

Are they worth it???

Was flicking through the latest copy of Bike in Smith's and came across an article saying that sports bike technology hit its pinnacle in 2005! I went on to read that the new bikes are now brought out to match noise and emission laws and the raw, screaming, mentalist engines will be a thing of the past. For example a 2005 GSXR has a great induction raw, but in the 07 model it has been strangled away due to the fact the bike would not pass the noise regulation tests. And the 05 10R was everything you could want in a bike engine, but the latest model wile still being stupid fast has lost all of its torque and bottom end power.

This is not too relevant to most people on the forum as most of us will buy secondhand but it’s something for the future as I think the next bike I buy will be mine for a very long time.

(And most of the new sports bikes are pig ugly!)
____________________
Honda SFX50 > Aprilia SR125 > Aprilia RS125 > Honda RFV400 > K4 GSXR600 > KTM Duke > C1H 636 > K3 GSXR1000 > Aprilia RSV-R > Triumph Street Triple R > Ducati 899 Panigale > Aprilia Tuono 1100 > Triumph Daytona 675R > KTM SuperDuke 1290 2.0

[Wafer_Thin_Ham]

Yeah, I read that too, whilst I'm not sure if I believe it I can see what they mean.

I'm sure the manufacturers will engineer a way to make bikes and their engines much better, they always do.
____________________
My Flickr

[craigs23]

I find my 08 CBR better on the road than the 05 CBR I test rode...

Other than that, it depends what you want. I mean, a mere 600's limits are way beyond my own, especially being used mostly as a commuter bike - what's the point of the 'pinnacle' of sportsbike technology (more power, less weight, etc), if it's mostly unuseable? I'd rather have low down grunt and midrange torque over top end whizz bang. Chassis and brakes continue to improve - but am I really going to feel the difference a couple of kilos here or improved shock linkages there return on my average skill level? And where does this invoke the fun factor of a bike? I've found through experience that a faster a bike wants to/can go, the less I feel satisfied about riding it at less than 2/3rd's pace. I've found messing around on bikes with less technology often more fun/satisfying than those tested with the latest 'pinnacle' components.

That brings me to how the latest things look. I prefer the 02 R1 to the latest bike (and that's not including the 09 R1 about to be released), my favorite Blade looks wise was the original models (RRN, RRS, etc), ZX10R's cosmetics peaked and died in 2004, Suzuki's post K4 models seem to get uglier and uglier. Even Ducatis these days (pinnacle flagship models anyway) look a bit too Jap-tastic for my palette. And looks wise, I prefer the 03 CBR to the 08 I have now...

What do we have to look forward to in regards to upcoming technology? Honda's new ABS system looked interesting in the same Bike magazine article...

[damz]

all the new jap bikes are getting pretty fugly and the others (triumph/ducati for example) are becoming more jap like and better looking.

i prefer the looks of the 2004/5 models, the ninja, the cbr, r1, gsxr looked better and hopefully il either pick up a ninja or gsxr towards next winter.

i only have a short 10 minute comute to work so comfort and unusability isnt really an issue for such short trips.
____________________
Current Bikes RVF400 - 94
Cars: RX7 FD, Eunos Roadster
Former Bikes: FZR 250R 89, ZX7R 98

[robbieguy2003]

Depends what your doing with it... The latest sports bikes are so track focused now. They are setup to a level that with very little work its good to go on a racetrack.

While emmissions levels/noise regs always cause issues thats why we have an aftermarket exhausts, ecu remaps and air filters - once you've played around with this I bet your bike doesn't meet the regs anymore.

Companies have to play nice with Government at times - which they do. To say they've managed to actually increase performance by a few % and take on the additional regulations is pretty impressive.

I still don't think there have been any amazing bikes that have been class changing for a long time (i.e. like the first blade).
____________________
Current Bikes: Honda CBR 600RR - '07, Suzuki GSX1250 FA ST '11
Old Bikes: Suzuki Intruder 125 LC - '2001, Honda CBR 600F - '92, Honda CBR 600RR - '03

[The Tot]

2000-2004 seemed to produce the best sportsbike for the roads, you had a mix of old 90's technology being combined with modern innovations. There wasn't such an emphasis for putting IL4 thous in WSB, because it was after that point I feel that thous got silly and 600's became too focussed. My preference in road sports bike seems to be between 1998 and 2004, dwindling after that.

Even between my ZX6R (1995 design) and my Fireblade (2000 design), the advancements in fabrication techniques alone are worth mentioning, frame technology, brakes, electronics etc. I was quite amazed that despite the 929 being physically bigger, it was actually lighter and better built than a mid 90's sportsbike.

I prefer my sportsbikes to be big but manageable.
____________________
The Tot 2019 Z1000SX - 2007 R1
Never argue with autism

[Dave ett]

[The Tot]

Based on my short blast today, the former! It's VERY easy to do silly speeds on the thou and it's all so effortless. But the blade is by far the better bike. Ask me the same question again in 2 months time after i've got the bike set up, then i'll probably say the blade.
____________________
The Tot 2019 Z1000SX - 2007 R1
Never argue with autism

[craigs23]

I think the term 'better' is a point of view. Okay, I'm a greedy bastard, but if someone asked me what was a better bike between my 20 year old NC30 and my year old CBR, I'd have to ask them what exactly they meant by 'better'.

Better performance? Sure, the CBR ought to run rings around the 400, in pretty much any environment.

Better bike though? Hmmm....

....likewise, if someone asked me what the 'better' bike was between my CBR and CG125.....well, I know for a fact that my CG made me smile more...