2005 Honda CBR1000RR vs 1999 XX

[Johnny Monsoon]

Preface:

I'm sure everyone who visits this part of the forum has read about the VFR vs other bikes, and how I've (personally) found the VFR somewhat superfluous when there are other bikes in the lineup that seem to be able to do the same job but with less weight, more power, etc.  Now, this isn't a bash on the VFR; I think it's a fantastic machine, but in my world, it just has somewhat of an identity crisis.

That left me comparing the XX to the VFR, and while I still think the XX performs better in most every situation, in most every measurable way, there are two facts that are simply inescapable:  1) The XX is a heavy bike.  Not a huge amount heavier than the VFR, but enough to be a deal killer for folks who live in really twisty stuff, and 2) The XX just isn't made anymore, and hasn't been offered here in the US for a while now.

One of the comparo bikes I was using was the CBR1000RR.  It weighs less than the VFR by a substantial amount, has (IMO) great ergos.  I find the CBR1KRR to be vastly more comfortable than the VFR (and quite frankly, more comfortable than the XX).  The CBR can certainly hold luggage, and when comparing the suspension... well... there's just no comparison as it blows both the VFR and XX completely away.

Findings:

First off, this is more of a direct comparison of the CBR1000RR to the XX than an outright review.  I opted to take a 2005 CBR1000RR over the brand new one for a test spin since the bikes, cosmetics aside, are identical to the available 2007 model on the floor, and the 'used' bike i rode had only 1400 original miles on it, which means it is broken in but not thrashed.  Hereafter, I'll refer to the CBR1000RR simply as the CBR and the CBR1100XX simply as the XX or Blackbird.  Since they're both technically CBRs, I didn't want to confuse anyone.

I'll skip the aesthetics of the CBRs since you either like them or you don't.  Everything works for me, and seems to be in a very good place.  My build is 5'11" (or 6' even depending on who's measuring me, etc), I have a 31" inseam and I want to say I have a 31" sleeve length.  I'm 170ish (little more, little less).  Healthy.  I only mention this because I seem to be built the same way most moto-companies must build their test guy to build bikes around.  

The CBR sits me further upright, oddly.  This has been my experience on the 929 and 954 models as well.  Whoever built the VFR and XX had a slightly different model.  The CBR sits me upright, and is actually more difficult to get down on the tank than my XX, which I think dictates the mission of both bikes; the CBR puts you in a good position to move around on it, where the XX wants to stretch you out over the tank to explore that top-end speed.  The VFR puts me a little further forward than the CBR, but not so much as the XX; however, the CBR doesn't lend itself to 'tucking in' as either of the two other bikes do, and leaves me in an uncomfortable position no matter where I try to get.  The bars are slightly too far rearward and causes me to roll my back.  The saddle on the CBR is firm, but not uncomfortable, and actually has a great shape.  The VFRs seat is just weird shaped for me, and is uncomfortable everywhere.  The XX is comfortable as it has more padding, but also is limited due to being a one-piece seat for both pilot and passenger.  The CBR, while comfortable, still does have high pegs that lock you into a single position.  On the XX (and I presume the VFR) the passenger pegs are an option on long trips, but on the CBR they're just too high and tucked to be a viable option.  This brings me to another difference in the overall design theory of the bikes.  Where the VFR and XX were designed to be refined, smooth, comfortable bikes that offer a lot of amenities, the CBR is a bit stripped-down and purpose built (which should surprise absolutely no one).  But, given that most of us use these bikes for real-world riding instead of eternal track days, I think it is worth noting those differences.

The VFR is nothing if not refined; likewise for the XX.  I was most struck, I think, by the very cobbled-together feel of the CBR.  It's like they put the engine in the frame, finished up the 'what makes it go, and what controls what makes it go' stuff, then everything else was an afterthought.  Of course this is almost certainly in an attempt to keep weight down, but overall makes for a very spartan, unrefined machine when coming off a bike like the XX.One note that I must make refers to the swingarm proximity to the left peg (shifter side peg).  When I had my feet in proper position (ball of my foot on the peg) my heel encountered the rear swingarm.  I don't have absurdly big feed (dang) and so found this somewhat unnerving and could see the potential for this to be an issue.   That's something that points directly to weight reduction over refinement/rider comfort.  Refinement wasn't limited to the aesthetics.

The XX is insanely smooth by comparison, throughout the rpm sweep.  I was very surprised that over the span of 6 years, it seems that the shortcomings of EFI on my XX (which present as off-idle/low rpm snatchiness) is not only present in the CBR, but even enhanced.  Again, I suspect this is due to lightweight combined with a lack of advancement of Honda's EFI program.

I would stop short of discounting the CBR as a daily driver/SPORT-touring machine.  Clearly, the suspension itself can be a huge asset, and can be adjusted to make the bike ride more like a heavier bike on long straights, and have the versatility to dial it back in when the going gets very twisty.  Clearly, the CBR can take luggage as well as any bike; maybe even better than some with the undertail exhaust.  The wind protection could prove an issue for foul-weather riding, though I suspect getting a large screen is an easy enough thing to do.

Overall, I was left confused.  It came down to a matter of weight vs refinement.  I'll have to sort out the details of what's more feasible to lose for my needs.  Of course, it also presented some other things that are important that may be combined in new ways.  If I want great suspension, a comfortable road ride, and light-weight, an upper-end DS bike might be the most logical answer.  Of course, then it becomes a matter of power vs capability/practicality...

I love bikes!

[gritsngravy]

"......First off, this is more of a direct comparison of the CBR1000RR to the XX than an outright review.  I opted to take a 2005 CBR1000RR over the brand new one for a test spin since the bikes, cosmetics aside, are identical to the available 2007 model on the floor, and the 'used' bike i rode had only 1400 original miles on it, which means it is broken in but not thrashed......."  



Actually the '06-'07 cbr's had numerous small changes that resulted in the bike being lighter and slightly faster than the '05 model.   Among the many changes the '06 has lighter  thinner front brake discs,  higher redline,  lighter exhaust system, all in an attempt to make the bike more aggressive in track riding.  


Your conclusion is pretty much right on, the xx & vfr are a generation or four behind the cbr.   The cbr is a honest to gosh sport bike that some use on the race track but the majority use on the street.   Those that ride the cbr, or any proper sport bike, any great distance do so because they value the purity of the ride over creature comfort.    Me personally, I'd rather eat rocks than ride my cbr over 400 miles in one day.   Those miles 1 - 399 would be an absolute blast, especially with a hot bath and steak waiting at the end.   I'm no iron butt type on ANY style of bike.  Give me a great day ride and a nice evening to cap it off.    If I ever do decide to take longer rides I'd get a soft highway capable touring cruiser like a nomad and do the easy rider thing.  

My advice, stick with your xx

[bizarro]

I'm 5'11'' and about 190 lbs. I haven't ridden the new gen CBR but the 954RR was one of the smoothest, most capable bikes I've ever ridden. I had no problem doing 500 miles days on it (why did I sell it? I wanted to slow down and picked up a R1150GS, which was a very expensive mistake). I personally prefer a bike with ergos that encourage lateral movement vs encouraging a superman high-speed spawl. You might give the 954RR another chance.

[kevin_stevens]

BTW, I know people are tired of hearing it, but the ZX-14, similar in class to the XX, has similar advantages and weights only four lbs. more than a VFR.  

2006 Honda VFR Interceptor
Rake: 25.3 degrees
Trail: 100mm
Wheelbase: 57.4 in
Dry Weight: 470 lb

2006 Kawasaki ZX-14
Rake: 23.0 degrees
Trail: 94mm
Wheelbase: 57.5 in
Dry Weight: 474 lb


KeS

[Rogue]

Johnny, have you tried test riding the 2007 CBR 600RR?

This bike has won massive praise from many testers.  In fact, Motorcyclist magazine named it THE BEST SPORTBIKE.  Period.

Why?

They say it has the power of a 750.  It has the right amount of low to midrange power (for a 600), yet has the top end power to rule the 600 class.

It has ergos that allows it to be ridden all day.  No.  It is NOT like the VFR.  Probably more like the 1000RR but with higher bars.

It has a gas gauge!  OMG is that true?  On a sportbike no less!  

It weighs 412 lbs WET.  No other bike can touch it!  

It has handling that Motorcyclist describes as, "sublime".  

Honestly, if you are looking for something that is "better" than your XX in many ways, you may want to take a closer look.  And BTW, don't laugh it off by assuming it's just a 600 therefore you're not interested (not enough power and speed).  Ride it and see what it's like first.  It may surprise you.  You may surprise yourself in that you may come to the realization that you don't actually NEED big power to have BIG fun.  

If I were shopping for a do it all sportbike, I know the 2007* CBR600RR would be the very first bike on my list.  

*make sure it's a 2007 model.  2006 model is slightly different.

[kevin_stevens]

Johnny, have you tried test riding the 2007 CBR 600RR?

This bike has won massive praise from many testers.  In fact, Motorcyclist magazine named it THE BEST SPORTBIKE.  Period.

Why?

They say it has the power of a 750.  It has the right amount of low to midrange power (for a 600), yet has the top end power to rule the 600 class.

It has ergos that allows it to be ridden all day.  No.  It is NOT like the VFR.  Probably more like the 1000RR but with higher bars.

It has a gas gauge!  OMG is that true?  On a sportbike no less!  

It weighs 412 lbs WET.  No other bike can touch it!  

It has handling that Motorcyclist describes as, "sublime".  

Honestly, if you are looking for something that is "better" than your XX in many ways, you may want to take a closer look.  And BTW, don't laugh it off by assuming it's just a 600 therefore you're not interested (not enough power and speed).  Ride it and see what it's like first.  It may surprise you.  You may surprise yourself in that you may come to the realization that you don't actually NEED big power to have BIG fun.  

If I were shopping for a do it all sportbike, I know the 2007* CBR600RR would be the very first bike on my list.  

*make sure it's a 2007 model.  2006 model is slightly different.

Would the GSX-R 750 be on that list, Rogue?

KeS

[UFO]

Here's a little tip.  When you write a review comparing Bike A to Bike B don't mention Bike C 50 times.

[Rogue]

Would the GSX-R 750 be on that list, Rogue?

KeS

It should be huh?  

I have not tried sitting on the Suzuki.  Although I'm thinking the GSXR750 would have lower bars than the CBR600RR.  The RR has ergos that are very similar to my modded Firebolt (helibars/Rider Pegs), which is really perfect for me.  I can ride that all day without much fatigue.  And at 412 lbs wet.....that bike will feel like there was nothing to it when you're flicking it in and out of turns.  My 'Bolt weighs 460 wet and it already feels real easy to ride in the twisties.  

I used to not think so but now I'm convinced.  It's not just the ergos that determine rider fatigue, it is also how much energy a rider exerts while riding the bike.  Even with comfy ergos, a heavy bike will tire you out on a long day ride if you spend a lot of it in the twisties.  A lighter bike that handles well will demand less from you and allow you to ride faster with less energy for longer periods.  

[kevin_stevens]

It should be huh?  

I have not tried sitting on the Suzuki.  Although I'm thinking the GSXR750 would have lower bars than the CBR600RR.  The RR has ergos that are very similar to my modded Firebolt (helibars/Rider Pegs), which is really perfect for me.  I can ride that all day without much fatigue.  And at 412 lbs wet.....that bike will feel like there was nothing to it when you're flicking it in and out of turns.  My 'Bolt weighs 460 wet and it already feels real easy to ride in the twisties.  

I used to not think so but now I'm convinced.  It's not just the ergos that determine rider fatigue, it is also how much energy a rider exerts while riding the bike.  Even with comfy ergos, a heavy bike will tire you out on a long day ride if you spend a lot of it in the twisties.  A lighter bike that handles well will demand less from you and allow you to ride faster with less energy for longer periods.  

Well, seeing where you were going with your CBR recommendation, it seemed like the 750 commonly fell in that same category, so I was curious.

I guess I agree with you in part - I'd just say that the energy exerted depends so much on the ergos that the weight becomes very secondary to having a bike that fits you.  I mean, you'd consider 35lbs a significant chunk of weight, right?    But while I can notice the difference of a full vs empty tank, I don't ever think at the end of a long day "Oh geez, I'm going to fill up, this bike is going to be a pig for the next 75 miles."  I'm also a big believer that smoothness and wind noise/buffeting make up a huge component of rider fatigue.

KeS

[Rogue]

Oh yeah.  The fit of the bike to your body is important as well.  Perfect example is Johnny's findings about the VFR.  He doesn't fit the bike so he doesn't like it's ergos.  Even though, the VFR is one of the most comfortable (in my opinion) sportbikes around.  It has the perfect balance in that it distributes rider weight equally among your arms, butt, and legs.  I also love the fit of my Firebolt.  It has more forward lean, and higher pegs, but its body positioning encourages high speed riding more than the VFR does, yet it doesn't put me in a fetal position with arms stretched out!  

So assuming a good fit, weight would be the next big factor to me.  It's not so much with many people here (including you it sounds like).  But a lot of times it's what you are used to.  For example, it's probably hard for you to imagine how much "easier" it is to ride a 412 lb. bike, being that you are so used to riding a 550 lb. bike (ZX14).  Or not.  I don't know what other bikes you have.  But ridden back to back, say your ZX14 vs the CBR600RR, or the XX vs the RR, it would be easier to ascertain the effects on fatigue.

[kevin_stevens]

Oh yeah.  The fit of the bike to your body is important as well.  Perfect example is Johnny's findings about the VFR.  He doesn't fit the bike so he doesn't like it's ergos.  Even though, the VFR is one of the most comfortable (in my opinion) sportbikes around.  It has the perfect balance in that it distributes rider weight equally among your arms, butt, and legs.  I also love the fit of my Firebolt.  It has more forward lean, and higher pegs, but its body positioning encourages high speed riding more than the VFR does, yet it doesn't put me in a fetal position with arms stretched out!  

So assuming a good fit, weight would be the next big factor to me.  It's not so much with many people here (including you it sounds like).  But a lot of times it's what you are used to.  For example, it's probably hard for you to imagine how much "easier" it is to ride a 412 lb. bike, being that you are so used to riding a 550 lb. bike (ZX14).  Or not.  I don't know what other bikes you have.  But ridden back to back, say your ZX14 vs the CBR600RR, or the XX vs the RR, it would be easier to ascertain the effects on fatigue.

Well, I was comparing most directly to a '03 Gixxer1K, which is the bike I came off of to the ZX14.  It's a good comparison for me because I ran a full circuit Palomar/Zuma run of ~300 miles on the gixxer just beforehand, and the same on the zixxer just after.  I thought both bikes ergos were fairly comfortable for me, but the smoothness, quieter exhaust, and wind protection more than offset weight, and the 14 ended up a clear "comfort" winner as a result.

Weight really only matters much to me when I have to do multiple HARD transitions, and that just doesn't happen very often.  Apart from that, the fatigue is from shifting around on the bike keeping weight on my thighs/toes, and that's pretty much the same.

KeS

[Johnny Monsoon]

You may surprise yourself in that you may come to the realization that you don't actually NEED big power to have BIG fun.  

I find myself honestly pining for my KLR; so big power is very secondary.  Here's the rub though:  Try to find a lightweight bike with modest/adequate power that is as smooth or refined for distance riding as a big-bore open-class bike like the XX, ZX14, ZZR, 'Busa...  

Oddly, this recent volley of sportbikes has gotten me thinking more and more at well spec'd DS bikes.  

[Rogue]

Here's the rub though:  Try to find a lightweight bike with modest/adequate power that is as smooth or refined for distance riding as a big-bore open-class bike like the XX, ZX14, ZZR, 'Busa...  

Hmmmm....a VFR?    

BMW F800 ST
Triumph Sprint ST
Plenty of people have toured on 600's before.  I don't see why a modern 600 wouldn't meet your requirements.

Oddly, this recent volley of sportbikes has gotten me thinking more and more at well spec'd DS bikes.  

But you won't get sportbike handling.

[kevin_stevens]

I find myself honestly pining for my KLR; so big power is very secondary.  Here's the rub though:  Try to find a lightweight bike with modest/adequate power that is as smooth or refined for distance riding as a big-bore open-class bike like the XX, ZX14, ZZR, 'Busa...  

Oddly, this recent volley of sportbikes has gotten me thinking more and more at well spec'd DS bikes.  

http://www.bmwmotorcycles.com/bikes/bike.jsp?b=g650xmoto

KeS

[Johnny Monsoon]

Hmmmm....a VFR?    

BMW F800 ST
Triumph Sprint ST
Plenty of people have toured on 600's before.  I don't see why a modern 600 wouldn't meet your requirements.



But you won't get sportbike handling.

Hmmm,

Too heavy & expensive without performance
Too heavy & expensive
Too heavy

A spec'd DS won't give you sportbike performance?  Maybe not in a straight line, but I'll go toe-to-toe with any sportbike rider off the street on a track with me on a sweet DS bike and very likely hand him his backside.  They corner better than most any beast alive.

[Johnny Monsoon]

http://www.bmwmotorcycles.com/bikes/bike.jsp?b=g650xmoto

KeS

I've had the BMW machines in my sights for a while now.  Oddly, while I've been confused of the F650GS's purpose (or where it would edge out any of the established Big4 bikes or KTM/Aprillia, etc) I find myself really settling up on this one.  I'd rather stay with a 21" front though for offroading if I go the DS route.  The new Honda Transalp seems very impressive and is also in my sights.

[gritsngravy]

Hmmm,

Too heavy & expensive without performance
Too heavy & expensive
Too heavy

A spec'd DS won't give you sportbike performance?  Maybe not in a straight line, but I'll go toe-to-toe with any sportbike rider off the street on a track with me on a sweet DS bike and very likely hand him his backside.  They corner better than most any beast alive.

Nah, don't think so.   Unless your closed course has pot holes and table top jumps the sport bike will have the edge.   Admire the enthusiasm but it's time to be real.  

[Johnny Monsoon]

I've never ridden a well-spec'd DS bike or a motard.

Fixed it for ya!  I've ridden both, and I can say with absolute certainty, that at anything less than pro-racer level, a well spec'd DS/supermoto will outcorner a sportbike on a twisty road; especially if the surface is anything less than absolutely pristine.

[gritsngravy]

 

[skater69]

Hmmm,

Too heavy & expensive without performance
Too heavy & expensive
Too heavy

A spec'd DS won't give you sportbike performance?  Maybe not in a straight line, but I'll go toe-to-toe with any sportbike rider off the street on a track with me on a sweet DS bike and very likely hand him his backside.  They corner better than most any beast alive.

Too heavy & expensive without performance-F800ST?

You obviously haven't ridden one.  It's not cheap but it's about 412lbs dry.....feels light and easy to maneuver....big time.  And plenty of power...not superbike performance but believe me......it goes.  A few suspension mods and the bike would be perfect.....and it's very comfortable.

[kevin_stevens]

Too heavy & expensive without performance-F800ST?

You obviously haven't ridden one.  It's not cheap but it's about 412lbs dry.....feels light and easy to maneuver....big time.  And plenty of power...not superbike performance but believe me......it goes.  A few suspension mods and the bike would be perfect.....and it's very comfortable.

Not compared to his VFR, at least in the side-by-side reviews I've seen.

KeS

[Johnny Monsoon]

 

Wanna race?  Get me to a twisty track with a KLR/DR/KTM etc (especially the latter; Super Duke?) and you can put your bike against me there.  I'll hand you the checkered flag when you finally get caught up.

[Johnny Monsoon]

Too heavy & expensive without performance-F800ST?

You obviously haven't ridden one.  It's not cheap but it's about 412lbs dry.....feels light and easy to maneuver....big time.  And plenty of power...not superbike performance but believe me......it goes.  A few suspension mods and the bike would be perfect.....and it's very comfortable.

No, the heavy and without performance was for the VFR, though the F800ST isn't something I would buy.

[Rogue]

No, the heavy and without performance was for the VFR, though the F800ST isn't something I would buy.

Well we all know by now you hate the VFR.

BTW, Cycle World did do a comparison test of the VFR vs the F800ST.  They chose the VFR because it was faster and it handled better.

[gritsngravy]

Wanna race?  Get me to a twisty track with a KLR/DR/KTM etc (especially the latter; Super Duke?) and you can put your bike against me there.  I'll hand you the checkered flag when you finally get caught up.

OK

[chornbe]

Monsoon, I applaud where you're going with this, taking the time to do such deep comparisons, but aren't you kind of comparing Apples and F-150s?

[Johnny Monsoon]

Monsoon, I applaud where you're going with this, taking the time to do such deep comparisons, but aren't you kind of comparing Apples and F-150s?

Yes, that's true, and somewhat by design.  I wanted to contrast the differences in the two types of bikes despite their similarities (I4, similar tire sizes, similar brakes, similar ergos, etc).  I had expected something different in the CBR, especially given its 6 years of evolution.  I guess I expected that the level of refinement would have closed the gap between a bike like the CBR in comparison to the XX, but that wasn't what I found.

[gritsngravy]

Yes, that's true, and somewhat by design.  I wanted to contrast the differences in the two types of bikes despite their similarities (I4, similar tire sizes, similar brakes, similar ergos, etc).  I had expected something different in the CBR, especially given its 6 years of evolution.  I guess I expected that the level of refinement would have closed the gap between a bike like the CBR in comparison to the XX, but that wasn't what I found.

Honda's been advertising the cbr1000rr as it's RCV derived flag ship SPORT BIKE since it's inception.   The XX is an old school design that was meant to be the top speed king of it's time.   Two very different bikes for two very different missions.   I guess you didn't get the memo.  

[Johnny Monsoon]

Honda's been advertising the cbr1000rr as it's RCV derived flag ship SPORT BIKE since it's inception.   The XX is an old school design that was meant to be the top speed king of it's time.   Two very different bikes for two very different missions.   I guess you didn't get the memo.  

I'm sure I know all this better than you.  However, there's no reason for some things that work well on the XX not to be incorporated into the CBR.  Further, things that make a big difference were omitted in the CBR.  Oddly, the XX shifts FAR better with a shorter throw due to zero linkage to the gearbox.  The XX is also a little more 'under the paint' from the get-go than the CBR.  The XX also has a much smoother airflow than the CBR has ever dreamed of; they're just using displacement to shove that CBR brick through the air instead of aerodynamics, I guess.  There are a host of things that would be far better on the CBR; things that would make the CBR much closer to the XX than it could be.  Oddly, the GSX-R1K is MUCH closer to the XX in ride, feel, torque, smoothness, and shifting than the CBR, which makes the GSX-R superior in just about every way.  So, ultimately, I'm confounded as to why Honda didn't borrow more from already established and primo points to make a smooth, powerful, fast, agile sportbike that was as easy to ride as bikes that it already has, instead of making it feel cheap, cobbled together, and choppy; makes the bike feel much more like Saile's ,92(?) FZR600 (which I actually prefer).

Honda continues to disappoint!  WOOT!!!!!1!!!!!

[tomek]

Couple points.

BMW 800 st weights 485 dry not 416,or ready to go without fuel.Numbers from Cycle World BMW vs VFR comparo. That is real weight,not some manufacturer dream.With fuel it is over 500 pounds,I would not call it light weight.

With barely 80 rwhp you won`t find many people from liter bikes/XX/ZX12-14/etc crowd who would even briefly consider that bike.Yes,,,,,,,,power corrupts. It is hard to downsize in hp department.

G1k is a couch of liter bikes,at least older models were,I rode 04,very smooth and comfortable,it did remained my cbr1100xx,made me think,,,,,,,"hm maybe I can downsize to just one bike"

CBR1100xx suits tall people better,long reach to the bars,I`m 6 01,190 ,long,ape like arms,bike fits me very well.

ZX 14 is much,much better bike then XX in I would say in all areas,brakes,suspension ,handling.Motor is almost XX smooth.Feels much lighter,motor is fucking nuclear.The only thing that sucks is a seat,but it is easy fix.

I prefer linkage to gearbox as it allows infinite adjustments,in XX lever is either too high or too low,impossible to get it just right.Pure sport bikes have very low inertia gearbox,engine,gears need to be shifted really fast,or it is not smooth.
Gixxers have the best shifting gearboxes in sport bike world I would guess.

So what was my point ???????I don`t know

[Johnny Monsoon]

I hadn't considered the ZX14 as I was trying to step down to a lighter weight class, but maybe that isn't the best way to go.  I dunno.

Honestly, the Versys is really getting my attention.  Having been incredibly impressed with the Ninja 650R, I can see the Versys working extremely well for my needs.  Especially with hard luggage.

Something that doesn't eat tires, gets great mpg and won't leave me feeling like I've given up everything in power is on the menu.  Honesly, the 650R feels like it has a lot more punch than the VFR.  It was a helluva lot easier to ride around town than the CBR, and is a lot lighter than the XX (or similarly classed bikes).

[gritsngravy]

I'm sure I know all this better than you.  However, there's no reason for some things that work well on the XX not to be incorporated into the CBR.  Further, things that make a big difference were omitted in the CBR.  Oddly, the XX shifts FAR better with a shorter throw due to zero linkage to the gearbox.  The XX is also a little more 'under the paint' from the get-go than the CBR.  The XX also has a much smoother airflow than the CBR has ever dreamed of; they're just using displacement to shove that CBR brick through the air instead of aerodynamics, I guess.  There are a host of things that would be far better on the CBR; things that would make the CBR much closer to the XX than it could be.  Oddly, the GSX-R1K is MUCH closer to the XX in ride, feel, torque, smoothness, and shifting than the CBR, which makes the GSX-R superior in just about every way.  So, ultimately, I'm confounded as to why Honda didn't borrow more from already established and primo points to make a smooth, powerful, fast, agile sportbike that was as easy to ride as bikes that it already has, instead of making it feel cheap, cobbled together, and choppy; makes the bike feel much more like Saile's ,92(?) FZR600 (which I actually prefer).

Honda continues to disappoint!  WOOT!!!!!1!!!!!

    You know, I think it's time for you to go gently in that good cruiser.  

[Johnny Monsoon]

    You know, I think it's time for you to go gently in that good cruiser.  

  only a guy who's never ridden with me would say something so goofy!

[TuffguyF4i]

I sold my VFR for my XX.  I love the power of the XX and i'm glad that i got ride of the VFR.  However, i do find that the 'stretch' forward feel on the XX tires me out more then the body positioning on the VFR.  
Handeling wise, i think the vfr and xx are very close.  The XX to me feels very very planted in an agressive sweeper but is not that much fun to flick around in the twisties.  Although, it can be done quite well w/o luggage.  

I jump back and forth from my F4i to my XX, and all things considered, i have more fun on my F4i then i ever have on my XX when it is just me.  2-up riding for a long distance on the XX is always a good time and my wife really doesn't complain.  Thats what i really bought it for.

Here in the northeast, you end up riding 100 miles to get to any decient roads.  When i was living down south i was 40 miles from awesome roads.  I never would have even bought a second touring bike if i hadn't made this northern migration.

[emillard]

OK, here's my 0.02.

I have an 06 gixxer 750, 02 XX, and an 04 ZZR1200.

I hardley ever ride the gixxer.  I thought that dropping down to a lighter bike with less displacement would allow me to carve up the twisties all day.  Well that didn't happen.  The ergos only allow 200 mile days for me and the torque is...non existent compared to the 1200 and the XX.  

The ZZR has a freight train of a motor and not much else.  It pulls like a Chevelle and rattles and buzzes like one too.  The ergos are good, but there are so many vibes, that I can barely ride 200 miles on it.  

The XX is the sweet bike.  Yeah, it's down on torque a bit to the ZZR, but it's so damn smooth that I don't care.  It's all day comfortable and handles very well.  For whatever reason, I'm more confident on it in the twisties than the gixxer.  

In the end, the gixxer will have to go and so will the ZZR.  The XX is just so darn good and doing a lot of things very well.  It only lacks great wind protection, but you can't have everything.

I've ridden a ZX14, and I do love them.  However, they can't be set-up nearly as well for touring as the XX.  

The XX rules.  I only wish they still made them.

[Johnny Monsoon]

I've ridden a ZX14, and I do love them.  However, they can't be set-up nearly as well for touring as the XX.  

Really?  I'm honestly shocked by this; it would seem that bike would be ideal (maybe even moreso than the XX) for that sort of work.  

As I'm thinking about it, one of the really big differences in the 14 is simply that it has so much brute strength; the XX was designed to knock the ZX11D off the top speed podium, but it would seem the 14 was really designed to break a 10sec 1/4 mile.  That it can handily off the XX seems to be a by-product.

Still, lots of folks are saying the 14 is smoother and handles far better than the XX; I don't doubt either with the years of refinement between the two designes.  The reach to the bars is shorter on the 14, isn't it?  Seemed so when I got on one (static; never ridden one).  That's probably my #1 ergo complaint (maybe my only complaint) on the XX.

My hat's off to the 14!

[kevin_stevens]

Really?  I'm honestly shocked by this; it would seem that bike would be ideal (maybe even moreso than the XX) for that sort of work.  

As I'm thinking about it, one of the really big differences in the 14 is simply that it has so much brute strength; the XX was designed to knock the ZX11D off the top speed podium, but it would seem the 14 was really designed to break a 10sec 1/4 mile.  That it can handily off the XX seems to be a by-product.

Still, lots of folks are saying the 14 is smoother and handles far better than the XX; I don't doubt either with the years of refinement between the two designes.  The reach to the bars is shorter on the 14, isn't it?  Seemed so when I got on one (static; never ridden one).  That's probably my #1 ergo complaint (maybe my only complaint) on the XX.

My hat's off to the 14!

This is what I really want for sport-touring on the ZX - I just don't want to pay for them.  
http://http://www.corbin.com/kawasaki/kzx14bag.shtml

KeS

[emillard]

This is what I really want for sport-touring on the ZX - I just don't want to pay for them.  
http://http://www.corbin.com/kawasaki/kzx14bag.shtml

KeS

Yeah, those bags look good...but they don't hold crap.  Yes the ZX will outhandle the XX and it darn well should.  However...because the front cowling / windscreen is swept at such a low angle, heli-bars really don't do much.  They don't raise the clip-ons much because of clearance issues with the fairing.  To my knowledge, you can't do much to get around this.  You also can't mount any larger hard bags on the ZX (think Givi E36).  So, now your stuck with soft bags or those expensive ones from Corbin that don't hold anything.  As well, the rearsets are already set in a more aggressive position stock than the XX's are stock.  So by getting a peg-lowering kit, you are still nowhere near the peg-relocation thing on the XX.  

Don't get me wrong, I really want the ZX to work better for touring than the XX.  Hell, I had a ZZR and would have loved to stay with mother Kawi....especially since it's a currently produced bike.  However, looking at the really reallies, the ZX is just not as versatile as the XX when it comes to touring.  

I guess it depends on what your definition of touring is, however.  For me, it's hard bags and relaxed ergos (as much as possible) on a GT bike.  

[Heath3n]

You and I seem to have simialiar tastes in bikes Johnny. It also seems we have owned some of the same bikes(xx, vfr) . I know this will seem biased, because I own one now, but have you ever considered a ZZR1200? If you like the bird, you'd like the ZZR. The ZZR does everything better than the blackbird does, and it's a lot more comfortable to boot. It doesn't have FI, but that was never a deal breaker for me anyways. Go take one on a testride if you ever get the chance.  Here's a comparo between the 2 : http://www.motorcycle.com/shoot-outs/honda-cbr1100xx-vs-kawasaki-zzr1200-15400.html

[Johnny Monsoon]

You and I seem to have simialiar tastes in bikes Johnny. It also seems we have owned some of the same bikes(xx, vfr) . I know this will seem biased, because I own one now, but have you ever considered a ZZR1200? If you like the bird, you'd like the ZZR. The ZZR does everything better than the blackbird does, and it's a lot more comfortable to boot. It doesn't have FI, but that was never a deal breaker for me anyways. Go take one on a testride if you ever get the chance.  Here's a comparo between the 2 : http://www.motorcycle.com/shoot-outs/honda-cbr1100xx-vs-kawasaki-zzr1200-15400.html

I love the ZZR, but there's a few things keeping me away from it.  I've come to really love EFI.  The mileage on the ZZR is an issue too; I'd like to get a bike that gets good mileage.  I'm getting away from powerful bikes these days; I'd much rather have fun ones (which is pointing me to DS bikes.  That F800GS makes me all warm and fuzzy inside!).  The ZZR, like the ZX14, XX, 'Busa and others are just heavy too.  I've rediscovered the joy of a truly light bike, and lighter has become better for 9/10s of my needs.

So, while bikes like this are marvels of engineering, they aren't as desireable for me as they used to be.  I still want to see them in this world, but I'm not sure I want them in my garage anymore.

[emillard]

I know this will seem biased, because I own one now, but have you ever considered a ZZR1200? If you like the bird, you'd like the ZZR. The ZZR does everything better than the blackbird does, and it's a lot more comfortable to boot.

I'll have to disagree with this one.  I own both a ZZR (my second) and an XX and I can't think of anything the ZZR does better than the XX except for providing more wind protection.  The ZZR is buzzy as hell, and comes with more than one neutral. Yeah, it's torquey as all get out and has reasonably good ergos, however the XX is smooth as silk, shifts better, and handles better to boot.

[Heath3n]

I'll have to disagree with this one.  I own both a ZZR (my second) and an XX and I can't think of anything the ZZR does better than the XX except for providing more wind protection.  The ZZR is buzzy as hell, and comes with more than one neutral. Yeah, it's torquey as all get out and has reasonably good ergos, however the XX is smooth as silk, shifts better, and handles better to boot.

Maybe one of us had/has a lemon then. I'll agree that the ZZR is buzzier than the XX, but not annoyingly so. The shifting on my ZZR has been flawless so far, and it definitely handles better than the XX I owned. Seems you liked them enough to own a second one?

[Johnny Monsoon]

I've read more than one motorcycle review stating that between the XX and the ZZR, the ZZR is the better handling.  Again, I can believe it since the ZZR is a newer bike than the XX is (consider the XX is an older design to begin with that Honda simply chose not to update in any meaningful way).  To that end, I think it says something about the design in that such a much older design is so close to the ZZR's capabilities.

Oh, and I like a bike that feels 'alive'.  The XX does a better job than most bigger Hondas at having some personality, but it is flirting with 'appliance-ism'

[emillard]

Maybe one of us had/has a lemon then. I'll agree that the ZZR is buzzier than the XX, but not annoyingly so. The shifting on my ZZR has been flawless so far, and it definitely handles better than the XX I owned. Seems you liked them enough to own a second one?

Yes, I did like it enough to buy another one after I plowed into a deer with my first one.  However, that was before my first ride on an XX.  I guess the handling can be subjective, but they both handle amazingly well for the porkers that they are.  

[emillard]

I've read more than one motorcycle review stating that between the XX and the ZZR, the ZZR is the better handling.  Again, I can believe it since the ZZR is a newer bike than the XX is (consider the XX is an older design to begin with that Honda simply chose not to update in any meaningful way).  To that end, I think it says something about the design in that such a much older design is so close to the ZZR's capabilities.

Oh, and I like a bike that feels 'alive'.  The XX does a better job than most bigger Hondas at having some personality, but it is flirting with 'appliance-ism'

The ZZR was outdated when it was released.  What sport(y) bike still had carbs in 2002?  As well, the ZZR is a basically an updated ZX-11.  That is some ancient technology.  There is no denying the engine in the ZZR, however.  Old or not, it will rip your arms off like nothing short of a 'Busa.

[Johnny Monsoon]

Really, I think all the bikes in this class are amazing machines for their intended purposes.  I believe people try to shove them into other duties, then become dissatisfied or dissapointed in their performance (usually due to the very things that make them good ST mounts).  In the end, I think we're splitting hairs on performance aspects between these bikes.  The newer bikes certainly have more power available, but I think handling is only marginally better one way or the other; and is probably more related to the pilot's ability than any limitation of the motorcycle itself.

I'm pretty certain it is largely impossible to make a poor decision when trying to choose between any of these machines.

[emillard]

I believe people try to shove them into other duties, then become dissatisfied or dissapointed in their performance (usually due to the very things that make them good ST mounts).  

I'm pretty certain it is largely impossible to make a poor decision when trying to choose between any of these machines.

Yes, we are splitting hairs.  You hit the nail on the head when you said that people become disappointed because they try to shove these bikes into other duties.  People start complaining when their ZZR won't hang with a Gixxer750 in the corners or is as comfortable as a C14 on the slab.  Yeah, but the reaons you buy an XX / ZZR is to have the "one" bike that does most things well.  You can spend a lot of money on any bike to try to make it into something it's not, then salivate when you see the "stock" version of your bike on Ebay.