It’s a proven bike. I’m more of a Yamaha man (R1 revision was disappointing), but I’ll be the first to admit that the 2009/2010 CBR sh*** all over the competition. I’ve ridden one myself, and it’s just so damn easy to ride fast. I can’t make direct comparisons as I’ve not ridden every current 1000, but many “in the know” people have said the Honda is the most well-rounded of the bunch, even compared to the BMW and new ZX10R.

Paint-job in the pic stinks of BMW though.

Report this comment

That’s just a fancy paint job for the feeble of heart. (^_^ )
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fred M. says:
Honda’s trick-new transmission from MotoGP will probably end up in CBRs in the future.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I hope it happens before i become a weak old fart that can’t get a 1000 of it’s side stand…lol.

Report this comment

This is really great material guys; I love a good pissing contest.

In case you’ve got your rulers handy: 10 years of experience, maybe 20,000 miles, no wrecks yet.

Report this comment

I certainly share your enthusiasm for sporting twins….I have had a few RC51′s and a TLR at some point over 120,000 kms on those in fact…..and I wish the Japanese continued with them….but homologation is all they were interested in…however

I would disagree however on your wider powerband suggestion on the basis of my experience…ie at least with RC 51 and TLR come on at 6500 and are into the rev limiter at 10,000rpm….modern inline 4′s are well into the good stuff at 75-8000 rpm and climb well into the 13 range…..but on I4 1000′s I really dont use much above 10 on the street…and they also seem to pull quite a bit smoother and without protest at 4-5000rpm….1000cc twins will flutter if you load them at those revs….I have always felt that from experience that the I4 sport bikes were much more civilized than 1000cc v twin sport bikes especially at parking lot speeds…..we all have opinions I suppose

And on the center tire wear issue…..I work on bikes for a living…so I can say this to be true…a common scenario..a younger inexperienced person comes to the shop with his bike for a new rear tire….I ask him how my Km’s on it he says 3000kms…and its only worn at the center…
conversely….I get older more experienced riders(like me) on the same type of bike..the tire is worn even right to the edges…all the tire is used…..the mileage 7800kms !! I good rider will always say……I watch my freeway speed..but I turn up on the twisty stuff…and it shows….in how the tire is worn and where…..this applies particularly with the recent crop of I4 sportbikes….with over 160 RWHP

remember why the Daytona 200 became a 600cc venue ?? the faster a(any) bike runs under power in a straight line..the rear tire will always spin a bit faster than the bike is actually going..due to load and ever increasing drag this increases proportionally the faster the bike travels..they estimated at the time that at 200mph the rear tire was actually going 212 or more…..

yes the braking and accel forces at any speed account for a good portion of wear on a street bike…..especially on a twin with its more pronounced off throttle characteristics

but I will always stick to “be easy” on the top of the tire keep it cool….and use more throttle in the turns….

I didnt copy this from a internet site BTW

Report this comment

Report this comment

Report this comment

Report this comment

Report this comment

You wrote: “But it’s been this way for years, why stop now?”

Because the performance envelope of the latest bikes is so far beyond the capabilities of the average buyer. You’ve got street riders who lack the fine throttle control of a racer trying to ride bikes that make too much horsepower at the high end and too much torque at the low end. These riders become herky-jerky and lack smoothness. As the day goes on, they tire out faster and ride even worse. What they need is not a 180hp bike — it’s a 120hp bike that revs slower, has a wider power band, and a flatter torque curve.

Take the average rider on a liter-class state-of-the-art sport bike and put him on something like a Triumph Speed Triple, Buell 1125R, or Ducati Monster 1100 EVO and he’ll rider faster and better.

Report this comment

Souns like we have roughly similar levels of experience, at least in mileage/kilometerage. Sorry, but I took a bit of offense at what I (mistakenly?) took to be a swipe at my level of riding experience.

In my 35+ years of riding, I have come to believe that the torque, tractability, and balance of V-twin sport bikes, combined with the lower RPM range in which they operate, make them a far better choice for street sport riding than I4 liter class bikes. Sure, my Buell is going to top out in the 160+ MPH range, probably twenty-some lower than the CBR1000RR, but I’m going to be faster on the Buell, on a twisty road, than I am going to be on the CBR.

What flat-centers tires faster on liter-class bikes is not top speed. The center wears out first because acceleration, engine braking, and actual braking scuff rubber off the upright rear tire. Each time you downshift to engine brake, upshift and release the clutch, roll on the throttle or roll off the throttle, you will scuff the rear tire at the contact patch. The very fact that this wear happens on the street, on bikes that seldom go triple-digit speeds, is evidence of that. Generally, rolling at a steady state, it’s not scuffing and shedding rubber, which is why you don’t see front tires wear out at the same rate as rear tires, regardless of the top speeds attained.

Report this comment