 |
| Sunday Ride: Face it, we’re not going to change any negative stereotypes about motorcyclists with the looks of this crew. |
Last year’s Kawasaki ZX-6R has been thoroughly analyzed by the world press since its redesign in 1998. What did they have to say?
Well, on the positive side (1) it has a great motor (broad spread of power, high peak horsepower — usable and smooth); (2) it feels light and flickable (turns in well — almost too well for some tastes).
On the negative side, the 1998 redesign of the ZX-6R yielded the following general consensus, including (1) front brake has decent power but lacks feel (the word “wooden” popped up more than once); (2) the front end, in general, feels “vague” — you don’t know what the front tire is doing (is it about to let go?!); (3) the suspension needs to be sorted (spring rate and valving is off — in the opinion of some, way off).
Well, enough about the past, Kawasaki claims to have addressed all of the shortcomings, and even improved the killer motor. To quote from Kawasaki’s ad copy, its new sportbikes “have been sculpted, tightened and honed . . . to create the most dominating sportbikes on the planet.” (Side note — who used the word “dominating” first, Honda or Kawasaki?).
Has Kawasaki delivered? S**t yes!!
I’ve just ridden a 2000 Kawasaki ZX-6R more than 430 miles in four days — including extensive freeway mileage and canyon carving. In the past few months, I’ve also spent extensive time on a CBR600F4 (including a track day at Willow Springs here in California) and have even ridden Yamaha’s R6. What has emerged from this experience? A conclusion shared by at least one other journalist who has spent extensive time with the new ZX-6R (more about that below) — this bike kicks ass!
Let’s address the issues the press (and riders) had with the prior generation ZX-6R, in the order discussed above.
First of all, the redesigned brakes — Kawasaki has a new, differential-bore, 6 piston caliper with new brake pad material, gripping dual 300mm floating front discs. How do they work? Superbly. Offering excellent feel and outstanding power, I was more impressed the more I rode (particularly through the twisty stuff).
As I mentioned Friday, I did get a chance to ride Honda’s F4 again today, and, in my opinion, the Kawasaki’s new brakes are substantially superior to those of the F4 (and the F4’s aren’t bad). Kawasaki has obviously tested Yamaha’s R6 extensively, and has been aiming to outperform the R6’s class-leading brakes (particularly, the front brake). I’m not ready to say that the Kawasaki’s front brake is better than the front brake on the R6, but it is probably just as good (if not better).
How about the vague front end? Kawasaki also attacked this head on by (1) increasing trail by 4mm; (2) increasing fork pitch by 5mm (the distance between the fork legs); (3) replacing the tapered roller bearings in the steering head with ball bearings (a trick learned from Yamaha); and (4) changing spring rate and damping specs in the fork. This, and other chassis tweaks (including revised shock linkage and stiffer swingarm) have resulted in a great handling motorcycle — and one that provides quite good feedback from the front tire (goodbye, vagueness).
The suspension? Excellent fork that is both firm (no severe dive under hard braking) yet supple enough to offer a smooth ride. The rear shock seemed a little stiff over ripples in the pavement while accelerating (something I probably could have cured with the compression and rebound clickers), but performed well overall.
A related development is the change in tire sizes — both front and rear. The front tire is now a 120/65-17 versus last year’s 120/60-17. This is the same front tire size used by the new Aprilia RSV Mille Special Edition. The 65 series front tire, according to Kawasaki, offers more grip surface in turns and smoother handling. Coupled with a new, larger 180 section rear tire (last year’s was a 170) stability is again improved, along with cornering grip.
One of the most striking things about the new ZX-6R is its incredible combination of flickability and high speed stability. For many years, this was the holy grail of sportbike handling. You simply couldn’t have both. Now, you can.
The ZX-6R is so stable at high speeds you simply wouldn’t believe it. To call it “composed” really doesn’t say enough. Simply put, you feel relaxed and confident cruising at high speeds.
At the same time, the Kawasaki is still very flickable in the twisty stuff. It turns in quickly, but doesn’t feel “tippy”. After you ride the bike for a while, the handling is always reassuring and predictable.
What about the engine? Well, Kawasaki didn’t need to do too much here. In the opinion of many, the Kawasaki motor was already the class leader. Nevertheless, Kawasaki tweaked the motor substantially, including several new internal parts (lighter crankshaft, for example), an entirely new combustion chamber, and significantly higher compression ratio. The motor is awesome. Moving 379 pounds of dry weight (9 pounds lighter than last year, according to Kawasaki), the ZX-6R is very quick for a 600. Moreover, it has a very broad powerband.
Around town, you could make quick progress at as low as 4,000 rpm on the tach. Between four and 6,000 rpm, if you’re in the mood to cruise, the ZX-6R is satisfyingly fast. Between six and 9,000 rpm, the ZX-6R really wakes up, and will take you into another dimension. It is above 9,000 rpm, however, where the ZX-6R really screams.
If you ride a 600 long enough (and I put in long hours on the ZX-6R), the power can become a bit unimpressive. This never happened on the ZX-6R. I never really felt like I wanted a bigger bore motor. The light weight and impressive 599cc powerplant kept me happy all day long. Back to back with the F4, the ZX-6R seemed to have about the same mid-range thrust, but substantially more power above 8,000 rpm (where the F4 eventually seems to flatten out). The ZX-6R motor is also much smoother (less vibration than the F4 powerplant).
Kawasaki didn’t do much with the ergonomics and, once again, it didn’t need to. The ZX-6R, like Honda’s F4, is an excellent balance between a severe sportbike and a sport tourer. The riding position allows all-day comfort, marred only by a seat that becomes uncomfortable (for me, at least) after about 40 minutes in the saddle. The redesigned fairing provides excellent wind protection for this class of motorcycle (probably the best).
Until Triumph’s new 600 makes its debut, the only real contenders for 600cc class champion are Kawasaki, Honda and Yamaha. With similar ergonomics, the ZX-6R and CBR600F4 really go head-to-head, and, in my opinion, the 2000 ZX-6R comes out on top just about everywhere. Yamaha’s R6 may handle just a bit better than the ZX-6R (I did feel quicker on the R6 in the first ten minutes I rode it — the ZX-6R took a little more time to reach the same comfort level), and it is probably more “flickable”, but its other characteristics, again, in my opinion, put it behind the ZX-6R overall. The R6 has a more severe riding position, far less wind protection from its tiny fairing, and, this year at least, a less impressive motor.
As I said at the beginning of this article, the only other road test I have seen on the ZX-6R draws similar conclusions to my own. England’s Motor Cycle News flatly declares the 2000 ZX-6R the “best 600 yet”. One of MCN’s few gripes (as I also noted) is that the ZX-6R lacks a low fuel indicator light (you simply know you need to switch to reserve when you run out of gas).
I guess we can commend Kawasaki for truth in advertising. The new ZX-6R really is “sculpted, tightened and honed”. Kawasaki had a good package to begin with, and they thoroughly addressed the weak points of last year’s ZX-6R. Good job, Kawasaki.
