This article was originally published in the August 2000 issue of Sport Rider.
Until this year, the Yamaha YZF-R1 has ruled the open-class roost with an iron fist. Like other landmark motorcycles before it, the R1's performance and design single-handedly changed the established way of thinking about sportbikes, inspiring quite of bit of flattering mimicry in the features of competitor's subsequent machinery. "Is it better than the R1?" has been the comparative catch-phrase of the past two years.
These are highly competitive times, however, and Yamaha's rivals were getting tired of all the R1-speak. So their reaction was expected: the competition returned this year with highly improved models to challenge the leader. While one manufacturer took an excellent platform and administered strategic upgrades (Kawasaki's ZX-9R), the other basically tossed the old design—which had gone through several editions since its '93 inception—out the window and came back with a completely new design (Honda CBR929RR).
But, in the meantime, Kunihiko Miwa and his Yamaha R-series design team knew this was coming, and weren’t exactly sitting on their hands. Although the basic overall package remains the same, there are more than 400 changes to the new 2000 model, all aimed at refining the R1 to keep it ahead of the two latest threats to its dominance.
The Honda CBR929RR ("The Big Red Dragon Awakens," June, '00) and Kawasaki ZX-9R ("Coming Up Nines," April, '00) are two of the most serious challengers to Yamaha's liter-bike champ. We came away from both bikes raving about their acceleration and handling capabilities, and knew they were going to give the R1 a run for its money. But do either have what it takes to be the new top dog? We flogged all three bikes together over 1000 miles of canyon, city, highway and racetrack pavement to find out. And it wasn't easy….
City Poseurs
One of the great aspects about open-class bikes is their instant access to gobs of torque, and these three machines are no exception. Using power to zip out of a tight traffic situation or holeshot a pack of four-wheeled urban denizens to gain better access to a lane is literally as simple as twisting the right hand grip. All three possess great throttle response coupled with quick-revving motors that allow you to make use of that instant-on power without having to think about shifting or being in the powerband.
There's no real standout engine-wise among these three, but if you were to nitpick—and we really mean nitpick—to keep this comparison from turning into an "All motorcycles are great: We investigate" shootout, we'd pick Yamaha's motor by a smidge over Kawasaki's, with the Honda shadowing both of them. The R1 exhibits near-perfect carburetion, a smooth, progressive clutch with excellent feel, and a slick, yet positive-shifting gearbox permits you to access the engine's stupendous low-to-midrange torque without much effort.
The ZX-9R is extremely close in most respects, and its powerplant almost feels a tad livelier coming off idle—which can be a boon in this environment and a bane in others (more on that later). Some may even prefer its lighter-feeling clutch and shifting compared to the other two. And the Kawasaki definitely has the best-sounding exhaust note of the bunch.
Not only is the Honda the featherweight of the group at 434 pounds with a full tank of petrol, but also it feels smaller dimensionally from the rider's perch, and that can make you feel a bit more confident in tight traffic situations. Comparatively speaking, the CBR requires a shade more throttle and rpm to get the same acceleration as the R1 and 9R. The tables are turned in the braking department, however, with the CBR's binders offering the best response, power and feel in urban situations; the ZX-9R's six-piston calipers are close in most respects. The R1's brake pads were changed this year to soften their response a tad, and while they still provide fantastic power in the canyon and on the racetrack, we found their response to be a bit lacking when you're not constantly riding aggressively, requiring more lever effort.
Another urban word of note: we’ve heard that due to the R1’s popularity, thieving scumbags have been targeting this bike more often, so you would be keen to purchase some serious anti-theft accessories.
Highway Droning
As far as ergonomics go, none of these bikes are torture racks—but the Kawasaki definitely has the friendliest seating position, with the highest-set bars, generous legroom and cushiest seat. Its engine is definitely the smoothest of the bunch, with better wind protection from its fairing than the comparatively skimpy windscreens on the other two.
The Honda falls behind with a slightly more aggressive riding posture, but the reach to the bars is short, and the pegs are placed high enough for good ground clearance, yet still provide decent legroom. However, the CBR buzzes a bit at the handlebar and footpegs between 4500 to 5000 rpm at light throttle, which is right in the 60 to 70 mph highway cruising range. The mirrors are good, providing a decent rearward view (when they’re not fuzzed out by vibration).
In relation to the other two, the Yamaha has the raciest seating position, but we wouldn’t label it uncomfortable by any means. Seat-to-bar relationship is short, and the new slimmed-down tank works with the more canted slope of the seat to put the rider further forward for better weight distribution—without forcing him into a GP tuck. The windscreen is tiny compared to the other two, though it offers better protection than the Honda’s. The new R1 is definitely buzzy, vibrating incessantly at the bars from 4500 to 5000 rpm (65 to 75 mph range). The new mirrors are much improved over the previous units.
Gas mileage was close among all three bikes, with the Kawasaki usually being the most frugal, averaging approximately 175 miles before you needed to move the petcock over to reserve (the other two forego the petcock in lieu of a low fuel warning light). The R1 would average almost 170, while the CBR’s low fuel light would usually come on around 165 miles.
Racetrack Wrangling
Segueing to the high-speed confines of Willow Spring's ultra-fast, nine-turn main road course, and the tighter, more technical 11-turn Streets of Willow circuit allowed us to really put these three bikes through the paces to see which had the goods at the limit. After slipping on a set of Metzeler's new MEZ Rennsport radials (see sidebar, page 32) to each contestant, the SR Thrash crew was let loose to sort it out, with the editor assigned to the task of cutting timed laps on each bike at both tracks.
For being the most “streetable” of the three bikes, the Kawasaki doesn’t make any excuses. On the big track, its stupendous motor powers the 9R off the corners and down the straights with uninhibited zeal. The brakes are strong and fade-free with lots of feel, and the chassis remains fairly unruffled through the triple-digit speeds of Turn Eight. We say “fairly”, because the suspension—while damped well—could use some slightly stiffer springs; the bike would tend to rock a bit on weight transfer, making things a bit busier than we’d like. Still, the ZX-9R was right in the hunt with a 1:27.33 lap time.
On the tighter Streets of Willow course, however, one of the minor annoyances we cited in our original road test—the rather abrupt off/on throttle response—turned into a glaring problem. It was difficult to make a smooth transition onto the throttle midcorner, upsetting the chassis and often causing the bike to go off-line. The Kawasaki is the quickest-turning of the three bikes, but it was largely unable to take advantage of that asset due to the instability caused by its sudden acceleration. It was hard work hustling the ZX-9R around the Streets, reflected in its 1:14.46 lap time.
For the R1 and CBR, however, it was close—very close. On the big track, there was nothing between the two as far as chassis feel and performance. Both were solid, stable platforms, with excellent suspension characteristics that kept weight transfer and/or gnarly midcorner pavement from upsetting the bike unnecessarily. A slight nod goes to the Honda for its outstanding brakes (the R1 requires a bit more lever pressure to stop hard), but the Yamaha holds a slight advantage in the engine department (a bit more horsepower to rail through the fast stuff). While the CBR may steer quicker, the Yamaha feels more planted midcorner. In the end, a gnat’s eyelash separated the two: the CBR turned a 1:27.01, the R1 carded a 1:26.96.
On the smaller Streets course, though, each bike’s attributes became more pronounced. The Yamaha required far more muscle to flick it through the tighter turns, yet felt a tad more stable midcorner; the CBR’s awesome brakes required far less work for deep corner entries, but the Yamaha’s motor was stronger off the corner exits and through the short straights. The Honda seemed to turn-in sharper, but the R1’s precise carburetion allowed earlier throttle application. When the watches stopped, though, some advantages carried more weight than others: CBR929RR—1:13.53; YZF-R1—1:13.12.
Canyon Carvers
Here's where the objective testing evaluations tended to get subjective, because the bikes were so close in performance, the reduced speeds of public roads neutralized much of the advantages we encountered on the racetrack. Even after repeated switching among the three bikes during an extended street jaunt, our testers often came back raving about the motorcycle they just rode; but when queried as to whether it was better or worse than the others, an intensely thoughtful look accompanied by a long silence would usually follow. Distilled down to their purest form, the evaluations eventually came down to rider "feel," and the bike's ability to inspire confidence.
In the tighter canyon roads, the Kawasaki has a few aces up its sleeve. It’s the quickest steering bike of the three, and the more upright ergonomics permit increased leverage on the bars to accentuate that effect. The motor’s quick-revving nature (especially off the bottom) and slick transmission equaled a bike that can give the Honda and Yamaha more than their share of fits.
The only problem is that if the pace heats up enough that you should need to dial up some juice from a closed throttle anywhere over 6000 rpm in midcorner, the ZX-9R’s abrupt throttle response will again rear its ugly head. Although really only a minor irritation on the street, it’s enough to possibly ruin a perfect relationship.
Choosing between the CBR and the R1 in the canyons, however, was a tough call. Here are two sportbikes that get the job done, with no major faults to speak of; only distinct personalities that possess a slight advantage in one area or another. The Honda is supremely flickable, with a lithe, light feel that inspires you to go into the next corner just a little deeper and carry a little more corner speed. While the R1 may desire a heavier hand for steering input due to its lower bar placement, its solid, planted feel works with the seamless carburetion of the supremely torquey and responsive motor to promote ever-higher midcorner and exit speeds.
When pressed for a decision between the two, however, our testers grudgingly leaned toward the R1. And the most common theme in the decision invariably tended to be confidence—the Yamaha’s chassis seemed to impart a feel that led to more communication between the road and rider—and the motor. The R1 powerplant simply cranks out the jam in all areas of the rpm range.
Conclusion
As far as open-class shootouts go, this was by far the most difficult to call. All three bikes are supremely capable machines with performances that have set new standards for the liter-sportbike category.
Don’t write off the Kawasaki simply because we keep complaining about the abrupt off/on throttle response. At anything other than a nine-tenths riding pace on the street, the ZX-9R can more than hold its own against the competition, and under an expert throttle hand, can deal with them. We’re still conducting testing to remedy the throttle response ills, and are getting close to the cure—we’ll let you know the results as soon as possible.
Making a selection between the CBR929RR and the YZF-R1 is like choosing between getting paid $10 million now, or receiving $2 million a year for five years—it’s all about how you feel at the moment. It’s so close that selecting one over the other is almost an injustice.
When push came to shove, however, the Yamaha YZF-R1 just eked out the tiniest advantage over the Honda CBR929RR. It took continuous running back and forth through the canyon roads of Southern California, however, before we could even come to a consensus. But there’s a tangible sense of security in the Yamaha’s handling and strength in its motor that can’t be ignored, and that was enough to sway our testers. The Yamaha R1 stands up and makes the grade—again.
Test Notes
KAWASAKI ZX-9R
+ Mondo motor, slick transmission
+ Best ergonomics
+ Great ground clearance
- Abrupt throttle response
- Spring rates are a tad soft
- Rear spring preload hard to determine
X Fix that throttle response, and you got a contenda
HONDA CBR929RR
+ Lightest, smallest feeling bike in the group
+ Outstanding front brakes
+ Well-sorted fuel injection
- Motor could use a shade more power
- Vibrates a bit at cruising speeds
- Give us a minute, we're thinkin'
X It’s on par with the R1 (see the R1’s Test Notes)
YAMAHA YZF-R1
+ Great motor, flawless carburetion
+ Vastly improved riding position
+ Does even better horn monos
- Brakes require more effort than last year's model
- Vibrates a bit at cruising speeds
- Give us a minute, we're thinkin'
X It’s on par with the CBR (see the CBR’s Test Notes)
Suspension Settings:
KAWASAKI ZX-9R
FRONT: Preload: 4 lines showing; Rebound damping: 4 clicks out from full stiff; Compression damping: 4 clicks out from full stiff.
REAR: Preload: 3 turns in from stock; Rebound damping: 3 clicks out from full stiff; Compression damping: 10 clicks out from full stiff.
HONDA CBR929RR
FRONT: Preload: maximum; Rebound damping: 1.50 turns out from full stiff; Compression damping: 2 turns out from full stiff.
REAR: Preload: position 7 of 9; Rebound damping: .75 turn out from full stiff; Compression damping: .25 turn out from full stiff.
YAMAHA YZF-R1
FRONT: Preload: 3 lines showing; Rebound damping: 6 clicks out from full stiff; Compression damping: 4 clicks out from full stiff.
REAR: Preload: position 6 of 9; Rebound damping: 9 clicks out from full stiff; Compression damping: 11 clicks out from full stiff.
SR Opinions:
With every comparison test we do, I find that at some point there's the "moment of truth," when I know the bike I'm riding is my favorite. Sometimes the moment comes early in the test, sometimes later; with these three bikes, we were practically done testing before I could decide which one I liked best. I couldn't get along with the Kawasaki, especially in the tighter street stuff or at the small track. The throttle abruptness makes this a tough bike to ride, and compared to the R1 and 929 it's physically big and the suspension is just not there. The ZX-9R is surprisingly quick though, and has a great motor with lots of potential.
Choosing between the R1 and CBR is like deciding whether to have chocolate cheesecake or apple pie for dessert. Both are awesome, but by picking one you feel like you’re missing out on something the other has to offer. With the 929, it’s the superb brakes, flickable chassis and raspy engine that make it a desirable bike; but the R1 has that great motor with stomping midrange, and composed, stable handling. And it’s not like you can have the cheesecake now and the pie later….
I came to grips with the big bikes on the final loop of our street ride, over the last canyon. Charging down the hill on the Yamaha, the boss big in my mirrors, I finally felt comfortable on an open-classer, confident rather than timid. The R1 did everything I asked—with ease—and I was having a blast. Definitely a moment of truth.
—Andrew Trevitt
I wish I could say I struggled making my decision about which open classer would get the nod, but I didn’t. Although the outcome was a surprise to me (I expected to select the sexy, new 929), the determining factor in my choice was that of refinement, which, to me, was apparent early on—despite how I expected to vote.
On the throttle on smooth pavement, the ZX-9 rocks. The wide bars make it the quickest steering of the bunch. Unfortunately, poorly sorted carburetion and suspension relegated the big Kawi to an also-ran status almost immediately. The new Honda bowled me over on my first few rides. The 929’s amazing brakes, nimble feel and a suspension that tracks well over a variety of road surfaces put this bike in the running right away. Honda also provided the 929 with almost stumble-free fuel injection. Unfortunately, niggly little things such as the lack of wind protection (which was particularly unsettling during our canyon testing on a day that the Santa Anas were really blowing) and power that doesn’t come online until high in the rpm range, took some of the luster off the ride.
You see, the R1 ruined me for the other bikes by offering the best overall package. While the Yamaha steered slower than the Honda and Kawasaki, it felt more planted when leaned over. The midrange grunt up to the top end rush put a smile on my face every time I cranked on the throttle. The carburetion was flawless. The new riding position kept me from feeling perched on the front wheel like last year's model. The only letdown was the wooden feel of the R1's front brakes—but that's only a pad swap away from resolution. Nothing compares to refinement.
—Evans Brasfield
This was by far the most difficult comparison test I’ve ever had to deal with at the magazine. All three bikes are so good, choosing among them to determine a “winner” puts an undeserved stigma on the others. Truth be told, any one of these sportbikes can show its taillight to the other two in the right hands; any advantages only show when we nitpick these bikes to death.
So let’s start nitpicking: the Kawasaki probably has the most glaring imperfection with its rather abrupt throttle response coming off a closed throttle above 6000 rpm. While being no more than an annoyance to me in street riding, track riding on a tight course transforms it into a minor problem. Other than that small flaw, the ZX-9R is an otherwise fantastic machine that will shred your favorite curvy road, run nine-second quarter-miles at the strip, and handle sport-touring duties without complaint.
Try to objectively nitpick between the Honda CBR or the Yamaha R1 to determine a winner, however, and you’re in for a long day. Both are nearly perfect sportbikes that can literally do no wrong. And if you do find an advantage in one, the other has an opposing advantage that offsets it. It’s too damn close to call.
But if truly, absolutely, positively pressed to make a selection, it would be a subjective choice of the R1. Its slight power advantage (by virtue of its displacement) and oh-so-slightly preferred handling feel, combined with its landmark (for a Japanese bike) styling, would be enough to sway me in the Yamaha’s favor.
Don't be surprised to see the 929RR in the Bike of the Year shootout, though.
—Kent Kunitsugu
Sticky Buns
Metzeler Rennsport DOT race tires
As usual for comparison tests and track days, we tossed our open bikes’ stock tires and outfitted each contender with the same tires to ensure we were evaluating the bikes and not their stock buns. In this case, we spooned the latest offering from Metzeler—Rennsport DOT race tires onto the CBR929RR, ZX-9R and R1. An evolution of the MEZ3+ tires (tested in our giant tire cook-off, February ’00), the Rennsport’s most noticeable feature is a distinct lack of tread on the rear tire. These front and rear buns are somewhat more triangular than the MEZ3+s, with the front sidewall substantially shorter and the new rear tire slightly taller and wider than previously. These tires are equivalent to Pirelli’s new Dragon Super Corsa—aside from the distinctive tread pattern—introduced earlier this year (see Late Braking, June ’00).
We were impressed with the Metzeler’s performance during the course of our track day. Overall traction is easily on par with the MEZ3+ tires, which scored well for traction characteristics in our tire test, and the Rennsport’s more triangular profile aids turn-in and flickability. Compliance at full lean is comparable to the MEZs, even with the shorter sidewall on the front Rennsport. Tire life is always a factor on open-class bikes, and the Metzelers provided consistent performance, with traction going off only near the end of the day. Interestingly enough, with so little tread on the edge of the rear tire, estimating wear was virtually impossible.
Only two sizes are available—a 120/70-17 front and the 180/55-17 rear. The front tires supplied for our test incorporated a tread pattern similar to that of the MEZ3, but our Metzeler rep informs us that later versions will incorporate a sparse pattern similar to that of the rear tire.
—A.T.
To read a comparison of some other super fast bikes, click here.