2005 ZX6R

[superman]

Someone tell me the bad points to buying a 2005 ZX6R as next year when i have the money i may be overly tempted to get one. or maybe sooner. just looked at em by mistake

[rene]

all round very good bikes, although there ment to have a hard shock as standard so needs ajusting to your weight

[superman]

Are these chocks easily adjust then? if so i think iv found the bike of choice. stuff the fact they aint as fast as the competition. they must have somethin over the competitors thoe.

[Rob636]

Are these chocks easily adjust then? if so i think iv found the bike of choice. stuff the fact they aint as fast as the competition. they must have somethin over the competitors thoe.

aint as fast as the competition, lol how wrong you are, i havent met an R6 yet that can keep up with me off the lights in a drag race, oh and a cbr600 had that too, oh and wait i also had a triumph daytona, the zx636r, just fcuking rips, and if you dont believe me go ask masters here, he has ridden my bike and you want to know his words when he got off my bike, i shall quote 1 year ago " WOW that thing has more power than the 750 " so dont nock the 636, go test ride one it will blow your fcuking mind, an awesome supersport machine, also where do you live if your close i could show you the bike ?,

Rob

[masterofinsanity]

yeah but not as much power as my 1100

[gubbs]

yeah but not as much power as my 1100

Not as red either.

[superman]

Im in wolverhampton....
well i thought of a 636 but i do like the look of the ZX6r. are you sure the 636 is faster than the new 6ers my mate has a GSXR6 K6 an its rapid. ah im all confused now. i want more power but im just not sure. the 05 zx6r looks mint as ek with the exhaust under the seat it just looks fantastic. yet the 03 636 looks good but not as good if you know what i mean. what do i do ay

[greengoblin]

When your talking about the newer bikes being faster, its only by a fraction of a second, and remember, any muppet can go fast in a straight line (as I'm sure any of the 400 riders on here will agree).

I personally think that the bikes available in the last few years are so close in performance that us mere mortals would struggle to gain any benefit from one over the other!!

Best bet is go for the one you think looks best.

If it still gives you wood when you see it in the morning who cares if someone elses is 0.5 mph faster or 0.1 of a second quicker.

[Xphyral]

bad points? it's a 600, nuff said

[wonderpupp]

at 12000 miles - shock regassing, front fork seals blown and exhaust servo motor died. C & S needed replacing at 8k

Hungry for rear tyres (so much torque.) front wheel in the air most of the time.

hungry for front brake pads.
road tax category

Fuel thirsty when ragged like it should be.

sound of standard exhaust can (go get a yoshi pipe sounded best)

Insurance costs.

But all this compared to ZXR400

Plus side is like RobB said, will whoop everything else on the road - unless you find someone crazy enough to actually push it.

So find one with 2000 dry miles on and go for it.

Nobody buy a 2007 ZX6R cos I want to remain special in that respect...

[superman]

Well i like the ZX6R I was lookin 05 thoe but yea the 636 sounds good.


how much extra are we talkin fuel wise, i like lots of torque thoe......

anyway wats the brake on a 636 an all its gota be the 120's aint it.

plus pupp how much would all that work cost after 12000 miles?

[Rob636]

i disagree with most pupps coments, my bike has the same fuel econemy as a rover metro, any standard chain and sprocket can go in half its intended life time, if the bike is being pushed most of its life which is why you upgrade to stronger c and s, forks seals can blow on any bike, wheelies increase this risk, sounds like alot of usual wear n tear u can get on any bike,


and for the person who made the coment that all 600's are the same, yes they may all do roughly the same top end but its how it gets there,

instance

the Yamaha R6 has no power in the lower revs infact it has nothing at all untill ur right in the top revs,

the Kawasaki too does have a power band in the higher revs, but it doesnt suffer from having no power in the lower revs, i find from only mid range revs the bike in second gear will just take off and hit the rev limiter fast, which also leads to say the kwak has small advantage against an R6 out of the bends cause its more torquey,

so for the person who says all 600's are the same its not, it goes for 1 litre bikes also,
fireblade tame and rideable
tl1000s furious beast will more than likely spit you off,

get it all bikes have character,

Peace,

Rob

[Xphyral]

mid range torque is only an advantage when your not riding the bike properly.

they might have character but it's still a 600

[rene]

its not always best to be in a high screaming gear all the time, like if your on a long sweeping bend last thing you want is to have to lift the bike up off your knee to change gear

[Xphyral]

its not always best to be in a high screaming gear all the time, like if your on a long sweeping bend last thing you want is to have to lift the bike up off your knee to change gear

reverse shifting is availiable for a reason.

Anyway, cant i just tease?

i actually think the 636 is pretty fun a real kawasaki achievement, but then i'd still rather have an r6 as a track toy.

The TL1000s was an epic failure of a sports twin, hence its rep as a mean machine. litre twins are big bang engines and unless steps are taken to give the rider good control over that torque they become unridable, tbh i hate bikes being referred to as having character. "having character" is what owners say to try cover up the bad points everyone points out. "Furious beast"... lol, closer to "suzukis f*** up". Replace character with "fits my personal needs from a bike" and all bikes that dont fit my needs become the same thing. my zxr doesnt have character it's old and slow but i still have fun on it.

The fireblade is an awesome peice of machinery and it's tag of tame, ridable and also spouted by people who've never ridden one "boring" is quite amusing. Since when did a litre sports ever become boring? it's smooth is what it is, theres no surprises hiding in the revs to catch you out but it's still one hell of a fast bike. It does exactly what it says on the tin, it's honda, they rock. If i had 9 grand i'd have a nice black one in an instant.

Everything i've ridden bar a few strokers could take off from mid range revs in second and hit the limiter quickly.