Kawasaki Ninja 1000 Forum banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,947 Posts
It not as accurate as he could have been, ut he did a decent job. He's another victim of the added balancer, for 2014. He's also listing another balancer for 2017. This mod never happened. It was always there.

The slipper clutch was added in 2016. Between generations, almost.

The air intakes added for 2014. Sorry, look at the picture. Those were always there.

He talks about the odd handling. That was there from day 1. People stopped complaining about that in 2020.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,472 Posts
Not bad if he actually didn't OWN each generation. It's obvious some of the comments came from Kawasaki advertising copy. I must say I didn't notice the 3% stiffer rear spring on my '14! I have no idea what "odd handling" being talked about. I stopped complaining about it the second I slapped a /55 rear tire on the '11, '14 and '18.

His comments on the VFR800 sparked my attention. If they hadn't gone VTEC and updated the components just a little while keeping the weight the same I'd still have one. I often thought I'd like to get a late model VFR and stick my '98 motor in it. Then again, the frame and components gained 35#. On the + side, you could run any rpm up to redline all day without vibration decalcifying your bones and even tell what was in your rear view mirrors. The minus side, of course, was the loss of about 20 ft. lbs. of torque almost everywhere. I didn't miss it when I didn't have it but now that I've had it...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,947 Posts
If a person were to ever publish a list like this, why wouldn't you take the time to make sure it was accurate?

If he would have brought it here, first, we could have all checked it. I didn't read it all. Once he reached my two error limit, I gave up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
The world is filled with Internet Warriors who want to be authorities. Many of the Youtube reviews are very silly (like and subscribe!) The unfortunate part is when the uninitiated take their words as gospel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
259 Posts
The world is filled with Internet Warriors who want to be authorities. Many of the Youtube reviews are very silly (like and subscribe!) The unfortunate part is when the uninitiated take their words as gospel.
The YouTubers drive me crazy - Its either inane or often wildly inaccurate - Although Dandanthefireman kept me entertained a little bit for a while til he got a little preachy :)

Its the same on FaceBook - User posts - My "XYZ" 500 cc blah wont start - Cue 50 different replies all claiming to be 100% correct - And for fucks sake don't ask about tyres - Tyres are a more personal choice then if you like a finger up your bum during sex.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
lol. Tires and oil, the age old subject more volatile than politics or religion. And don't get me started on break-in procedures!
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Bc2 and Minlak

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
I have heard that on the grounds that these nav units have underlying speakers the two won't cooperate. Likely why all Canadian models with RF never accompanied route? Has anybody figured out how to have both introduced without issues?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
I have no idea what "odd handling" being talked about. I stopped complaining about it the second I slapped a /55 rear tire on the '11, '14 and '18.
I looked into this before I bought my '21 model (instead of a used older model). Apparently the steering geometry of the pre-20 models was such that the low speed handling was described as "heavy", and installing the 55 section rear tire fixed the issue. I never rode one, so I can't really say. It seems that for the '20 model year Kawi changed the geometry so it handled better at low speed and didn't need the 55 section tire swap. At least, this is what I found amongst the reviewers pretty much across the board in my pre-purchase research.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,947 Posts
That's about it on the handling . There were several causes. The stock tires were OEM grade Bridgestone BTO16. These were junk, and the front tire had a strange profile.

The back end sat really low. Kawasaki changed the rear linkage, in 2014. I believe they did this again, in 2017. They also reworked the seat , rider position, slightly.

Good tires,and the 190/55 helped . A longer shock, or lowering links(use them to raise) was the real cure.

So, why did they do this? Go to the other thread where the guy is taking about a light front wheel,at 120 mph. If he adjusted his suspension, he didn't mention it. They have to protect people from a wobbly front end,at all costs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
That's about it on the handling . There were several causes. The stock tires were OEM grade Bridgestone BTO16. These were junk, and the front tire had a strange profile.

The back end sat really low. Kawasaki changed the rear linkage, in 2014. I believe they did this again, in 2017. They also reworked the seat , rider position, slightly.

Good tires,and the 190/55 helped . A longer shock, or lowering links(use them to raise) was the real cure.

So, why did they do this? Go to the other thread where the guy is taking about a light front wheel,at 120 mph. If he adjusted his suspension, he didn't mention it. They have to protect people from a wobbly front end,at all costs.
I think the light/wobbly front end described elsewhere has to do with improperly adjusted suspension. You're right that safety is paramount for the engineers so they error on the side of safety. Many of us have lowered the front and/or raised the rear by a significant amount which "should" possibly cause instability but as many of us have confirmed, it just makes the bike turn MUCH better without introducing any instability when the suspension is adjusted properly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rcannon409

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,947 Posts
I agree. Suspension is a big deal, especially when you start approaching a machines limits. It gets more critical depending on body weight, too.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top