Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Kawasaki Ninja 300 and 400r

Discussion in 'Bike Reviews, Questions and Suggestions' at netrider.net.au started by Pockets, Sep 2, 2012.

  1.  Top
  2. Not a particularly good article.

    First problem is their assumption that 39hp from a 300cc might mean it's a parallel-4. They've obviously not realised that the 250cc engine began its life with 43hp (but had a nasty habit of blowing up). You would think 25 years of technology and an extra 50cc would make it pretty easy to get this sort of power reliably from a twin (and in fact I reckon you could get it from a single if you really wanted to).

    They've also obviously missed the fact that the 250cc engine used now was derived from a 400cc engine originally anyway (the GPZ400R) - and that this in turn was quite literally just half of the 4-cylinder engine used in the GPZ900R.

    So yay, we're back to where we were 25 years ago. Maybe in another 25 years the Japanese might start developing something new in the small bike sector :roll: (assuming they haven't been crushed by the Chinese).

    Edit: Of course that said if they do bring the 400cc version here I would seriously consider buying one.
  3. Just went looking for some more info. Seems the 400R is already on sale in Canada and New Zealand, and is nothing more than a sleeved down 650R. Hardly seems likely it'd be sold here when we already have a LAMs version of the 650. I'm guessing the bikesales "journalists" aren't that big on research, or they would have easily found this:

    The 300R seems to be new, but is just a slightly bored-out 250R. My guess is that it's only purpose is to compensate for the fact their bikes lose so much power as a result of the environmental regs.
  4. JD, please...

    I don't see them being anything other than llel twins
  5. Lilley try reading "The Kawasaki Story" by Ian Falloon. The GPZ400R was indeed developed by taking half a GPZ900R engine and simply adding a balancer shaft.
  6. My qualm is in the literally, half, 400 and 900.

    I assume they shortened the stroke?
  7. Bike manufacturers used to be good at stretching the one design into a range of uses. I've actually checked Falloon's book and I was slightly off - it's actually the GPZ500 I was thinking of as the origin of the 250, not the 400.

    The literal "half GPZ900" engine was used in the LTD450 cruiser, and was then modified to make both the Vulcan 500 and the Vulcan 400. It's the Vulcan 500 engine that went into the GPZ500 (or EX500), and this in turn was modified to make the GPZ/GPX250 (or EX250) engine.

    The GPZ900R engine incidentally also spawned the GPz550, which in turn became the GPZ400R and GPX600R, which then became the ZZ-R 600 (and rare ZZ-R 500).

    Kawasaki did spend a lot of money developing the GPZ900R, but I'm guessing they more than made than money back :)

    Edit: Oh and despite being essentially the same engine the bore and stroke varied considerably depending on what sort of bike the engine was being used in (but really that's only a matter of changing the size of the hole and the pistons used).
  8. This seems on the money. Looks like the 300R will be just a more powerful version of the 250R, which will attract a lot of new riders as they want something a bit more powerful then the standard 250s today but don't want to take the risk with a 600 supersport.
  9. I'd say the lesser power is due to enviro tunes and for reliability... always funny to tell a Ninja 250 owner that the previous versions made more power :p

    When are Suzuki and Yamaha going to realise the insane profits the mini bikes bring? I think I read somewhere the Ninja 250 is the biggest profit maker of any bike in their range. I see so many of them everywhere too.
  10. Really, I thought the only reason was so that 300R riders can taunt those silly Honda riders on forums whom settled for a bike with 50cc less.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. The 300 is suposed to be EFI too, assuming we get that here. If it's generally tarted up it could be a neat little bike.

    It looks like the 250R gets a power drop to be a budget entry while the 300 goes for more stick. If the latter makes anything like the claimed power it could do well.
  12. am i the only one that picked up that this was a US based story and makes absolutely no reference to the bike's being made available here?
  13. No.

    But why not talk about new bike models on a motorcycling website?
  14. When it's an Australian website and the story is only relevant to the US market.

    Personally I hate the laziness that has crept into the Australian media, where cutting and pasting something found online can count as journalism. To make matters worse the US site I think they pinched that info from was itself nothing more than a cut-and-paste from an Indian website (which seems to be one of the few that is actually finding news which is genuinely new). :soapbox:
  15. So how many people commenting are or will be in the market for a lams bike?
  16. I'm certainly in the market for any decent small bikes that might be released. Whether they're LAMS or not is irrelevent to me.
  17. It will be here, we have way bigger small bike market than the usa which have no learner laws. It might take a year or so.

    Cazzo a lot of full licensed riders are discovering small bikes are cheap to run asa second bike
  18.  Top
    • Like Like x 2
  19. Interesting, wonder if this means they'll be dropping the 250cc version. Would suck to be someone who's just bought a 250 Ninja if that is the case (goodbye resale value).
  20. Looking at the Kawasaki site, slipper clutch, EFI, 29kw (39hp) & ABS available.
    Bit of a jump up all around from the 250 Ninja. (y)