I had a dream about 400s
Discussion
black-k1 said:
I wonder if how much rose tinted nostalgia is at work here. I would suggest that 400 sports bikes seem awesome when your experience of larger engine, more powerful bikes is limited, and get more awesome the longer the time period since you last rode one. While chasing the revs sounds like fun when reminiscing, slightly misjudging an overtake, only to find there is nothing left in the "get up and go" department, will remove some of that rose tinting.
I enjoyed my younger days riding slower, less powerful bikes, but that's the past and there's a good reason why most people purchase bikes with larger capacity engines.
I would disagree. I cut my teeth on an NC30, had it 6 years in fact. Brilliant, brilliant little bike despite being a bit rough round the edges and the first track day I did on it at Cadwell (and the first i'd ever done) it showed up most, if not all of the bikes in the novice group that day. I'd previously thrown it through a fence and the rebuild (cheap pattern fairing and £50 respray by the work lads) was even rougher I enjoyed my younger days riding slower, less powerful bikes, but that's the past and there's a good reason why most people purchase bikes with larger capacity engines.
Still, a great bike.
Moved onto a CBR600, then a 97 Blade, then an RR3 Blade and then I sold that and bought an FZR400RR. Have to admit the day I picked it up I was wondering what i'd done as it felt sluggish to say the least
but once I got myself back into that 'having no mechanical sympathy' attitude, and tweaked it a little for my style, it was an awesome bike. Utterly rewarding to ride at pace with a fun factor it's hard to replicate on the road on a big bike.Then I was back to a ZX6R, then a GSXR1000 and now i'm running an SV650 which is similarly powered to the 400's and i'm finding it rewarding to hoon and just as much fun
black-k1 said:
It's like meeting an old girl friend ... what was a great ride in its day now feels a bit soggy, is a bit heavier and slower than you expected and just doesn't go as well as you remember!
Not the sort of reply I expected from you! Aren't most like that at our age though.
My first bike after passing my test was this little rocket FZR400R.
400's were great at the time as they were relatively quick for beginners, cheap to insure and were plentily available (back in t' day ;-)
I think I traded it in around 10 year ago for an SRAD gsxr600 and I only got around £800 trade in. Retrospectively I wish I had just kept it for use on track days and whatnot as I think a 400 would be the perfect weapon for my local track
400's were great at the time as they were relatively quick for beginners, cheap to insure and were plentily available (back in t' day ;-)
I think I traded it in around 10 year ago for an SRAD gsxr600 and I only got around £800 trade in. Retrospectively I wish I had just kept it for use on track days and whatnot as I think a 400 would be the perfect weapon for my local track
3DP said:
In pure terms they are pretty s
t these days, but in context were great back then. 600s were budget spec and 750s were expensive and heavy.
You got 750cc superbike specs with about half the power, but 30kg less weight. A lot more special feeling than 600s of the era.
Fast forward to now and they are 10-20kg heavier than a 1000cc superbike with under a third of the power and next to no torque. A 600 now, produces twice the power and has a nicer spec as well as being more comfy.
Saying all that, I enjoyed my VFR400 NC30 before writing it off, but beyond the nostalgia factor, they are not much cop today.
If your main motivation for liking them is missing bikes with low weight and good fun at a reasonable speeds, these days you have the MT09 and Street Triple being spiritual successors.
zxr400 is 159kg dry, about 185kg wet.t these days, but in context were great back then. 600s were budget spec and 750s were expensive and heavy.You got 750cc superbike specs with about half the power, but 30kg less weight. A lot more special feeling than 600s of the era.
Fast forward to now and they are 10-20kg heavier than a 1000cc superbike with under a third of the power and next to no torque. A 600 now, produces twice the power and has a nicer spec as well as being more comfy.
Saying all that, I enjoyed my VFR400 NC30 before writing it off, but beyond the nostalgia factor, they are not much cop today.
If your main motivation for liking them is missing bikes with low weight and good fun at a reasonable speeds, these days you have the MT09 and Street Triple being spiritual successors.
please point me to the 139-149kg dry weight 1000cc superbike.
black-k1 said:
I wonder if how much rose tinted nostalgia is at work here. I would suggest that 400 sports bikes seem awesome when your experience of larger engine, more powerful bikes is limited, and get more awesome the longer the time period since you last rode one. While chasing the revs sounds like fun when reminiscing, slightly misjudging an overtake, only to find there is nothing left in the "get up and go" department, will remove some of that rose tinting.
I enjoyed my younger days riding slower, less powerful bikes, but that's the past and there's a good reason why most people purchase bikes with larger capacity engines.
I never misjudged an overtake on my 400. The only time it was ever revving below 8k rpm was tootling through town, otherwise it was 10k or above, and it really didn't feel even slightly lacking at those revs. In fact it was much too fast for most uk roads. I enjoyed my younger days riding slower, less powerful bikes, but that's the past and there's a good reason why most people purchase bikes with larger capacity engines.
Whilst I have always admired these bikes and lusted after them, my mates who remember them from back in the day tell me I'm too tall for them, and too broad. At 6ft and 15 stone, they reckon I'm too long in the leg to be comfortable for long and too heavy for them to really zip. Now, I reckon that's a description of power through bikers eyes, rather than an objective stance. I'm sure they won't feel slow but they won't bowl me along like a thousand or even a modern 600 does. My mate who is 5'6" and 9 stone would love the 400's.
Loyly said:
Whilst I have always admired these bikes and lusted after them, my mates who remember them from back in the day tell me I'm too tall for them, and too broad. At 6ft and 15 stone, they reckon I'm too long in the leg to be comfortable for long and too heavy for them to really zip. Now, I reckon that's a description of power through bikers eyes, rather than an objective stance. I'm sure they won't feel slow but they won't bowl me along like a thousand or even a modern 600 does. My mate who is 5'6" and 9 stone would love the 400's.
I was 6 foot and about 13 stone when I got mine, definitely getting towards the limit of being practical!
Rubbish!
I'm 6'4 and did Newcastle - Oxford - Donny for WSB back to Newcastle in a day on a CBR400 Tri-arm.
Yes, it was 27 years ago and it took my joints 3 weeks to recover but it can be done
No speed cameras in those days and the only time the revs dropped below 14,000 was stopping for fuel (which was quite regular with an RGV 250 in the group).
Compared to 600s and 750s of the era they were little jewels - ironically some of the best brakes in the business but were rarely used due to the relative lack of top speed and (for the time) sublime handling.
I'm 6'4 and did Newcastle - Oxford - Donny for WSB back to Newcastle in a day on a CBR400 Tri-arm.
Yes, it was 27 years ago and it took my joints 3 weeks to recover but it can be done
No speed cameras in those days and the only time the revs dropped below 14,000 was stopping for fuel (which was quite regular with an RGV 250 in the group).
Compared to 600s and 750s of the era they were little jewels - ironically some of the best brakes in the business but were rarely used due to the relative lack of top speed and (for the time) sublime handling.
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff