Brakes: CBR600RR Vs SV650

Originally Posted by Steve H

But surely there is some reason why the SV is STILL Bike magazines 'best of the best' winner for budget middleweights, and has been for over a year. The competition in this category included the Z750, FZ6 and of course the Hornet.
From someone who has ridden a 600 Hornet, the SV is soo much more involving than the Honda imo.

Of course, it's the cheapest! But cheapest doesn't mean best. It is great value for money without a doubt but still has some very basic budget bits. In hindsight I would have rather spent an extra few quid and got a new Hornet but then that's me. The SV does have more of a feel to it but that's mainly due to it's V twin characteristics and the flaws it has that give it a certain 'character'. In a way I find the Hornet more involving as you have to work the engine a little more to get the most out if it but the handlng is sublime, even 2 up the lean angles I'm getting I would never have tries in the SV, even scuffed my sliders with a pillion (not on purpose either). On the SV you could be in any gear, and still give it a handful and get out of a sticky situation if needed. IL4's need more revs but so worth it. But then I think this is down to which type of bike you prefer, IL4 or Vtwin.

Horses for courses in the end but there certainly is no denying that the SV cannot be beaten on price and for what you get in return.

SV Dan, the cost of the Hornet was factored into the equasion and it was still beaten by the SV and Z750.
The Hornet is still a budget bike in the same category as the SV.

Dunno about the Hornet but you can get plenty lean out of an SV...

I think the attraction for journos is they ride IL4s all day long and then ride a Hornet/fazer/z750 which is an underpowered verdion of the breed...and think not much...A SV is different from what they are used to and I think this plays into their thinking. Also the SV is a good handler and light and they are all Rossi Wannabees so it plays again in the favour.

Originally Posted by Toypop

The rear suspension on my bike is rubbishly hard I know but the front does give you a smoother ride despite being harder than the SV's. So I echo what others have said.

Do you really have the slightest clue what you're talking about?

SV Dan, you obviously love your Hornet, which is fine by me. Its just that you seem to be suggesting it is in a higher league than the SV. You may prefer it to the SV, but it is still no SS600.
And I simply cannot agree with the suggestion that it handles better than the SV.........unless there was something very wrong with the Hornet I rode!

[northwind]

Originally Posted by Steve H

SV Dan, you obviously love your Hornet, which is fine by me. Its just that you seem to be suggesting it is in a higher league than the SV. You may prefer it to the SV, but it is still no SS600.
And I simply cannot agree with the suggestion that it handles better than the SV.........unless there was something very wrong with the Hornet I rode!

Different sorts of handling. SVs are more flicky, Hornets are more chucky.

Originally Posted by northwind

Different sorts of handling. SVs are more flicky, Hornets are more chucky.

Technical terms?

[northwind]

Absolutely

Originally Posted by Flamin_Squirrel

Do you really have the slightest clue what you're talking about?

LOL allow me to translate in laymans terms:

The rear suspension on my bike is utter sh*te. In fact it is so sh*te it ruins the bike. In fact it is so sh*te I wonder if Kawasaki gave the job of designing it to the £30 a week spotty YTS apprentice who knew feck all about anything! On 90% of roads I could go quicker with the SV's rear end. Only on smooth dual carriageway roundabouts when pushing hard did the SV's rear get into trouble and the ZX6's work a treat. Kwak changed the unit for the next model so I guess they sacked YTS boy and came to their senses.

The front suspension on the ZX6R is absolutely feckin wicked. Unlike the SV's it isn't all soggy and floppy. It doesn't dive or knock/bottom out over potholes and the ride is smoother than a babys bottom. That knocking over pot holes and big bumps did my head in, it is so nice to not find myself bracing myself anymore when I approach a bump. Well I do brace myself but that is due to rear end problems.

So I'd like the front of my bike, mated with a hybrid of the rears from both bikes.

I'd also take the following from the SV to stick on my Ninja for the perfect bike:

1, Gearbox - miles better and I mean miiiiiiiiiiiilllllllleeeeeeeeesssssssssssss.

2, Bar layout where the levers can be twisted down into a comfortable position.

3, Analogue rev counter because the digital one on mine is the biggest most g*yest and useless gimmick ever.

4, SV's headlights where both are on rather than just one.

5, LED rear light strips cos they look cool.

6, Autofast idle because I didnt pay a grand more to move some crappy little lever around.

7, The LCD that displays the clock as well as the trip distance at the same time. Plus you get two trip meters.

8, Sensible pricing - how much for a ZX6 seat cowl!!!!!!!!!!! Its a piece of plastic for fecks sake! How can it cost double the price of the SV's?!?!

8, Mirrors - you can see behind you.

9, Screen - useless but not as useless as the ZX6's.

10, Black frame - no explanation required.

Everything else I'd keep from my bike.

Originally Posted by Steve H

SV Dan, you obviously love your Hornet, which is fine by me. Its just that you seem to be suggesting it is in a higher league than the SV. You may prefer it to the SV, but it is still no SS600.
And I simply cannot agree with the suggestion that it handles better than the SV.........unless there was something very wrong with the Hornet I rode!

No they are in the same bracket as far as I know although the Hornet is more expensive which will always play into peoples pockets (as it did mine). I also loved my SV, until I got the Hornet which just blew it away. About 25 more horses and only about 9 more kg's dry, top end is quicker, handling is better and so is braking. To me it's a no brainer. Like I said though horses for courses I reckon.