• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

’08 Ninja 250: 3rd Day Riding “Real World Impressions” (Looking for “Nits”)

I'll have to check my tire wear, but at just over 1,000 miles I don't think I'm anywhere near done with either tire. You must be killing it!
 
soliqsoliq said:
I'll have to check my tire wear, but at just over 1,000 miles I don't think I'm anywhere near done with either tire. You must be killing it!
Click to expand...

X2 and I'm at 2200 miles. I still have nipples on my tires. :laughing


Also, how's the fit with a 140 rear tire? Did you have to remove the chain guard?
 
Thanks for the update Gary!

I was upset that they replaced the handy temp gauge with the silly fuel gauge when I first saw the 08s. Now it's turning out to be a very stupid move. Hopefully they will bring back the temp gauge for the 09 but I doubt it.

You never go wrong with the odometer as a guesstimate for your fuel so at least that can be done.
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

There's a few more categories (brakes, chassis setup for tires size/type, etc.) of life in the Real World with the new '08 Ninja 250 that I've now had the opportunity to put into the books after 3,200 miles of use ...... but will have to wait for a few more free minutes in the near future, to put them down in writing on one of these treads. Once again, please stay tuned, if you have an interest ..... and let me know if you have any specific questions on the bike.

Happy riding all ........... :ride

Gary J
Click to expand...



I still would like to know how the 08 compares to the classic while cruising at freeway speeds. Just how much (if any) top end has been lost? Please do tell if you do get to spend more time on a freeway. I would also like to hear about the mpg difference at freeway cruising.



Thanks again for the update!
 
I had a decent ride today and ended up at the gas station 4 times, so I have some new fuel mileage numbers. Here's the data:

tank 1: 61 miles / 1.78 gallons 34.3 mpg
tank 2: 75 miles / 2.21 gallons 33.9 mpg
tank 3: 113 miles / 2.87 gallons 39.3 mpg
tank 4: 61 miles / 1.17 gallons 52.1 mpg

It turns out that there is a *huge* difference in mileage for different riding styles on the baby ninja, at least with a large rider on it. Tank 1 was me getting from the south bay to Marin this morning. I had it pinned or close to it the entire way up the highway. Indicated speed was 85 mph, actual speed is 78 mph (the ninja's speedo is way optimistic; I've got a GPS mounted). 34 mpg. Tank 2 was the morning portion of the SMR, the throttle is pinned just about the entire time, speeds range from 40 mph to 85 mph, but constant acceleration to whatever she'll do for pretty much the entire ride. 33.9 mpg. Tank 3 was the after breakfast portion of the SMR, the riding style was similar to the prior tank, but the roads were a lot more goaty; mileage was a bit better at 39.3.

So I wanted to see if there was something wrong with the bike (the prior owner said she got 55 - 60 mpg on the highway), so I resigned myself to do a slow run back on the freeway. Holding the speed at 65 mph for 61 miles(indicated, true speed is 59 - 60), I got 52.1 mpg. So the bike's fine. And if I cane the hell out of it, I can push the mileage down to the low 30's. I bet if I can convince the wife to ride 2-up on the 250 instead of the RT, we could get the mileage down to the high 20's. Forget that silly hypermiling crap, let's have a contest for who can get the worst mileage on a Ninja 250. :laughing

I also miss the petcock, the fuel gauge isn't particularly linear, and I would even like a low fuel light so there is some constant to judge when things are getting dire, the gauge is hard to trust.

My bike came with the GT501's. They looked brand-new at 1000 miles when we got the bike, but they look a little less new now at 1600 miles; riding the bike hard does seem to wear the tires more than would be expected on a 26 hp bike.

But all in all, still loving the little machine! Huge upgrade from the prior version, and looking forward to thousands and thousands of fun miles on this thing.

305376663_me8Xm-L.jpg
 
jrace said:
GT-501's?

Gary's came with the BT-45's, IIRC. They are a bit more sport-touring oriented, as opposed to the sport-touring nature of the GT-501's. YMMV, of course.

-jim
Click to expand...
Not sure on the model number. My understanding is that there are two different tires that come stock on the bike, the Dunlops or Bridgestones. So I got whatever model of Dunlops comes stock with them.
 
Riding two up on the freeway certainly does slow what little acceleration I have in the high RPM band, but I haven't noticed much difference in fuel consumption. With my fiance in tow, I still get around 40-50 MPG on the freeway.
 
Gary J said:
Having put two solid rides in on the new “08 Ninja 250, over the last two evenings, and put to paper (and posted on the forums) the highlights of my impressions of the bike …. I realized that I’d pretty much exhausted the discovery process in identifying all of the “good” (or great in many cases) aspects of the bike. Recognizing that there’s nothing perfect in the real world, including motorcycles, I decided to dedicate yesterday’s ride to the process of looking beyond the sunshine and blue skies of taking ownership and riding a new bike ….. and focus all my attention on digging deep beneath the shiny new paint, and looking to identify the “nits”.

Being a budget-priced bike, there’s no question that some compromises needed to be made when Kawasaki was going to the parts bin to spec out individual components for the ’08 Ninja 250. That’s the reality of life. You can only get so much, for so much money. Cartridge forks, fully adjustable shock, and complex computer controlled fuel injection systems just don’t come cheap.

In keeping with the easy-to-digest “itemized by category” format of the earlier postings, for providing real world riding impression feedback, I’ll use that method for sharing the results of the “nits finding” mission from today’s ride. For those interested, please reference the following:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

ENGINE: (Carburetion)

During the bulk of the 50+ miles that I put on the bike this evening, the riding was done while carving up some lightly traveled twisty backroads. Thanks to the open roads, the majority of those miles were spent at a moderately “spirited” pace, with the engine working mostly in the 7-10K range. In this mid-upper RPM range the fuel delivery, and resultant throttle response, had proven to be quite good. As a result, I had begun to come to the impression that all was rosy in the world of the carbureted USA model of the ’08 Ninja 250.

Normally getting stuck following traffic at a significantly sub-speed limit pace isn’t a good experience. However on the last few miles of yesterday’s ride, while on the last leg coming home, being subjected to this kind of riding environment proved to be a very valuable experience in the quest for uncovering the “nits” of the new bike.

This “nit” appears in the form of a “hiccup” (momentary power lag, followed by a snatch as it kicks in again) when going from total off-throttle position, to just cracking the throttle back on again …… in approximately the 4,500 – 6,000 RPM range …… especially noticeable in the lower (3rd/4th, etc) gears. While following closely being a train of cars in front of me (at around 30-35 MPH), every time they would go through their unexpected cycle of slowing and speeding up again, and I was forced to go to zero throttle and then come back into it again, I’d get a momentary “snatch” as if the bike lost fuel, and then had it turned back on again like a light switch.

No matter how smooth I was on the throttle movement, as long as going all the way to zero throttle position was part of the off/on sequence (while in this RPM range), I’d get the “snatch”.

I experimented and found a work-around, which was to consciously keep just a small amount of throttle opening during those moments I was needing to slow for the traffic, and work the brakes slightly against the very light throttle to achieving the needed slowing. By keeping the carburetors off of their total zero idle circuits, and minimal butterfly/slide opening positions, it seemed to avoid this “bad spot”.

I suspect that the reason for this behavior can be traced back to the testing processes used by the government regulatory agencies for meeting the current strict level of emissions outputs that the bike had to meet for 2008. Likely the carburetors are setup extremely “lean” in that specific RPM range, as a necessity in meeting those standards. The penalty for that compliance being the stock bike exhibiting this “nit” for new owners.

Not a big deal, and likely can be addressed by creative carburetion tweaks …. but a “nit” none the less that should be noted in the effort of trying to provide an un-biased account of the bike for those potentially considering ownership.

----------------------------------------------

SUSPENSION: (Damping Rates/Behavior)

- Compression/Springs:

I’d previously noted that both ends of the bike’s suspension has an extremely “firmer” feel to it, especially in comparison to the previous generation Ninja 250’s. This “firmness” is a welcome characteristic when the bike is being ridden in a spirited fashion …. at times when the road surface is not excessively rough, bumpy, or in overall poor condition.. That’s the “perk” side of this.

The “nit” side is that this “firmness” in the compression direction (spring preload, spring rates, high-speed compression damping) definitely makes the bike less happy when the roads get bad. The behavior materializes in the form of having the tires prone to “skittering” (momentarily losing, and regaining, traction) over really rough pavement. The more conservatively the pilot is riding the bike, the more noticeable (and more of a “nit”) this behavior will be.

This will be more of a factor for less experienced riders, where the previous generation Ninja 250 had a bit like a “comfy couch” feel (due to really squishy/soft suspension). The behavior associated with this aspect of the suspension on the ’08 model will be something they’ll see when riding on real world roads.



- Rebound Damping:

This was an area where the previous generation Ninja 250 was SERIOUSLY lacking; at least the front forks. A “pogo-stick” was the best way to describe how the stock forks on the earlier bikes performed.

It’s great to see that this historic, nearly non-existent rebound damping has been addressed by Kawasaki in the ’08 model. Unfortunately the budget price of the bike didn’t allow for the use of modern technology style suspenders. As result, the Engineers had to accomplish the additional damping using limited tools. The outcome is that the old-school “damping rod” style suspension is still WAY better then the old bike ….. but not without “nits”.

Statically testing the rebound damping in the garage, when I’d first got the bike, had already showed me that the amount (non-user adjustable) of damping (how slow it bounces back up) was slower then I would have preferred. The forks actually weren’t too far off, being pretty close to where I’d want them to be if I had an adjuster to turn. The rear shock was the primary culprit in this “too much damping” category.

It should be noted that my bike has less then 200 miles on the odometer, so things are still in the process of “breaking in”. It’s possible that the shock’s rebound damping may loosen up a bit once it’s got more miles on it? We’ll just have to wait-n-see.

Recognizing this “too much rebound” characteristic of the suspension, and consciously keeping it in mind while out on the road test riding the bike, I anticipated areas on the road where I’d likely see the impact. The places where it ultimately surfaced in the most recognizable form, was when taking a few corners that were located at the crest of “uphill” rises. I found that the rear tire wanted to get a bit “light” (lose grip with the pavement) at those moments.

This was due to the unweighting effects of the pavement surface dropping away over the crest, and the rear shock not responding quickly enough to cause the swingarm to drop down at a rate where the rear tire would maintain maximum grip ….. in tracking with the road surface.

It should be noted that it took riding the bike at what would be considered a VERY spirited pace (not top speed, but just cornering level for the tight/narrow backroads) in these spots, for a significant enough impact of the excessive rebound damping of the rear shock to become a fully recognizable event. Though the rebound damping is definitely not without flaw on either end of the bike (what you pay, is what you get typically, when it comes to suspension), I suspect that during the level of riding that most owners will do with the little Ninja 250, it won’t be greatly noticed while out on the road.

GENERAL – FUEL ECONOMY:

Prior to taking off on last night’s ride, I deliberately “topped off” the gas tank. The goal being to be able to get an initial feel for the fuel usage (MPG) of the ’08 model bike. The ride consisted of a mixture of approximately the following:

  • - 80% “Spirited” tight/twisty backroad riding (7-10K range)
    - 20% city street in-traffic riding

In topping off the gas tank again (from a gas jug), upon arriving at home, the bike took right around 1 gallon to bring back to the pre-ride level. With the ride being about 55 miles today, it worked out easy to see the approximate average mileage (55 MPG) the bike had returned on this mixture of riding. As is so often said ….. “your mileage may vary”.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONCLUSION – DAY 3 – “Nit Hunting”

The limited number of items that surfaced, despite this being a very deliberate “nit hunting” mission, shone well on the ’08 Ninja 250. A pretty small list, from a $3,500 motorcycle?

Hopefully digging out these “nits” from the recent real world riding experiences with this new bike, and posting them up on the forum will be of some value for other potential owners (or eventual owners).

Gary J
Click to expand...
The only 'Nits" I've noticed are crappy welds,the shock linkage that looks like a part from a Soviet lawnmower, and that they seem to have been assembled without grease where it should be(like bearings and the the swing arm pivot, shock linkage and stuff)...

I really like them... I really like the old ones too but the 08's are a huge improvement...:thumbup
 
ch47dmechanic said:
Also, how's the fit with a 140 rear tire? Did you have to remove the chain guard?
Click to expand...
It's possible the "Bridgestone" 140 sized tire fits the 3.5" wide rear rim better then the Dunlop Sportmax D208-SM 140/70/17 that I just finished trying ...... without much success. The tire didn't present any mechanical clearance problems with the chainguard, or swingarm, it just didn't work on the rim. From my experience, it's just too wide for the 3.5" rim to work properly, as described below.

With the Dunlop D208-SM Sportmax, I would NEVER use this tire in the 140/70/17 size again on the stock rear wheel of the '08 Ninja 250!

The narrowness of the stock rear rim results in the beads of the tire being pulled inward excessively. This results in the contour across the tread being very tightly curved, and the last 1/2" of rubber totally unusable ..... being literally "vertical". I find this to result in an unstable behavior (until it wears away the high spots), and produce a very high tire wear rate (as you can see in the photo below, after less then 1,800 miles).

Got some new plans to try next, for tire use/testing. Will share the news once the results are in. :)
 

Attachments

  • 140 Tire Wear (Ninja 250 08).JPG
    140 Tire Wear (Ninja 250 08).JPG
    78.5 KB · Views: 53
ch47dmechanic said:
Riding two up on the freeway certainly does slow what little acceleration I have in the high RPM band, but I haven't noticed much difference in fuel consumption. With my fiance in tow, I still get around 40-50 MPG on the freeway.
Click to expand...

This makes sense; power/weight ratio directly affects acceleration. Fuel mileage at a constant speed on the freeway is more related to aerodynamics & related friction than to weight. Holding 78 - 80 mph (so ninja speedometer says 85 - 86) will likely net you 35 - 40 mpg, whether or not the rider is 2-up. And even 2-up, the bike will likely get 50+ on the highway if the speeds are held closer to 60 mph (65 on the speedometer).
 
aciurczak said:
This makes sense; power/weight ratio directly affects acceleration. Fuel mileage at a constant speed on the freeway is more related to aerodynamics & related friction than to weight. Holding 78 - 80 mph (so ninja speedometer says 85 - 86) will likely net you 35 - 40 mpg, whether or not the rider is 2-up. And even 2-up, the bike will likely get 50+ on the highway if the speeds are held closer to 60 mph (65 on the speedometer).
Click to expand...

As far as the speedo goes, I had my fiance follow me to check it. At a indicated 80MPH, the GPS in her car (she was right next to me) was reading 78. :dunno
 
ch47dmechanic said:
As far as the speedo goes, I had my fiance follow me to check it. At a indicated 80MPH, the GPS in her car (she was right next to me) was reading 78. :dunno
Click to expand...

Unless it's mounted on the bike, I'm not sure how accurate matching another vehicle's speed while trying to figure out what the gps in the other vehicle is saying, while you're checking your own speedo, can be other than +/- 5 mph. Borrow her gps and pop it onto your tankbag and you may be more sure of the difference between gps & your speedo. Or if you're riding 2-up, even go handheld for a mile, it won't take more than a minute or two.

While speedometers do vary, every Japanese bike I've ever had is quite optimistic, while British and American bikes we've owned seem to more accurately represent true speed. Who knows why. :dunno
 
soliqsoliq said:
Not sure on the model number. My understanding is that there are two different tires that come stock on the bike, the Dunlops or Bridgestones.
Click to expand...
Actually from what I've heard and read, there's three (3) different brand/model of tires that Kawasaki has partnered with as vendors for supplying tires for the '08 Ninja 250:

  • - Bridgestone: BT45's
    - Dunlop: GT-501's
    - IRC: Road Winner's

All the tires are supplied in a 110/70/17 front, and a 130/70/17 rear.

In at least one case (Dunlop) these are "OEM Specials", as they are not offered (currently) on the aftermarket in these exact same sizes.

Just for reference; one of the glossy-covered "Brit" sportbike rags recently tested the new 250, with the IRC "Road Winner" tires mounted. The result was them speaking very poorly of the tire's level of performance.

They referenced a very limited/poor amount of overall "stick/grip", as the primary shortcoming. Having not tried these IRC tires personally, consider this feedback as magazine FWIW info for now.

The IRC's are by far the cheapest of the bunch to buy on the aftermarket, at around $130/set (online), versus the Dunlops being closer to $200.
 
Gary J said:
It's possible the "Bridgestone" 140 sized tire fits the 3.5" wide rear rim better then the Dunlop Sportmax D208-SM 140/70/17 that I just finished trying ...... without much success. The tire didn't present any mechanical clearance problems with the chainguard, or swingarm, it just didn't work on the rim. From my experience, it's just too wide for the 3.5" rim to work properly, as described below.

With the Dunlop D208-SM Sportmax, I would NEVER use this tire in the 140/70/17 size again on the stock rear wheel of the '08 Ninja 250!

The narrowness of the stock rear rim results in the beads of the tire being pulled inward excessively. This results in the contour across the tread being very tightly curved, and the last 1/2" of rubber totally unusable ..... being literally "vertical". I find this to result in an unstable behavior (until it wears away the high spots), and produce a very high tire wear rate (as you can see in the photo below, after less then 1,800 miles).

Got some new plans to try next, for tire use/testing. Will share the news once the results are in. :)
Click to expand...

Damn, Gary. You worked that mutha. :thumbup

The IRC Road Winner's were the tires pictured in all the studio pre-release photo's Kawi put out....

-jim
 
So the GPS shows two MPH off at 80 MPH. I think you guys need to get your speedometers checked out. :laughing
 
:) Sounds like yours is much closer to reality, that's good! Saw this video review of the 250 this morning:

link to video on motorcyclenews.com

The UK bike may come with tires that we don't have here in the US (IRC's).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top