New Kawasaki Ninja 400

[russ69]

EXCEPT for that OMG ugly as hell pipe!

Never seen a Ninja 1000?

...At what cc size do you consider a bike slow? Would you head out on the highway on a 125?

A good 125 makes 45HP and weighs less than 200 pounds, sooooo.... yes I would.

 

[Wrycque]

A good 125 makes 45HP and weighs less than 200 pounds, sooooo.... yes I would.

Which 125 is that anyway

 

[kuksul08]

But the Japanese bikes are still using really dated technology. This is a 2018 model without inverted forks, radial brakes, braided lines, modern chassis (and by modern I mean something that was standardized in the 90s). It really feels to me that they are offering crap.

Compare this 2018 bike to what Derbi sold here in the States in 2005 for around $3500. Yeah this is a 50cc bike, but look at what it came with stock. Radial brakes, aluminum twin spar frame, aluminum swing arm, inverted forks, braided lines, etc. These Japanese bikes can't even reach that level. All the Japanese do is put on pretty plastics, and add some displacement. The Ninja is still an overweight under featured bike.



Note: this image is of a later model with a different livery, but it's the same bike.

Just because a bike has radial brakes or inverted fork does not inherently make it better. I've ridden bikes with very very horrible, but beautiful inverted forks and bikes with ugly stock forks that work extremely well. If the radial brakes don't have the proper seals, rotor diameter, tolerances, piston ratios, they too will suck. Besides, I've ridden tons of bikes with and without radial brakes and can't tell a damn difference.

I just think it's funny that these entry level bikes are slowly creeping up. First 250, then 300, then 390, now 400. I am guessing it's partly influenced by emissions regulations, and trying to just edge out the competition while still being a 'beginner' bike.

 

[ToraTora]

New rubber lines work very well. Yes, as they age there's some deterioration.

So you'd rather have rubber than braided?

The Ninja 400 is a real improvement over the 300: less weight, better frame, more power. That's not just "add some displacement".

That's not saying much to compare an underwhelming bike with an even more underwhelming bike. Does the 400 have a twin spar aluminum frame? How about a lattice frame made from high carbon steel? What is so great about the 400's frame? And if it is so great why are they hiding it behind plastic designed to make it look like it has a twin spar frame?

The 899 is significantly heavier - it's dry weight is more than the Ninja 400's wet weight.

He was speaking about the 300. I was a little off with my numbers because I didn't look them up. But I did this time. The 300 wet is 385lbs. Compared to the 899 wet which is 425lbs--the 300 still sounds heavy, and that was the question.

With regards to the 899 vs the 400. One bike has 148 HP, and comes in wet at 425lbs. The other bike has 45 HP, and comes in wet at 370lbs. That for sure is a measurable amount (55lbs for those counting). However, power to weight of the 899 .34 hp/lbs, for the 400 .12 hp/lbs.

We were however speaking about the 300 which is 385lbs, and that's even less. Still when you consider the feature set of the 899 it still shows that the 300, or the 400 are not light for what they offer. Maybe I just should have compared the KTM RC390 which is 340lbs wet (30lbs less than the 400 for those counting).

And just to clarify things: approximately five of those wet pounds of lightness on the new Ninja came from a smaller fuel tank, not because of better engineering, or materials. Yeah I know the 899 has a woefully small fuel tank too!

The 899 also has enough power to get brakes hot. I suspect the Ninja 400 will have enough brake for the track if you put decent pads on it.

Did I not mention that in my post? I'm pretty sure it was the first thing I said. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

How much did the sub-300lb bikes that made more power than this cost? Were they street legal in the US?

They are legal now.

The Ninja 400 will have the biggest size front rotor out of all the other bikes in the class,

2018 Ninja 400 front disc diameter: 310mm
2017 KTM RC390 front disc diameter: 320mm
2017 Ninja 300 front disc diameter: 290mm
2005 Derbi GPR50 front disc diameter: 300mm

Any 50cc "bike" will be a featherweight compared to a real motorcycle, so it's pretty useless to compare apples to oranges.

I wasn't comparing weight, I was comparing features--which you can easily compare, and guess what? Your "real" bike doesn't measure up. It's not even close. So you are right the Ninja doesn't compare to the Derbi.

Just because a bike has radial brakes or inverted fork does not inherently make it better. I've ridden bikes with very very horrible, but beautiful inverted forks and bikes with ugly stock forks that work extremely well. If the radial brakes don't have the proper seals, rotor diameter, tolerances, piston ratios, they too will suck. Besides, I've ridden tons of bikes with and without radial brakes and can't tell a damn difference.

To be sure just because a product has a feature doesn't mean it was well implemented. For instance the reason you want inverted forks is because you can have bigger diameter tubes--which add stiffness. Now lets say you went with a Honda Grom which has inverted forks--well then you'd be fucked because Honda used extremely tiny diameter tubes on the Grom. So yeah in general the features mean it's better, but like with the Grom, you could have the features, and still end up with crap.

I just think it's funny that these entry level bikes are slowly creeping up. First 250, then 300, then 390, now 400. I am guessing it's partly influenced by emissions regulations, and trying to just edge out the competition while still being a 'beginner' bike.

I'm in full agreement with you there. I don't think any of these Japanese bikes from the Ninja 250, CBR250 etc. are proper beginner bikes, and adding cubes to them doesn't help in any respect whatsoever.

 

[Blankpage]

A good 125 makes 45HP and weighs less than 200 pounds, sooooo.... yes I would.

I don't know of such a bike but if it exists it probably has to spin to 30,000 to get that power and makes 5 ft pounds of torque while doing it. Then a piston and ring replacement with every fill up.

I might head out on it once also but maybe not twice.

 

[Holeshot]

I disregard anyone who says a 250 or 300 is slow...

It's not the bike that is slow, it's the rider.

No, a 250 and 300 are comparatively, slow. And it's not the rider, many times.

They may be fun, but they're not setting records on those things.

 

[EastBayDave]

Dual exhaust, on a 400cc twin?

There's a cost penalty and a weight penalty, and most likely no power gain.

The cost and weight per can are significantly higher now than before, due to needing cats to meet emissions requirements.New rubber lines work very well. Yes, as they age there's some deterioration.

The Ninja 400 is a real improvement over the 300: less weight, better frame, more power. That's not just "add some displacement". The 899 is significantly heavier - it's dry weight is more than the Ninja 400's wet weight.

The 899 also has enough power to get brakes hot. I suspect the Ninja 400 will have enough brake for the track if you put decent pads on it.

Why do you say over 400lb wet? Kawasaki says 168kg wet, which is 370lb.

Modern emissions requirements lead to a large increase in weight. Cats aren't light.

How much did the sub-300lb bikes that made more power than this cost? Were they street legal in the US?

Dunno why the wouldn’t use the exhaust system on the Ninja 650, specifically the post-cat “muffler” part. It is small, tucked out of the way and looks so much like an aftermarket piece that I’ve had people ask what brand I’ve put on.

It sounds like a big industrial vacuum under 4K, but my hearing is bad enough as it is so I don’t mind.

Never seen a Ninja 1000?

View attachment 501164



A good 125 makes 45HP and weighs less than 200 pounds, sooooo.... yes I would.

Thanks f/replies... It's simply the FUGLY new pipes like these I hate. "Shorty" or "Bulbous" both. Especially the MASSIVE ugly ones like on this bike.

Do they really NEED to make them look like that? Is there not stylists working for the manufacturers. Was there not even one poll taken on looks of the exhaust system?

Sorry, just my own taste coming from back in the day when most pipes on all brands at least had some look of "cool" to them.

 

[Roadstergal]

No, a 250 and 300 are comparatively, slow. And it's not the rider, many times.

They may be fun, but they're not setting records on those things.

This. Fun bikes, but I can play a few levels of Candy Crush down the straight at Thunderhill.

I wouldn't say a 300 is heavy. Compared to what?

The 400, for starters.

In its class, the Ninja 300 is heavy. Heavier than the R3, heavier than the RC390, heavier than the CBR300.

 

[j5m]

This. Fun bikes, but I can play a few levels of Candy Crush down the straight at Thunderhill.

Ha!

I liked my Ninja 300. But if I wanted to pass a car with that thing, I had to plan the maneuver weeks in advance. Was only really fun when you could keep your momentum up.

 

[Reli]

Bandit and FZR 400 called wanting to know why did it take so fuckin long LOL.

Except that those were peaky 4-cylinders that sucked for city use IMO

 

[Blankpage]

I did ride an FZR400 many years ago and what I remember most was what a pain in the ass that seat was. The other thing was the waiting for the engine to wind up. Not only are 250's slow, 400's can be slow also.

 

[Marcoose]

Thanks f/replies... It's simply the FUGLY new pipes like these I hate. "Shorty" or "Bulbous" both. Especially the MASSIVE ugly ones like on this bike.

Do they really NEED to make them look like that? Is there not stylists working for the manufacturers. Was there not even one poll taken on looks of the exhaust system?

Sorry, just my own taste coming from back in the day when most pipes on all brands at least had some look of "cool" to them.

Without knowing the whole story, blame regulations. I'm all for clean air --and am very biased given my line of work-- but targeting "hobby" motorbikes not only yields fugly looks, but also solves the proverbial 0.001% of the emission problem. Go figure.

 

[stangmx13]

But the Japanese bikes are still using really dated technology. This is a 2018 model without inverted forks, radial brakes, braided lines, modern chassis (and by modern I mean something that was standardized in the 90s). It really feels to me that they are offering crap.

i said the "new" arms race. given that the OEMs are making these bikes and they are selling, it seems that none of that matters to the majority of street riders. the arms race is now about power, a slipper, and maybe fly-by-wire, while still keeping costs low. the largest benefit of all the parts u listed is "looks", which just isnt worth the cost to OEMs or the added MSRP.

those "higher spec" parts dont even have a large impact on laptimes either. i was just having a convo w/ a reputable tuner back east about lightweight twins lap records. he says a lot of them were set on SV650s with the OEM front end (w/ fork carts of course), even though every squid on the planet thinks they need a GSXR front end w/ USD forks, larger rotors, and radial 4 piston brakes. nah, its all bullshit. the time gained in club racing due to those parts is tenths at best.

inflation adjustment from 2005 is 25%. id suggest going even higher with motorcycles. the '05 R6 was $8399 and the '17 is $12199 = 45%. so a Ninja300 is about the same price. no fucking way id buy a 50cc bike over a 300 for the same cost

 

[Holeshot]

This. Fun bikes, but I can play a few levels of Candy Crush down the straight at Thunderhill.

Quit sending me those requests to play CC with you on the BACK STRAIGHT!

 

[FreeRyde]

This. Fun bikes, but I can play a few levels of Candy Crush down the straight at Thunderhill.

Who cares about how fast it goes down the front straight at Thill? I sure fuck'n don't... Only .001% of 250/300/400's will EVER see the track. Track riding is for the wealthy and elite few, whom these bikes are not designed for.

These little bikes are perfect for street riding, yes you have to ring their necks, but that's more than half the fun. It also just so happens they allow newer riders to ride without the fear of whiskey throttle induced death.

I'll say this again, because I know most of you have never actually spent any time on small displacement bikes on the street (for long rides). I've ridden 250's on extremely long rides, 14+ hour day rides. It just so turns out that I could lead or keep pace with everyone, including those on 1290 SuperDuke GT 9000's and BMW GS's, Connie's. Yes, they can't go 110mph up steep inclines, but they can hold redline at 10k at 75mph up hills. (It should be noted that I am not right in the head)

You folks do know the rest of the world rides 250's, right? We are an elite nation of unregulated, unskilled LiberBiek Ryders.

 

[Marcoose]

Track riding is for the wealthy and elite few...

I see loads of trash rednecks at the tracks, but perhaps we go to different tracks.

 

[ToraTora]

i said the "new" arms race. given that the OEMs are making these bikes and they are selling, it seems that none of that matters to the majority of street riders. the arms race is now about power, a slipper, and maybe fly-by-wire, while still keeping costs low. the largest benefit of all the parts u listed is "looks", which just isnt worth the cost to OEMs or the added MSRP.

those "higher spec" parts dont even have a large impact on laptimes either. i was just having a convo w/ a reputable tuner back east about lightweight twins lap records. he says a lot of them were set on SV650s with the OEM front end (w/ fork carts of course), even though every squid on the planet thinks they need a GSXR front end w/ USD forks, larger rotors, and radial 4 piston brakes. nah, its all bullshit. the time gained in club racing due to those parts is tenths at best.

inflation adjustment from 2005 is 25%. id suggest going even higher with motorcycles. the '05 R6 was $8399 and the '17 is $12199 = 45%. so a Ninja300 is about the same price. no fucking way id buy a 50cc bike over a 300 for the same cost

You sure are working hard to rationalize buying bikes that don't even meet 1990's tech--this coming from the same guy that made a big deal about an additional 20mm on a front disc. lolz

Your math needs help. The Ninja 400 in England will be about £5100, an Aprilia RS4 50 retails for about £3800. Yes things are more expensive over there, but it is an actual real price comparison. Also, two strokes don't really need a slipper clutch. That's just a glommed on technology to help deal with yet another four stroke deficiency.

And yeah I get that you wouldn't buy a 50, that just illustrates how little you grok the two stroke Replicas.

 

[FreeRyde]

I see loads of trash rednecks at the tracks, but perhaps we go to different tracks.

It appears that you don't know what the difference between lower middle class (working class) and upper middle class (classical middle class) income is. The income is the exact same, and only buying patterns/lifestyle choices differ. Those "trash rednecks" you love so much make a comparable salary to yourself. Their buying behaviors and lifestyle choices are the only difference.

Let me put it in understandable terms that even a close-minded bigot can grasp. Poor folk are NOT going to track days. Truly poor individuals are not buying Ninja 400's and going to trackdays with you.

 

[ToraTora]

No, a 250 and 300 are comparatively, slow. And it's not the rider, many times.

They may be fun, but they're not setting records on those things.

This is truly a function of location. There are plenty of places (like corners) where the smaller bikes will be faster than the bigger bikes. I tell you what though, I don't enjoy my motorcycle riding going straight nearly as much as I do going around corners.

This. Fun bikes, but I can play a few levels of Candy Crush down the straight at Thunderhill.

But why would you even take one there? Pointless activities create pointless results.

Ha!

I liked my Ninja 300. But if I wanted to pass a car with that thing, I had to plan the maneuver weeks in advance. Was only really fun when you could keep your momentum up.

This is a function of rider ability. And obviously carrying speed is one of the thrills of riding the little bikes.

I did ride an FZR400 many years ago and what I remember most was what a pain in the ass that seat was. The other thing was the waiting for the engine to wind up. Not only are 250's slow, 400's can be slow also.

Another skill development. Learning how to keep your small engine in the power band is a huge part of the fun. Sure it's not for the lazy rider, but if you are a lazy rider you might as well just get a car.

Who cares about how fast it goes down the front straight at Thill? I sure fuck'n don't...

Exactly!

Track riding is for the wealthy and elite few, whom these bikes are not designed for.

On an appropriate track the little bikes can be just as much fun, oh and the costs are usually about 1/20th--makes it possible to ride the track without being wealthy.

These little bikes are perfect for street riding, yes you have to ring their necks, but that's more than half the fun. It also just so happens they allow newer riders to ride without the fear of whiskey throttle induced death.

I'll say this again, because I know most of you have never actually spent any time on small displacement bikes on the street (for long rides). I've ridden 250's on extremely long rides, 14+ hour day rides. It just so turns out that I could lead or keep pace with everyone, including those on 1290 SuperDuke GT 9000's and BMW GS's, Connie's. Yes, they can't go 110mph up steep inclines, but they can hold redline at 10k at 75mph up hills. (It should be noted that I am not right in the head)

You folks do know the rest of the world rides 250's, right? We are an elite nation of unregulated, unskilled LiberBiek Ryders.

They don't because they suffer massively from SPS.

 

[Krooklyn]

A good 125 makes 45HP and weighs less than 200 pounds, sooooo.... yes I would.

The only 2T 125s that I've seen that put out over 40hp at the rear wheel were the Aprilia RSW125, which for obvious reasons are not valid in this argument. What 125s are you talking about?