RC390 Review

[srt4evah]

From what i've read so far the RC with CUP parts is faster on the track the a decked out 300 Ninja, but I guess i'm biased. I used to own a Ninja 750, which was their Superbike at the time. Other then the stupid amount of power (which got me into trouble with the police way to many times, but hey, I was young) this bike is pretty amazing.

It would be, no doubt, but we're talking about a $10,000 investment versus about $6000. Money's not the big factor for me, but value is, and that $4000 for 77cc more displacement and a small weight advantage don't add up for me, and that's not including the poor stock brakes on the RC and lack of a slipper.

When the RC is a few years into the market and a used one is $4000, and the aftermarket catches up to the Ninja, I'm sure I'll be looking for the upgrade. I definitely like the styling of the RC over the Ninja.

 

[ToraTora]

I've read the reviews and they mention that the shock has terribly soft damping and that the brakes feel soft. Anyone ridden the R3 or Ninja for comparison sake regarding the shock and the brakes?

This is normal for the smaller Euro based bikes. The concept being put the money where it counts. You can pretty easily replace somethings, but others are more difficult. Shocks and brakes can be replaced without too much in development costs from third party venders (in some cases no development), but new suspension designs like with a rear swing arm is much less likely to happen (although it does sometimes) due to the inherent costs involved.

The only negative to this strategy is that with some magazine shoot outs the bikes that don't use this method will have slightly better shocks, and brakes find they have a better chance at winning the comparisons. But when both bikes get upgraded the one that put the money into the chassis ends up being the better bike. Companies like KTM expect that their buyers will be educated well enough to understand this concept. The other kinds of companies know that they can put considerably less money into the chassis, and slightly better shocks and sell plenty of bikes to the great unwashed masses. Sadly this second strategy will sell more bikes--way more bikes. Which is why as consumers we are incredibly lucky when we are afforded the opportunity to buy a bike produced with the first strategy.

Upgrades don't have to be back breaking expensive. Many times you can grab parts from the Universal Donor Bike. Which is to say the R6. Lots of squids buy them as their first bike, and through acts of questionable judgment send the bikes to the eBay parting zone. Craig's list, and forums also support the bounty of parts to be found from an R6. These parts tend to be quite decent quality with reasonable prices.

And for sure you can really step up and get an RCS master, Ohlins shocks, etc. Those sorts of things perform magic on small cc bikes, and work even better on the ones with the money spent on the chassis.

Small cc bikes are all made to a price point as they basically target the entry-level rider. Then crazy people like me come along who see the potential as a track/race bike and start swapping out half the bike in order to upgrade components.

Music to my ears.

2 Cylinders is better than one.

Not everyone feels this way. For instance a single requires less effort to maintain--some folks would consider that better. Performance wise it totally depends on the engine. Configuration is only part of the story. For examples of people that like singles--pretty much all motocross riders, and most dirt bikes run singles because they are inherently lighter--which again some people think is better. And lets not forget that nearly all small displacement road race bikes, like Moto3 for instance, run singles. Lets just call it a preference, okay?

It would be, no doubt, but we're talking about a $10,000 investment versus about $6000. Money's not the big factor for me, but value is, and that $4000 for 77cc more displacement and a small weight advantage don't add up for me, and that's not including the poor stock brakes on the RC and lack of a slipper.

When the RC is a few years into the market and a used one is $4000, and the aftermarket catches up to the Ninja, I'm sure I'll be looking for the upgrade. I definitely like the styling of the RC over the Ninja.

I would be surprised if the main reasons for this wouldn't be mostly the riders. I also wouldn't place so much attention on the displacement. I kind of remember that the Cup bikes are power limited. With regards to the bike features: the suspension, and brake upgrades are going to be the big helpers.

If you were to get the street bike, and upgrade some things like the suspension (lots of choices now), and brakes (many things can be done here now too), you wouldn't have to spend the $10K price of a Cup bike to be competitive with the Ninja.