ronster wrote:With all due respect:
The ZZ-R1200 was never a legendary bike. It always was the poorer son of the ZZ-R1100 of 91-93 when the really good ones were built.
The 1100 was THE bike to have for 6 or 7 years and still takes a fair bit of handling when you mix that much weight with that much power.
I understand the resurgence of naked bikes as that was where most of us oldies started. I also think that not being able to buy a comfortable, faired Kawasaki with the raw power and gut wrenching induction roar of the ZZ-R 1100 would be a tragedy.
Ask the VIC boy racers about the ability of the 1100 if you have any doubts.
PC
scotty37 wrote:
Depends on what you want these days, afaik the 1200 has many advantages over the 1100, but please tell me if Iam wrong. What was the sports bike is nearly a tourer now and hey I don't mind one bit owning a tourer. As what I ment by legendary was the past decade of ZZR's leading into this model not the model it self is legendary.
ronster wrote:scotty37 wrote:
Depends on what you want these days, afaik the 1200 has many advantages over the 1100, but please tell me if Iam wrong. What was the sports bike is nearly a tourer now and hey I don't mind one bit owning a tourer. As what I ment by legendary was the past decade of ZZR's leading into this model not the model it self is legendary.
The 1100 was an unabashed sports/tourer whilst I think the 1200 has leaned more towards the tourer. I don't think theres anything wrong with the1200, however it is not the bike IMO that the 1100 was.
We live to disagree mate, to each his own, my other bike is a 69 Trident which I think was as good as you could get back then. (That should start a blue with the old farts)
cheers
PC
scotty37 wrote:So have you ever owned a 1100?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests