Kawasaki Sportsbike Riders Club - Australia - Online Forum

Guys,

Thanks for the feedback on the ZX-14. I'm now after feedback on the 1000SX. What are the positives and negatives if I trade the ZRX1200R in on a 1000SX?

I've read that the 1000SX has a comfy seat and a range of around 350kms. Is the seat better and the range (to empty tank) superior to the ZRX?

Also, the 1000SX has a smaller engine but it has fuel injection. How does the 1000SX compare to the ZRX for grunt? I tend to ride the ZRX low in the rev range.

I guess the 1000SX is not as grunty as the ZX-14. Are the chalk and cheese? Or in the same ball park?



PAH

Great bike and I replied to your PM

just bite the Bullitt and buy a z900rs

z900/zx9 wrote:just bite the Bullitt and buy a z900rs

Bullitt: How does a Z900RS compare to a ZRX1200R? The ZRX1200R is my yardstick? My beefs with the ZRX1200R are low fuel range, uncomfy saddle for long rides, a bit revy at 110kmh with only 5 gears.

How does the Z900RS compare to a Ninja 1000SX?


PAH

Well Fun comes to mind, great fuel range, light ,low down torque and a 6th gear that is a overdrive gear ,comfy seat just for starters.There is a guy on here that had a great zrx as well as many bikes and he loves his z900RS.Feel free to chip in Phil.

z900/zx9 wrote:Well Fun comes to mind, great fuel range, light ,low down torque and a 6th gear that is a overdrive gear ,comfy seat just for starters.There is a guy on here that had a great zrx as well as many bikes and he loves his z900RS.Feel free to chip in Phil.

The Z900Rs is great, probably doesn't have the off the bottom grunt of the ZRX but it is a great road engine. Comfort is far better than the ZRX, much more leg room and seat if fine for a full day ride. Maybe not as sporty in the ride position and is doing a few more revs at 100. The comment about the ZRX being a bit revvy at 100 stuns me, no bike I want to ride will rev less at 100 with the OE gearing than a ZRX. My ZRX was doing about 3500 at 100, in fifth. The ZZR 6 speed box alot of people opted for had the same final gear ratio so would rev at the same 3500.

The Z900RS is alot smoother, has great fuel range, is comfy and looks great. Add a quickshifter and the fun level rises.....alot. I dont do standard, so mine has some mods, but hey, everyone needs to personalise their bike, right

Found this article on ZRXOA

Ok its not a zrx1200 review but bottom line z1000r and zrx 1100 both under the 900 rs in top speed, power ,torque and weight not even thinking of brakes etc etc .Yes its not cheap but the good things in life are never cheap

I dont know why Kawasaki didn't go the very simple route of slotting
the ZX12R engine into the ZRX12... having said that, and not knowing
about the fuel efficency of your ZRX12, the ZX12Rs are a tad thirsty,
not quite able to return 15km per litre of 95 PULP during around town fanging... The price of having
more horsepower than a Hayabusa I suppose.

So why is it that you feel the need to part with your ZRX??? I always felt they looked grouse.

If your having "niggles" with your 12, this may give you some ideas, save you some bucks avoiding an expensive "swap",
and ultimately provide you with a bike personalized to you:

https://www.visordown.com/reviews/road- ... i-zrx1200r.

Phil wrote:

z900/zx9 wrote:Well Fun comes to mind, great fuel range, light ,low down torque and a 6th gear that is a overdrive gear ,comfy seat just for starters.There is a guy on here that had a great zrx as well as many bikes and he loves his z900RS.Feel free to chip in Phil.

The comment about the ZRX being a bit revvy at 100 stuns me, no bike I want to ride will rev less at 100 with the OE gearing than a ZRX. My ZRX was doing about 3500 at 100, in fifth. The ZZR 6 speed box alot of people opted for had the same final gear ratio so would rev at the same 3500.

The Z900RS is alot smoother, has great fuel range, is comfy and looks great. Add a quickshifter and the fun level rises.....alot. I dont do standard, so mine has some mods, but hey, everyone needs to personalise their bike, right

Thanks Phil: By way of explanation. The first big bike I rode were rentals and of course I gave them a try-out to see what big bike power felt like. So I revved the ring out of the poor thing and looked down at the tacho ... (and it was sitting on 6000 rpm So I gave it another go with the scenery flashing past my eyeballs and looked down at the tacho again ... 8000 rpm. I gave up at that point. It led me to conclude that I was (to an extent) using my ears as a tacho and they were set to regard 6000 rpm as the redline. Having ridden my ZRX1200 since 2007 I'm a bit more used to revving it to 8000 rpm on the odd isolated occasion but it does 95% of its running at around 3000 rpm.

That doesn't exactly touch on rpms at 110 kmh. I rode from Sydney to Melbourne at 110 kmh on the Hume (just under 4000 rpm?). With the redline at around 9000 rpm I guess that's not a strain on the engine. And I guess 2500 rpm at 110 kmh is too much to hope for this side of a 2.5L Triumph Rocket. I dare say a Rocket might give the type of low rpm cruise engine speeds at 110 kmh that I have in the back of my mind. I have no idea of Triumph quality (whereas Kwaka quality is known and impressive. And Rocket $ are more than I'd want to spend.

I wish that Kawasaki made a Z1200RS. That could be a wish without a logical basis because I have no idea how well a Z900RS goes.

How does a Z900RS compare to a Ninja 1000SX?


PAH