Saw the new cbr500r 2016

[TheRoadWarrior]

cbr500r designed for beginners and returning riders and for those dont need a lot of power but just a small nimble machine they can ride with minimal expense for service and petrol.

nimble??

it's 193kg @!!!

the new update does improve its appearance quite a bit though

[Lampang2]

cbr500r designed for beginners and returning riders and for those dont need a lot of power but just a small nimble machine they can ride with minimal expense for service and petrol.

nimble??

it's 193kg @!!!

the new update does improve its appearance quite a bit though

Lump of iron.

More weight than a 1000cc 200 hp Supersport bike.

Even the 10 year old ones weighs in below, all fluids, full tank.

[English_M_in_Bkk]

cbr500r designed for beginners and returning riders and for those dont need a lot of power but just a small nimble machine they can ride with minimal expense for service and petrol.

nimble??

it's 193kg @!!!

the new update does improve its appearance quite a bit though

Lump of iron.

More weight than a 1000cc 200 hp Supersport bike.

Even the 10 year old ones weighs in below, all fluids, full tank.

comparing an entry level budget bike to a superbike/supersport - of course the 1000cc one is lighter, it has always been like that, they are using lighter materials. Lighter materials push the price up, not something you want on the entry level bike. The 500s are not designed as race machines.

The 500s are nimble, you are not going to feel that weight when riding. There are also advantages for the weight with newer riders, traction and stability when braking.

Don't understand people who bitch about the 'performance' of these 500s, like saying you want a Toyota Vios to behave like a Ferrari.

Good all round entry level bikes, good for newbies, good for commuting or pottering around town.

[Lampang2]

cbr500r designed for beginners and returning riders and for those dont need a lot of power but just a small nimble machine they can ride with minimal expense for service and petrol.

nimble??

it's 193kg @!!!

the new update does improve its appearance quite a bit though

Lump of iron.

More weight than a 1000cc 200 hp Supersport bike.

Even the 10 year old ones weighs in below, all fluids, full tank.

comparing an entry level budget bike to a superbike/supersport - of course the 1000cc one is lighter, it has always been like that, they are using lighter materials. Lighter materials push the price up, not something you want on the entry level bike. The 500s are not designed as race machines.

The 500s are nimble, you are not going to feel that weight when riding. There are also advantages for the weight with newer riders, traction and stability when braking.

Don't understand people who bitch about the 'performance' of these 500s, like saying you want a Toyota Vios to behave like a Ferrari.

Good all round entry level bikes, good for newbies, good for commuting or pottering around town.

Yes.

And so is my exciter 150.

I stick to the "scooter"

I agree with all your arguments, but this iron lump will not light my fire.

Is 200K for this good price / performance?

Probably is, yes.

But I personally don't eat hay just beacuse it's cheap.

Others may very well do so.

I have no problem with that.

[hansgruber]

Basically the same weight as the 650f which in turn has the inline 4 engine.

That alone is reason not to buy the 500.

Why anyone would buy the 500 over the 650 is beyond me.

[properperson]

Basically the same weight as the 650f which in turn has the inline 4 engine.

That alone is reason not to buy the 500.

Why anyone would buy the 500 over the 650 is beyond me.

what about if you want an adventure bike ? - no 650X

What about f you can afford the 500F but the 650F is beyond reach ?

Using your philosiphy - we'd all be riding BMW's...

[sebastion]

Basically the same weight as the 650f which in turn has the inline 4 engine.

That alone is reason not to buy the 500.

Why anyone would buy the 500 over the 650 is beyond me.

what about if you want an adventure bike ? - no 650X

What about f you can afford the 500F but the 650F is beyond reach ?

Using your philosiphy - we'd all be riding BMW's...

219k for the 500 brand new v's 285k for the 650 series. Not much difference for what you get but yes its more money.

Used 650's with 3000ks are going for 220k, even less. A much better propostion and a bike light years ahead of the 500.

I dont undertstand the love for a heavy single thats basically older in design than i at 28 years of age.

[properperson]

Basically the same weight as the 650f which in turn has the inline 4 engine.

That alone is reason not to buy the 500.

Why anyone would buy the 500 over the 650 is beyond me.

what about if you want an adventure bike ? - no 650X

What about f you can afford the 500F but the 650F is beyond reach ?

Using your philosiphy - we'd all be riding BMW's...

219k for the 500 brand new v's 285k for the 650 series. Not much difference for what you get but yes its more money.

Used 650's with 3000ks are going for 220k, even less. A much better propostion and a bike light years ahead of the 500.

I dont undertstand the love for a heavy single thats basically older in design than i at 28 years of age.

CB500F is 210,000b and the CB650F is 285,000b ...

if you can only afford the former, you can't have the latter....

The 500 range are twin's not singles....

is the 650F better than the 500F ? - i should co-co - but then thats life....

but if you are going to argue - then argue like for like...

A Ducati Scrambler is better than a CB650F - but then it should be, cos it costs more....

A triumph XCX is better than a Ducati Scrambler - but then it should be, cos it costs more.....

At the tender age of 55, with well over 50 bikes under my belt (from little 'uns to big 'uns and plenty in between), my personal opinion is that the roads here are bleedin awful so when i chose my bike i went for an "adventure" style bike that could handle the pot holes and cracks better than a sports bike.......then it was down to budget.....

the Honda CB500X ticked all the right boxes and came in at just what i was comfirtable at - so i went for one...

just under 40 years of riding pretty much every style and size of bike, tells me that i made the right choice....

[MatteoBassini]

Basically the same weight as the 650f which in turn has the inline 4 engine.

That alone is reason not to buy the 500.

Why anyone would buy the 500 over the 650 is beyond me.

Wrong.

1. Cheaper.

2. Dont' need 650cc.

3. 500x

4. CB650f is pretty ugly to me. Tailights looks like MSX, Seat looks ugly. If I don't like the look of the bike, I'm not buying it, simple, don't care if one sounds better or goes faster.

5. Seat height. CB500f = 78cm, CB650f = 81cm, for people around 174cm tall, those few centimeters do make a difference, I tried sitting on both of them, I'm 175cm tall, I could flat foot both feet on CB500f comfortably, but on the CB650f, is a bit of a stretch.

6. Better fuel economy

[kannot]

ImageUploadedByThaivisa Connect1450927188.886733.jpg Sounds nice

Somebodys stolen your fairing.............get it fixed quickly

[kannot]

latest tech comes with money. do you have 840 k thb to spare for bike in thailand which will not be as easy to ride as a cbr500r at most normal riding situations?

. cbr500r designed for beginners and returning riders and for those dont need a lot of power but just a small nimble machine they can ride with minimal expense for service and petrol.

do you need those tech in Thailand as a farang as smallest problem at those electronics, you pay a hundred grand for repairs and wait for days.

and 1970s tech in cbr500r, i dont think so. yeah, bikes had two wheels in 1970 too:)

bikes from decades before. yeah nice bikes but basically honda still delivers nice bikes.

and some focuses on rpm:)

it is not rpm that makes a bike sporty or not! .

Yes.

If I crave a bike I would buy a bike.

But as you pointed out they are expensive.

So I don't, but I can't be asked to go back in time.

it is not back in time.

it is a 2016 model good value for money motorcycle which also looks greater now.

it is done by latest production techniques and standards. material tech now is also a lot better than 1970s.

Honda is certainly not using better base materials than in the past, all the steel and alu is of a lower quality and therefore cheaper.

The suspension components are very old tech

What they've done is down cost the manufacturing while still holding the price, made for people that dont know about the tech advancements but

see its still go the "look".

Yes still a relatively entry level price, and would be a great bike for many people.

This is a running joke in the MX world about Japanese bikes:

A management meeting at one of the Japanese companies

japanasleep.jpg

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2015/04/who-makes-the-most-reliable-motorcycle/index.htm

but it wont break

[bramds]

Basically the same weight as the 650f which in turn has the inline 4 engine.

That alone is reason not to buy the 500.

Why anyone would buy the 500 over the 650 is beyond me.

Well, I bought the 500 because there wasn't a 650 at that time.

Done 34,000 kms on it now all over Thailand and without any issues or problems.

Maybe you should come back with some comments when you've actually ridden one for a few kilometers.

[Lampang2]

Basically the same weight as the 650f which in turn has the inline 4 engine.

That alone is reason not to buy the 500.

Why anyone would buy the 500 over the 650 is beyond me.

Well, I bought the 500 because there wasn't a 650 at that time.

Done 34,000 kms on it now all over Thailand and without any issues or problems.

Maybe you should come back with some comments when you've actually ridden one for a few kilometers.

You must ride every bike on planet earth to be able to comment?

Complicated.

Maybe your experience is limited to this bike.

Who knows.

[bramds]

Basically the same weight as the 650f which in turn has the inline 4 engine.

That alone is reason not to buy the 500.

Why anyone would buy the 500 over the 650 is beyond me.

Well, I bought the 500 because there wasn't a 650 at that time.

Done 34,000 kms on it now all over Thailand and without any issues or problems.

Maybe you should come back with some comments when you've actually ridden one for a few kilometers.

You must ride every bike on planet earth to be able to comment?

Complicated.

Maybe your experience is limited to this bike.

Who knows.

I didn't say that, but I don't talk bad about something I know nothing about.

[ja99]

And the Honda spiel says the exhaust is 'now lighter and gives better balance..' Makes you wonder why they put such a bloated piece of steel on the first 500 model? The new exhaust looks like a Ninja ripoff too. Agree that this bike a better choice for extra 30K over a Ninja 300 or Yamaha R3.

Edited December 28, 2015 by ja99

[macknife]

[. . . ] Agree that this bike a better choice for extra 30K over a Ninja 300 or Yamaha R3.

Really?

2 of them look like sports bikes and ride like sports bikes. Get them in the twisties, keep them near the red line and the engine will sing to you as you tear the living crap out of it while still begging for more.

The other one looks like a (very nice) sports bike, but red lines at 8500rpms. Front end of a panigale,(ish) middle and exhaust of a ninja and back end of a yamaha.

Yes it has 3-4HP more, but is that really worth it? Coz a sports bike it aint.

[mark131v]

[. . . ] Agree that this bike a better choice for extra 30K over a Ninja 300 or Yamaha R3.

Really?

2 of them look like sports bikes and ride like sports bikes. Get them in the twisties, keep them near the red line and the engine will sing to you as you tear the living crap out of it while still begging for more.

The other one looks like a (very nice) sports bike, but red lines at 8500rpms. Front end of a panigale,(ish) middle and exhaust of a ninja and back end of a yamaha.

Yes it has 3-4HP more, but is that really worth it? Coz a sports bike it aint.

Sorry I gotta agree with this...

I have no axe to grind with the Honda 500's and in fact have a CBX and an R3 but as a sports bike the R3 and the Ninja 300 are all over the Honda, now as an everyday bike and commuter the 500's are really good and serve a purpose but the engine just aint very sporty and no amount of face lifts will change that

[ja99]

[. . . ] Agree that this bike a better choice for extra 30K over a Ninja 300 or Yamaha R3.

Really?

2 of them look like sports bikes and ride like sports bikes. Get them in the twisties, keep them near the red line and the engine will sing to you as you tear the living crap out of it while still begging for more.

The other one looks like a (very nice) sports bike, but red lines at 8500rpms. Front end of a panigale,(ish) middle and exhaust of a ninja and back end of a yamaha.

Yes it has 3-4HP more, but is that really worth it? Coz a sports bike it aint.

What is the quoted HP figure for the Ninja? 39HP from what I have read. The CBR 500 figure is 47 or 49HP depending on the article, a bit more than 3 or 4 as you claim. Maybe the Ninja is better for the twisties but the 500 would surely eat it for breakfast as a tourer , unless you like being buzzed by 13000 redline all day.

[mark131v]

[. . . ] Agree that this bike a better choice for extra 30K over a Ninja 300 or Yamaha R3.

Really?

2 of them look like sports bikes and ride like sports bikes. Get them in the twisties, keep them near the red line and the engine will sing to you as you tear the living crap out of it while still begging for more.

The other one looks like a (very nice) sports bike, but red lines at 8500rpms. Front end of a panigale,(ish) middle and exhaust of a ninja and back end of a yamaha.

Yes it has 3-4HP more, but is that really worth it? Coz a sports bike it aint.

What is the quoted HP figure for the Ninja? 39HP from what I have read. The CBR 500 figure is 47 or 49HP depending on the article, a bit more than 3 or 4 as you claim. Maybe the Ninja is better for the twisties but the 500 would surely eat it for breakfast as a tourer , unless you like being buzzed by 13000 redline all day.

Again as somebody with both I disagree

There really is very little between the R3 and the CB500X which has the same engine as the CBR and the little R3 is far more fun to ride fast and with weight to power ratios there is really nothing much in it

Touring well I have done many 4 hour plus rides and the comfort of the R3 and CBX are pretty comparable, cannot speak for the Ninja or the CBR as I do not have them but unless you are very tall or very fat there really aint much in it

There is slightly more leg room on the CBX and the tank is bigger and the mirrors are better but if I was in the market to buy a sports bike and could only have one and the choice was between the CBR500 or an R3 it would be the R3 all day long...

[macknife]

[. . . ] Agree that this bike a better choice for extra 30K over a Ninja 300 or Yamaha R3.

Really?

2 of them look like sports bikes and ride like sports bikes. Get them in the twisties, keep them near the red line and the engine will sing to you as you tear the living crap out of it while still begging for more.

The other one looks like a (very nice) sports bike, but red lines at 8500rpms. Front end of a panigale,(ish) middle and exhaust of a ninja and back end of a yamaha.

Yes it has 3-4HP more, but is that really worth it? Coz a sports bike it aint.

What is the quoted HP figure for the Ninja? 39HP from what I have read. The CBR 500 figure is 47 or 49HP depending on the article, a bit more than 3 or 4 as you claim. Maybe the Ninja is better for the twisties but the 500 would surely eat it for breakfast as a tourer , unless you like being buzzed by 13000 redline all day.

I believe the 'official' numbers are CBR 47, R3 43, Ninja 41. Of course none of them get this on the dyno. The top speeds are very similar. However I feel you're just splitting hairs.

The point is the CBR is advertised as a 'sports' bike and is made to look like a sports bike but the sad thing is, it isn't really a sports bike.

Just read what Mark says above as he has both.

Don't get me wrong, I think the Honda is a very good and reliable bike but like you said yourself it's more of a tourer. The CB and CBX are excellent value and do what it says on the tin sadly the CBR doesn't. Frankly, unless it has RR after it, the current CBRs don't live up to what they used to.

So if someone wants an actual sports bike and has limited funds, then a Ninja or R3 would be the way to go. So, no, paying 35K more for a CBR over the other two is, IMO, no way worth it.

[ja99]

Again as somebody with both I disagree

There really is very little between the R3 and the CB500X which has the same engine as the CBR and the little R3 is far more fun to ride fast and with weight to power ratios there is really nothing much in it

Touring well I have done many 4 hour plus rides and the comfort of the R3 and CBX are pretty comparable, cannot speak for the Ninja or the CBR as I do not have them but unless you are very tall or very fat there really aint much in it

There is slightly more leg room on the CBX and the tank is bigger and the mirrors are better but if I was in the market to buy a sports bike and could only have one and the choice was between the CBR500 or an R3 it would be the R3 all day long...

I cant see how the riding position on the R3 could in any way compare with the upright position on the CBX, let alone be comfortable for extended highway use. Sure the R3 is going to be far more nimble and looks the part, overpriced as it is.

[mark131v]

Again as somebody with both I disagree

There really is very little between the R3 and the CB500X which has the same engine as the CBR and the little R3 is far more fun to ride fast and with weight to power ratios there is really nothing much in it

Touring well I have done many 4 hour plus rides and the comfort of the R3 and CBX are pretty comparable, cannot speak for the Ninja or the CBR as I do not have them but unless you are very tall or very fat there really aint much in it

There is slightly more leg room on the CBX and the tank is bigger and the mirrors are better but if I was in the market to buy a sports bike and could only have one and the choice was between the CBR500 or an R3 it would be the R3 all day long...

I cant see how the riding position on the R3 could in any way compare with the upright position on the CBX, let alone be comfortable for extended highway use. Sure the R3 is going to be far more nimble and looks the part, overpriced as it is.

Problem is you are speaking from a position of ignorance whereas I am not, that said you can always have a look on cycle ergo.com

Very easy for you to rent a CBR or R3 and find out but for your information sitting position on the R3 is very upright and the clip on's are well above the yolk and it is actually, for me, a very comfortable position

We are not all the same and I have not done much long touring but for 4 or 5 hour trips I really don't feel either the CBX or the R3 are much different, both are comfortable with good seats and riding positions neither are particularly buzzy but the R3 is slightly more than the Honda at certain revs due to the higher redline but neither are uncomfortable

I have not rode the CBR but it does seem to me you are flogging a dead horse as it patently is not a sports bike in any way other than the aesthetics of it, if you want a sports bike by all means buy whatever you like but I would say from my experience there are better and cheaper options, if however you want a daily runner that is a jack of all trades then the Honda 500 series is a really good option

Overpriced, I don't know, I am very happy with both and feel they are both very good value for money then again opinions and arse-holes and all that...

Edited December 29, 2015 by mark131v

[Rhys]

The marketing push for this bike is on..

[TheRoadWarrior]

I believe the 'official' numbers are CBR 47, R3 43, Ninja 41. Of course none of them get this on the dyno.

why would they ever attain those numbers on a dyno?

the standard shop dyno is a wheel or hub dyno, not an engine dyno... manufacturers claim their figures at the engine, not the wheel, those figures should never match.

[maykilceksin]

[. . . ] Agree that this bike a better choice for extra 30K over a Ninja 300 or Yamaha R3.

Really?

2 of them look like sports bikes and ride like sports bikes. Get them in the twisties, keep them near the red line and the engine will sing to you as you tear the living crap out of it while still begging for more.

The other one looks like a (very nice) sports bike, but red lines at 8500rpms. Front end of a panigale,(ish) middle and exhaust of a ninja and back end of a yamaha.

Yes it has 3-4HP more, but is that really worth it? Coz a sports bike it aint.

What is the quoted HP figure for the Ninja? 39HP from what I have read. The CBR 500 figure is 47 or 49HP depending on the article, a bit more than 3 or 4 as you claim. Maybe the Ninja is better for the twisties but the 500 would surely eat it for breakfast as a tourer , unless you like being buzzed by 13000 redline all day.

cbr500r eats a ninja at all times. say it corners, straight line performance, commuting, touring, reliability, smoothness, quality, looks, service... hp difference is 8 hp which sounds like nothing but it is around 20 percent more power and 40 percent more torque. and for only 30 000 baht more!

and overall a cbr500r is more sporty. of course for riders now what they are doing not for riders focusing on rpm claiming it is what makes a bike sporty which they sound very funny:)

I think 175 kg ninja feels porky especially at low revs as it has less torque to keep it moving. when i ride ninja 300, i feel like i am riding a cbr150 until it reaches 10 000 rpm but you barely reach those rpms in city so it does not make much sense unless you are on a track or highway but then again a cbr500r will smoke a ninja 300 even if it is churning low revs because basically a cbr500r is more powerful and have a higher power to weight ratio of course.

and what happened to the guys here finding cbr500r old tech? ninja 300 or r3 having higher tech? no actually lower tech than cbr500r.

[maykilceksin]

[. . . ] Agree that this bike a better choice for extra 30K over a Ninja 300 or Yamaha R3.

Really?

2 of them look like sports bikes and ride like sports bikes. Get them in the twisties, keep them near the red line and the engine will sing to you as you tear the living crap out of it while still begging for more.

The other one looks like a (very nice) sports bike, but red lines at 8500rpms. Front end of a panigale,(ish) middle and exhaust of a ninja and back end of a yamaha.

Yes it has 3-4HP more, but is that really worth it? Coz a sports bike it aint.

What is the quoted HP figure for the Ninja? 39HP from what I have read. The CBR 500 figure is 47 or 49HP depending on the article, a bit more than 3 or 4 as you claim. Maybe the Ninja is better for the twisties but the 500 would surely eat it for breakfast as a tourer , unless you like being buzzed by 13000 redline all day.

I believe the 'official' numbers are CBR 47, R3 43, Ninja 41. Of course none of them get this on the dyno. The top speeds are very similar. However I feel you're just splitting hairs.

The point is the CBR is advertised as a 'sports' bike and is made to look like a sports bike but the sad thing is, it isn't really a sports bike.

Just read what Mark says above as he has both.

Don't get me wrong, I think the Honda is a very good and reliable bike but like you said yourself it's more of a tourer. The CB and CBX are excellent value and do what it says on the tin sadly the CBR doesn't. Frankly, unless it has RR after it, the current CBRs don't live up to what they used to.

So if someone wants an actual sports bike and has limited funds, then a Ninja or R3 would be the way to go. So, no, paying 35K more for a CBR over the other two is, IMO, no way worth it.

those does not sound correct.

actually you just sound like a ninja 300 owner (which you are) having full of regrets when you see the new cbr500r just for 30 k more than porky ninja 300.

so how can we believe what you are saying? r3 and ninja is sportier and cbr500r not? man it is very funny to hear these and they just DELETED

what do you think cbr500r is not a sport bike? because you just say 'cbr500r is not a sport bike' and nothing else. anything countable we can call facts not bs?

look, just facts not like 'i own a ninja 300 and it is sportier than cbr500r'

DELETED

Edited January 4, 2016 by seedy
troll / flaming

[mark131v]

I started typing and then thought, nah, can't be bothered! there is no point at all wasting time on some people.....

Edited January 4, 2016 by mark131v

[Lampang2]

Zxr400.

4 cylinder, 16 valve.

14000 rpm redline.

60+ hp.

Divine chassis, with usd.

25 years old, outruns the cbr500r.

Just as an example for calibration of your devices.

[canthai55]

Zxr400.

4 cylinder, 16 valve.

14000 rpm redline.

60+ hp.

Divine chassis, with usd.

25 years old, outruns the cbr500r.

Just as an example for calibration of your devices.

And the 650 too probably. Or give it a good run for its money !

[Lampang2]

Zxr400.

4 cylinder, 16 valve.

14000 rpm redline.

60+ hp.

Divine chassis, with usd.

25 years old, outruns the cbr500r.

Just as an example for calibration of your devices.

And the 650 too probably. Or give it a good run for its money !

Problem is that all bikes that have a modern chassis end up in the 170-180kg weight, wet.

Doesn't matter if it's, 400cc, 600cc or 1000cc.

The GSXR 1000 k5 is as nimble as the zxr400.

This is also applicable to the

Cbr150, cbr300, cbr500, cbr1000

Little difference in weight.

Add on the constant weight of rider and difference gets even more negligible.

This was defined on the Era of zxr400, zx6r, r1.

Before that era, smaller cc weight less, but with the aluminum frames this leveled out. Also front end, proper tyres, chain, etc weights more or less the same. Engine weight gone down, making difference in absolute numbers low.

Very old news by now, so it's painful to reiterate old findings.

But I can understand that argument considering Thailand as parallell universe.

Fine, I agree, just as we keep the context and define the cbr500r as a nice sports bike in the Thailand universe.

Given the above, yes, buy maximum amount of cc, because weight penalty is negletable, and the price premium looked to be very small.

Cbr500r, a small step for mankind but a giant leap for Thailand, maybe...