That ZR1000 looks very good. The seat looks like a poorly shaped piece of wood though. Only a butt test will tell for sure. Hopefully it will make it harder to sell the Honda 919, giving me more bargaining room!
The new ZX6 looks suspiciously like the R6, and bears an uncanny resemblance to the new F4i. Where's the originality? I'm sure they're all great bikes, but the manufacturers should take the time to design distinct products if they want to avoid the cookie-cutter syndrome. At least the GSX-Rs look different...
Although the new 999 is still damn ugly to my eyes, Ducati should be commended for designing something unique.
So far for looks the R-6 does it for me. But I do have some brand loyalty to Kawasaki since my 2001 ZX-6R has been a champ. I agree with others the tire hugger is a good addition since I have to clean junk from the shock sometimes. I wish the 636 had relaxed ergos though. I think the 636 will appeal to the sport-tourer (emphasis on sport) crowd. My 2001 bike has nice ergos. The naked bike is exciting. Nice work MO!
My question too, I searched the net but could not find an explaination of what the hell they were talking about. You can buy Radial calipers from many after market companies but they too dont explain why you would want to. I can only assume they are more form fitting to the disk by being arched or something...
Visually the only difference is that the "Radial" Brake caliper is mounted to the fork at both ends of the caliper. Instead of like on the CBR RR the front edge of the caliper and the middle. Less flex I guess...
If you look at any (to my knowledge anyway) production bike so far, the brake calipers are held to the forks by fasteners that extend parallel to the front axle. Radial brakes, which are found on most high end race bikes these days hold the caliper on differently. As you may have guessed, the fasteners extend radially (sort of) inwardly toward the front axle. That is, they are parallel to the plane of the front wheel. You'll see it if you look really closely at the pictures.
The reasoning behind all this is that fasteners are much better in tension/compression (as they are in the radial setup) than they are in shear (as they are in the conventional setup). The radial setup provides a stiffer brake caliper mounting, resulting in better brake feel.
Hope that covers everything, but I'm sure someone will find something else to add.
Great, bigger bore for the "street" version. But why make the ergos more racy on a "street version" bike. It seems to me that if you are going to have two versions of basically one bike, you would try to make the differences more clear cut. It will be interesting to see the dyno results. Could be that the only ones interested in the RR are the people that actually plan to race it competitively.
Man I've held off on buying an gixxer 1000 all this time waiting for team green to come out with the 10RR. Where is it? Is this little 600 and the naked bike all that kawasaki's going to do for us street riders that get tired of the gixxer whoopin everybody's but?
We have different press release dates (or embargo dates) than the overseas press has. Its kinda sucky considering we're all part of the big "global" media thing. But we have to follow our release dates and they have to follow theirs.
Upon closer inspection of the photos and my 93 CR500 with upside down forks, I have come up with two more questions about radial disc brakes. Are six of these slightly better than a half dozen of the other? Or is there no other way to mount a caliper to an upside down fork? Either way, you won't see "radial" in the description of Honda's or Yamaha's 600 class front brakes, so it must be better.