Gary J Veteran



Founding Member

Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: South Bay Motorcycles: Street & Track Name: Gary

Honda CBR250R vs. Kawi Ninja 250R : "Real World - Extreme Riding - Shootout" Ninja 250R vs. CBR250R: “Real World - Extreme Riding - Shootout”



In the interest of full disclosure I should preface this article by mentioning that I’ve seen over 150K miles of pavement pass under the wheels of Ninja 250s during the last 10 years. Miles logged on both the old-generation (pre ’08) and the current-offering models. Those deep roots on Japan’s mostly uncontested (for a lot of years) 250cc entry-level sportbike made Honda’s release of the CBR250R earlier this year an event of great interest.



Despite a strong desire over the last six months, since the bike hitting the showroom floors, unfortunately the opportunity to swing a leg over a 2011 CBR250R and take it out on the road for comparison to the Ninja had eluded me. Thanks to the generous offer of a fellow BARFer (Rugbynerd707 - "Ben") that opportunity finally arrived last weekend! The Ninja 250R vs. CBR250R Real World comparison article below is the product of that opportunity. Hope you enjoy the read.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



There has been no shortage of 250 shootout comparison articles appearing in all the glossy print publications and online motorcycle forums, since the CBR250R was first introduced early this year. I’ve read the majority of those comparison articles, finding some of them to be more accurate, comprehensive and unbiased than others.



One major publication’s shootout contained major errors regarding specifications (fuel tank capacity) for one of the bikes, resulting in totally bogus claims in rating the bikes in the associated categories; and arguably the overall ranking.



Despite the coverage the 250 comparison topic has gotten, I still felt that a void existed for a solid down-to-Earth, ridden to the bike’s full potential, Real World form of unbiased evaluation of the two bikes. This article is targeted at filling that void, for those with an interest in such a perspective.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





CBR250R Test Bike History:



The bike was purchased new a few months ago by a recent MSF graduate, as his first motorcycle. The odometer was showing about 3K miles, with the bike being 100% untouched from showroom stock, when I picked it up for the one day test riding opportunity.



Optimizing lever position, tire pressures, and setting the one (and only) user adjustment for the suspension (rear shock preload) being the only mods done to the bike once it was in my possession. These steps being performed to ensure an opportunity for the best possible showing by the bike, during the upcoming test ride.



During this one day test riding experience, the CBR250R was not babied. The bike was ridden up to the most extreme level of its potential performance. The objective was to meet, and preferably exceed, the most demanding level of testing that had been done in all of the previous ride reports and shootouts in the major magazines and internet forums.



The goal was to perform a true Real World test to ferret out the absolute performance potential of the bike (on the plus side), as well as to uncover potentially previously overlooked limitations and shortcomings (on the down side) under the most extreme demands the bike will ever see in actual use by future owners.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GENERAL:



- CBR250R:



HITS:



• Mirrors: The mirrors are large in size, well-shaped, and positioned wide enough (on long stalks) to extend beyond the width of most rider’s shoulders. The result being a very clear view of what’s going on behind.



ITEMS OF NOTE:



• Clutch Lever/Action: The amount of resistance on the lever pull of the clutch on the CBR is the lightest of any bike I can ever remember riding. A single pinky finger would be more than adequate to get the job done. The pull is so light that it’s hard to believe there’s enough pressure being applied to the clutch plates to keep things hooked up. The extremely light pull is very unusual for a motorcycle, and takes a bit to get used to; but the engagement is smooth and positive and all seems to work fine.



NITS:



• Gas Cap: It was a real shock the first time I stopped for a gas fill-up during the test ride to find that the gas cap came off right in my hand (no hinge)! I couldn’t believe that in this day-and-age that a new streetbike would have an unattached gas cap that you needed to find a place to put while filling the tank at the pumps. It’s been at least 20 years since streetbikes started coming with hinged gas caps. Was Honda out sick the day that message went out? Big fail here.



• Fuel Tank Filler: Finding a metal cross-brace bridging across the top opening of the filler hole on the fuel tank, preventing insertion of even the small diameter unleaded fuel pump nozzle into the hole, was another surprise at the first gas stop. The biggest challenge created by this obstruction is trying to avoid back-splash of fuel spraying up onto the painted surface of the gas tank while filling. Not sure why this form of fuel entry restrictor was used on the CBR (as most other bikes just have a smaller hole restrictor, to ensure unleaded only); but it’s a pain.



• Sidestand: The placement of the loop tab that is intended to allow for catching with a rider’s boot for extending the sidestand into use is a total fail! The footrest assembly and shift lever mechanism sit directly above, nearly totally blocking access. This item looks like a total afterthought that was squeezed into whatever space was left, by a junior engineer, after the rest of the bike was already on the drafting table.



• Coolant reservoir cover: An item that had me initially scratching my head to figure out what it was, is a black plastic piece (located just above the right foot peg assembly) that covers the coolant reservoir and filler cap. It’s an item that doesn’t have the usual Honda high quality engineering signature; looking like another afterthought part that got tacked on after the bike’s initial production



• Bodywork/Appearance: Viewing the two bikes from the side provides a good comparison tool for evaluating what works (from a styling cue), and what doesn’t. The CBR’s upper and side fairing panel combination lacks a natural horizontal flow with the chassis of the bike. It looks more like someone decided they needed to slap a piece of bodywork on an already designed naked bike, than something that was crafted into the original designers CAD drawings.



- NINJA comparison:



• Mirrors: The mirrors are decently positioned on the Ninja, and aesthetically have a much more modern and sportier look than the CBR. This visual appeal comes at a price however. The artsy trapezoidal shape of the glass area reduces the overall window for visibility of what’s going on behind.



• Bodywork/Appearance: The artfully sculpted flow and shapes of all the bodywork and panels on the new-gen Ninja 250 have gotten nothing but rave reviews from all that have commented upon seeing the bike for the first time, over the last three years. The very tasteful appearance giving the impression that an outside designer, of Italian descent, was used on this bike, versus an internal Kawasaki team member.



----------------------------------------------------

ENGINE/PERFORMANCE: -



- CBR250R:



The thinking process on Honda’s part, in terms of who their target buying audience was in making the decision for using a single cylinder engine design in their 250cc sportbike, is an area that many (including myself) have wondered about since the bike’s initial disclosure to the public.



The answer to the question on whether such a decision would end up being a hit or a miss in real world use can only be found by riding the bike. The 200+ miles of real world test riding on the CBR last weekend provided the needed data to formulate some solid opinions on Honda’s success or failure on that front.



HIT:



• Torque/Low-speeds: There’s no question that the added grunt (such as it can be with only 250cc’s to work with) of the single slug CBR serves a useful purpose when the riding is being done in stoplight-to-stoplight traffic around town, or in slow speed point-n-shoot riding out on the backroads.



Getting the jump on the cage traffic off stoplights, after splitting lanes up to the front, is an area the CBR really shines! Just dump the soft resistance clutch lever and off you go, with a great lurch forward for the first 50 feet into the intersection. This quick responsive and initial pull is a valuable attribute for someone doing a lot of city commuting; especially in a city like San Francisco with a lot of hills.



Amazing as it seems, despite the moderate overall power output of the engine, the front wheel can actually be coaxed to get some air between the tire and the ground; at least if done with the help of a little creative throttle and clutch work. A day riding the CBR250R leaves the impression of piloting a mini hooligan machine, with bodywork.



MISS:



• Overall Power & Low Rev Limit: The secret weapon, normally used for getting maximum performance out of 250cc sportbike, is a lot of tap dancing on the shift lever - while working the engine in the upper RPM (10K – 14K) range. Unfortunately with the inherent RPM limitations of the conventional single piston design thumper engine that was elected for use in the CBR, that secret weapon has been neutered.



The engine has decent initial pull, which gives the false impression of more things to come. Sadly that promise fizzles out with power dropping off sharply at a relatively low RPM; requiring another shift.



Short shifting would normally be the approach to capitalize on a thumper’s performance. In the case of the CBR250R having a mild peak of 16 ft/lbs. of torque to work with, and over 350 pounds of weight to pull (minus rider), that method fails to deliver in most riding conditions. One gear ends up being too high - and not having enough pull to get the job done; with the next gear down resulting in the engine quickly bumping into the 10,500 RPM rev limit.



Trying to fully work the little motor for spirited riding can end up being an exercise in frustration. A situation where eventually just accepting the limitations of the bike’s acceleration and pulling power and otherwise just enjoying the ride, becomes the recipe.



• Overall Power – MPH Numbers: There were a few different shootout tests in the media where the two bikes were actually tested on a dyno, side-by-side, to get quantifiable numbers. Averaging out the findings, selecting only from the most reputable-unbiased media sources, the numbers play out to be in the ballpark of those listed below:



- CBR250R: --------- 24 HP (at the rear wheel)



- Ninja 250R : -------- 28 HP (at the rear wheel)



The seat-of-the-pants feelings I’d gotten during the first 100 miles of riding the CBR closely mirrored those numbers; with the Ninja 250R's parallel twin being up a solid 10-15% on peak power over Honda's single-jug design.



In the quest to acquire my own form of quantifiable measurement of the power deficit of the CBR250R, under actual riding conditions, I looked for a few opportunities to directly test the MPH numbers against what I’d seen on the Ninja. Locating a few “special test ground” areas that were made available for the testing, the following numbers were seen:



• Top Speed: Fighting to overcome the effects of wind resistance on the front area of the bike became the major limiting factor to the CBR's maximum obtainable top speed. In initial testing the bike showed it was unable to reach the last 1K of the total RPM range while trying to pull 6th gear. The outcome being a rather meek 84 MPH (indicated).



In a second test, dropping down to 5th gear in the same section resulted in the engine having enough power to finally pull the tachometer up to near redline. The outcome being a couple more MPH, with things topping out around 88 MPH (indicated).



For comparison, the Ninja 250 has shown to be reach an indicated 100 MPH, under similar conditions.



• Uphill Climbing Speed: One of the special test areas includes a very steep uphill climb on a long straight that immediately follows a fairly wide-open corner. The steep climb really taxes the capabilities of little 250cc bikes. The best pull that the CBR could achieve in that section resulted in a 66 MPH (indicated) peak with the bike being in 4th gear at that time.



Again for comparison, by really screaming the Ninja up into the 12K and above range, an additional 10 MPH+ is achievable, for a 77 MPH peak (approximate, as indicated). This delta between the speeds achieved in pulling the steep hill showed that the small lower RPM torque advantage (maybe 1 ft/lb?) of the CBR fails to offset its near 20% shortcoming in peak HP, against the Ninja.



- NINJA comparison:



The combination of these two quantifiable tests, and the overall impressions of the engine’s performance during the CBR test ride, clearly illustrated that I wouldn’t want to take to the grid on a racetrack and try to do battle in the “Production” classes against a sea of Ninja 250s. In mildly modified form, it would definitely be a “David-and-Goliath” massacre!



** WINNER:



- Every form of riding - except stop-n-go city riding: Ninja 250R



- Exclusively used for around town, stop-n-go city riding/commuting: CBR250R



----------------------------------------------------

FUEL SYSTEM:



- CBR250R:



The Honda being equipped with EFI (fuel injection) was a big banner waving point by Honda and the media during the bike’s initial introduction. I was anxious to find out, from firsthand riding experience, if the EFI on a mild-mannered, 250cc entry level streetbike would produce the anticipated level of gain (over carbs) that many had anticipated.



• PRO: There’s no question that the instant start-up, and quick ready-to-ride nature of fuel delivery that the EFI provides is superior to the carburetors on the Ninja. One other area I expect a gain will be seen is in maintaining a more ideal fuel-air ratio when major changes in elevation are encountered during a ride. The limited one day of testing, with less than 2,000 ft. from sea level to peak, didn’t provide a chance to prove or disprove that theory.



• SIDENOTE: The one area where the EFI felt a little lacking was in the usable range of incremental throttle. The limited overall power output of the 250cc single motor likely being a factor to the all-or-nothing throttle position that I often found to be needed while riding the backroads. The throttle ended up spending a lot of time being up against the mechanical stop, just to maintain the desired pace.



• OVERALL: The EFI in use on the CBR250R platform works well, and is a win for the Honda. A win despite the EFI not quite living up to the gotta have it expectations for enhanced performance (over carbs), that many had anticipated.



- NINJA comparison:



The carburetors on the Ninja 250 do a decent job, with two flaws. An extended warm-up time; and a noticeable hiccup at just-off-idle throttle position in the 4K-5K RPM range (with stock jetting).



** WINNER: CBR250R



----------------------------------------------------

FUEL ECONOMY/RANGE:



- CBR250R:



It’s impossible to know whether the single cylinder engine design or the EFI (fuel injection) is the major factor in the fuel economy difference (MPG) between the two bikes. Perhaps the improvement boils down to being a combination of the two?



The final outcome is about a 10-15% advantage in fuel economy for the CBR, across all forms of riding.



- Pure commute riding by original owner: 66 MPG

- Shared moderate to spirited riding during my testing on backroads: 55 MPG

- Consistent spirited riding (full-throttle often used): 48 MPG



The fuel tank on the CBR holds more than a gallon less go juice than the Ninja (rated at 4.8 gallons), with a specification of 3.4 gallons total capacity. The offsetting of the smaller fuel tank capacity, against the increased MPG, results in the maximum number of miles between gas stops on the two bikes being close.



- NINJA comparison:



The Ninja would likely edge out a win by a small margin. 170 miles would likely be the mark for fill ups during spirited backroad riding, and 200’ish miles being the point where the bike would begin sipping on fumes when ridden in a conservative throttle manner.



** WINNER:



- Economy: CBR250R



- Range: Ninja 250R



----------------------------------------------------

SUSPENSION:



Being entry level priced machines, the suspension on both bikes are pretty basic; using old-school technology (damping rod forks). A spring preload adjustment on the rear shock is the only adjustment.



- CBR250R:



Overall: The damping performance of the suspension is an area that fell a bit short of my expectations. The compression damping is OK, albeit a bit on the harsh side when encountering sharp-edged bumps. This aspect of the suspension’s behavior was not unexpected however as this is the signature of the fork technology (damping rod style) used on all lower cost bikes.



Overall the suspension should be more than adequate for those riders that primarily use the bike for basic transportation and commuting purposes.



For heavier riders, or riders that plan on taking the CBR off the city streets or major highways for recreational riding on the less smooth backroads, the suspension story is not as rosy.



Shock: To achieve the desired rider sag, with my 170 pounds on board, required increasing the shock preload setting by two steps (from #2 to #4 position). The rebound on the rear shock is a little fast too; but acceptable for most riding conditions that the bike will likely see.



Forks: The springs are very soft; definitely far softer than the Ninja. The only fit for the stock springs would likely be a sub-120 pound, conservative commute use only rider. The telltale strap that I put on the forks, and reset before each stint of riding, quickly returned to a location marking near full (130mm) travel. Adding 10-20mm of additional fork oil might be a temporary cheap-fix to the tendency to use up all the travel (soft bottom out)



The rebound side was where the CBR really failed to perform. There’s a serious lack of rebound damping! The forks bounce up and down multiple times, in a cyclic pogo-stick fashion, in response to a single rapid depression.



This behavior results in the bike wiggling and wobbling before settling again, when trying to recover after hitting dips or bumps in a corner. Consciously using a light trailing of the front brake to keep the front end settled, when recognizing the onset of a road condition that will create such behavior, was the workaround.



A usually nasty kicker dip/bump on Stage Road really exposed the real world impact of the suspension shortcomings on the CBR. The bike wiggled, bucked and wobbled so violently in response to this road hazard that the behavior could be considered a safety risk for some riders.



The excessively soft springs and bouncy rebound behavior on the CBR250R forks were totally reminiscent of the front suspension performance that I’d experienced on the early-gen Ninja 250s for so many years. Fortunately the new-gen Ninja 250 forks got a serious shot of improvement in both areas. Looks like Honda is one generation behind at this point, in the front suspension category.



- NINJA comparison:



The Ninja definitely has the upper hand in the suspension category. The stock fork springs are adequate for most all forms of riding; even for slightly heavier (190 lbs or less?) riders. The compression damping is not that much different than the CBR, but the rebound is much more refined and keeps the bike a lot more under control on less than ideal road surfaces.



** WINNER: Ninja 250R



----------------------------------------------------

HANDLING:



- CBR250R:



The frame design and overall chassis of the CBR was well thought out in terms of providing a decent level of rigidity for aggressive cornering activities. The bike tracks quite true and straight, even at speed. The deliberate “bump the bars” test, used as a method of testing the tendency of a bike to fall into headshake, passed with flying colors.



The rake/trail numbers are solid, providing a good compromise between decent turn-in and straight line stability. The overly soft fork springs being the only flaw in the armor in that area; appearing primarily when encountering bumpy pavement.



The bike showed a good prowess for carrying front trail braking deep into turns without any tendency for standing-up. Some mild chatter occasionally experienced, due to the (soft) front suspension being compressed down close to its limits, was one additional area of note.



- NINJA comparison:



The Ninja’s geometry and chassis design also allow for pushing the bike to a pretty high level of cornering speeds and forces without upsetting things. The new-gen bike deserves a lot of credit as being a huge improvement over the flexy-frame, hinged-in-the-middle, behavior that the old-gen Ninjas had previously exhibited.



The better performing forks and shock provide the added edge in overall handling to the Ninja.



** WINNER: Ninja 250R



----------------------------------------------------

TRANSMISSION:



- CBR250R:



The Honda, as with most modern sportbikes, uses a 6-speed gearbox. The shifts were smooth and fairly uneventful, on both upshifts and downshifts during the entire test ride. The transmission didn’t, however, behave in a manner that would prompt a comment of “buttery smooth”, but it did the job just fine.



A subtle firmness in getting the mechanism to change between gears was noted. It’s likely that the fairly low mileage on the bike that I was testing had an impact on that aspect of the shifting performance. I suspect things will loosen up noticeably with time and use.



6th gear seemed a bit more like an overdrive on the Honda, than the Ninja. The combination of the motor’s range of power output and amount of horsepower consumed in working to overcome the bike’s wind resistance at freeway speeds made 5th gear a better choice in many situations. In top speed testing, this definitely proved to be the case.



- NINJA comparison:



The Ninja’s transmission performs at a similarly acceptable level to the Honda.. From a comparison perspective I’d say there’s very little difference in the shifting behavior of the two bikes,



** WINNER: TIE



----------------------------------------------------

BRAKES:



- CBR250R:



The only noticeable difference in the brakes between the two bikes, appear in the rotor design. The rotors on the CBR being conventional round discs at both ends; compared to semi-wave design items used on the Ninja.



The single disc front brake is quite adequate for getting the job done. The pads and rotor have decent bite and good feel; enabling getting the CBR slowed quite effectively. This being done while using two fingers (or less). Despite the spirited level of riding, during the 200+ miles of backroad testing, no noticeable fade or other shortcoming in the braking performance was ever noted.



- NINJA comparison:



It required getting back on the Ninja, the day after the CBR250R test ride, to finally recognize any notable difference between the braking performance of the two bikes. Up to 90% of maximum threshold braking level the CBR and Ninja are comparable. It’s at that final, most extreme, hardest possible late braking level, where the slight edge in maximum bite and slowing potential tips the scales in favor of the Ninja’s brake components.



** WINNER: Ninja 250R



----------------------------------------------------

SOUND/EXHAUST:



- CBR250R:



The muffler on the Honda is real monster (big)! To say that its appearance is not exactly a complementary element to the overall looks rating of the CBR250R is big understatement. The good news is that despite the massive oversize and somewhat ugly appearance of the muffler, some degree of the “thumper” heritage of the engine still comes through in the sound of the bike; at least when getting on the gas hard.



It was almost comical to be on this tiny little entry level 250cc motorcycle, and yet be barking with enough authority to draw attention to the bike from fellow riders hanging out at the local sportbike watering hole, when heading out for a ride.



- NINJA comparison:



The Ninja’s muffler isn’t exactly a work of art, but it’s much smaller size and uniform round shape manages to do the job of meeting the stiffening government regulations without becoming an eyesore. The exhaust is whisper quiet. Not a bad thing when trying to run in stealth mode, but definitely not a sound that will earn any respect.



** WINNER: Ninja 250R



----------------------------------------------------

WEIGHT/FEEL:



- CBR250R:



The comparison often done by magazines in comparing the small differences in numbers off a spec sheet rarely translates over into actual on-bike riding impressions. This proved to be the case in riding, and evaluating the feel of, these two bikes.



If one adds the weight of the extra gallon+ of fuel in the Ninja, to the wet-weight numbers, the CBR should tip the scales lighter by only about 10 lbs. Definitely not enough to significantly impact either bike’s handling, in either direction (from my riding impressions).



The narrow tires and lighter weight of the CBR (and the Ninja) over their bigger bore cousins, results in a very flickable machine. The tighter and twistier the road, the more at home the bike feels. On more open sections of road where the corners widen out and the allowable speed is higher, the CBR feels a bit nervous and out-gunned.



- NINJA comparison:



The Ninja is just as happy as the CBR, when carving up tighter roads at lower speeds. Where the Ninja excels however is when things open up. The chassis feels more planted and secure under those conditions.



Wet weight:



- CBR250R: 359 lbs. (w/3.4 gallons of fuel)



- Ninja: 374 lbs. (w/4.8 gallons of fuel)



** WINNER:



- Overall Weight: CBR250R



- Overall Feel: Ninja 250R



----------------------------------------------------

TIRES:



- CBR250R:



Honda elected to go ½” wider on the rear wheel of the CBR; at 4.0”. This results in a one size larger 140 rear tire being mounted, versus the Ninja. The only real advantage that I can see in the 140 size tire selection is an increase in available options for aftermarket rubber. The low HP output of either bike does just fine with a 130 sized tire, so getting grip to the ground is not an area where a bigger rear tire offers any value-add.



The CBR uses the same sized tire up front as the Ninja, being a 110/70/17. The IRC “Road Winner” is the OEM tire of choice used on the Honda. It’s a bias-ply tire. I started out with fairly low expectations in performance of these OEM tires that had already logged 3K commute miles by the bike’s owner, before my test ride adventure. To my (pleasant) surprise in actual use the tires ended up performing quite decently. 200+ spirited miles on the backroads did leave signs that they’d been worked hard, and put away wet however.



- NINJA comparison:



Bridgestone BT-045 or Dunlop GT-501 tires are the two choices most commonly seen as OEM rubber on the new-gen Ninjas. They’re also bias-ply tires, and despite the 130 size used on the rear, perform at a very good level; perhaps just a notch up on the IRC skins.



Upgrading to better rubber, after the stock tires are done, is the best approach on both bikes.



** WINNER: Ninja 250R



----------------------------------------------------

INSTRUMENTATION:



- CBR250R:



The gauge layout on the Honda is really well thought out. The speedometer is a digital design, using large, easy to read numbers that are located dead center on the console. The analog tachometer is positioned directly above the speedo readout, making a tight little area where all the key information is concentrated on the console. Nice!



The CBR includes a time-of-day clock. That’s a nice touch that’s generally reserved for higher dollar machines. A fuel gauge is also included in the user readout. The information is displayed as a very small grey LCD bar graph, which takes more than a quick glance to read. Due to the small fuel tank capacity, the accuracy of the information proved marginal at best. With only one bar still showing, the bike only took about 2 gallons (of the 3.4 total capacity) to fill.



- NINJA comparison:



The separate analog speedometer and tachometer spread the information out and require a little more effort for data gathering by the rider. The fuel gauge is analog and much larger than the CBR, but its accuracy is truly a joke and doesn’t warrant bringing any extra points to the bike’s rating. The removal of the analog engine temperature gauge that the old-gen Ninja used to provide, from the new-gen bikes, loses more points in the instrumentation category.



** WINNER: CBR250R



----------------------------------------------------

ERGONOMICS:



- CBR250R:



The most glaring difference in the CBR’s ergonomics (to the Ninja 250) became obvious after traveling less than block into the very first ride. It was the reach and position of the handlebars. The bars are located further forward, and rotated a bit more outward. At just under six feet tall, the reach felt right on the verge of being a bit too high and extended for optimum bike control positioning. Over the course of the 200+ miles of riding the backroads, the slightly extended reach did become more familiar, and ultimately did not impair even the most spirited forms of riding on the bike.



Thanks to some input from a riding friend (that’s a few inches taller) who had complained about having a difficult time molding into an ideal position with the tank contour/seat/bar orientation on the new-gen Ninja, a taller rider’s perspective on the CBR was achieved. He felt the slightly longer reach to the bars, combined with the slightly greater span between the seat and foot pegs (pegs a bit lower on the CBR?) and the sculpted shape of the fuel tank provided a better fit for bigger riders.



Most other attributes of the CBR felt quite familiar (to the Ninja 250) once out on the road. The windscreen is a bit smaller on the Honda, and as a result did seem to provide a little less wind protection while out on the highway.



- NINJA comparison:



The higher footrest positioning, and tighter overall spacing between seat, bars and pegs makes the Ninja a better fit (ergonomically) for riders under the 6 foot, and sub-200lb level. Minus the tighter cockpit fitment for larger riders, the overall layout of the controls on the Ninja provide a riding environment that easily allows for 200 mile plus days of riding, without creating a need for a Chiropractor visit.



** WINNER:



- Riders over 6’, or 200 lbs: CBR250R



- Other riders: TIE



----------------------------------------------------

FEATURES:



- CBR250R:



Likely in response to minimizing costs for this entry level bike, some usability items were left off the spec list. The combination of an absence of a center stand (as provided on the old-gen Ninja, but also gone on the current model), and lack of welded bosses on the swingarm (for spools to support a typical aftermarket rear stand,) will make rear wheel and chain maintenance much more of a challenge for many riders.



The previously mentioned time-of-day clock is a convenient feature the CBR possesses, and Ninja lacks.



- NINJA comparison:



The feature list starts and ends pretty quickly for the Ninja and the CBR250R, due to their low-end price point. With a plus one/minus one hit list in both cases, the features list is a draw.



** WINNER: TIE



----------------------------------------------------

QUALITY:



- CBR250R:



Despite the Japanese roots of the Honda and Kawasaki namesakes, both bikes share a birthplace of Thailand. This shared manufacturing point-of-origin may be the reason for the very similar levels of quality seen in the two bikes. A level I’d consider “decent – but not flawless”.



The lack of the use of thread locking agent on some of the critical hardware (i.e. foot peg brackets) on the CBR, came as a surprise during the time spent with the bike. A bit atypical if one looks at the CBR as being a Honda (as per the name/logo on the gas tank), and considers their long-standing reputation for quality.



The quality of the welds on the main frame are far better than what I’d found on the Korean Hyosung 250 last year, but still a bit below the standard of what’s typically seen on the more mainstream Honda products manufactured in Japan. .



- NINJA comparison:



The nearly 40K miles of extreme level riding on a new-gen Ninja 250 provides a solid history on which to rate the overall durability and quality of that bike. The motor’s been rock solid bulletproof, and shows no signs of slowing down. No other items have failed, broken or rattled off prematurely over that same span of hard use, giving the Ninja 250 a pretty solid rating in the quality category; especially for an entry-level priced motorcycle.



I suspect the Honda will provide similar reliability in extended real world use. Unfortunately being a first-year model, that proof will need to be forthcoming as the years, and miles, of use by their owners pass.



** WINNER: TBD



----------------------------------------------------

PRICE:



For 2011 the MSRP for the Ninja 250 had dropped slightly from the previous year, to $3,999. This was likely driven by the Kawasaki's recognition that the soon-to-be-released Honda CBR250R was going to be a serious direct competitor (from Japan) and would be coming in at a price level targeted at encouraging entry-level bike buyers to "Go Red".



For 2011 the MSRP of the CBR250R came in resetting the benchmark to $3,999. Unfortunately searching the web failed to come up with Honda's official MSRP price for 2012, but all indications point to a likelihood of that number creeping up to at least the announced price point of the Kawasaki; at $4,199. This increase likely being a natural response to the changes in the currency exchange rates with the US $.



MSRP (2012):



- Ninja 250R: $4,199



- CBR250R: $4,199 (? TBA) - (non-ABS model)





** WINNER: TIE?



----------------------------------------------------

CONCLUSION:



CBR250R:



Honda’s recent 250cc entry-level sportbike is a very good first effort (as one would expect from the big “H”). The bike does everything reasonably well, and some things very well. There’s no question that Honda has created another very viable option for the decision making process being done by those looking to purchase a low-cost, fun riding, 250cc sportbike.



For bikers that live in the city, and do 90% of their riding from stoplight-to-stoplight in urban traffic, the CBR250R is a very solid choice and should be considered the winner in that performance category.



The slightly expanded ergonomics of the Honda provides a package that will be a better overall fit for taller/larger riders that are interested in a small displacement machine. For those riders, the CBR250R is again well worth considering as a good choice.



For experienced riders that want to stay loyal to the team red banner (Honda), the CBR250R can provide enough performance to keep pace with many other riders on larger displacement machines, right up to the point of very spirited riding on the backroads. The limitations for outright performance by the 250cc single cylinder engine design in this application is the one aspect that needs to be recognized, and accepted, by those who choose the CBR250R over the Ninja.



Below is a quick checklist of the categories where the Honda got the nod in this evaluation; for those reviewing their priorities in purchase of a new 250cc sportbike:

- Ergonomics: (for larger/taller riders)

- Instrumentation: (Gauges)

- Fuel (MPG)

- Fuel Delivery (Injection)

- Weight: (very slight)

- Engine: Low-end, stoplight-to-stoplight power (torque)

Ninja 250R:



The Ninja 250 packs a lot of performance in a tiny package. The bike’s refinement of design, attention to detail, and peak engine performance provide a great package! It’s a package that can serve the needs of everyone from a first-time newbie looking for a great starter bike, to a very experienced pilot looking for some small cc thrills on the backroads - or even the racetrack. The proven reliability is also an area that’s hard to ignore when making a bike buying decision. The proven resilience of its resale value over time is another facet where the Ninja shines.



Below is a quick checklist of the categories where the Ninja got the nod in this evaluation; for those reviewing their priorities in purchase of a new 250cc sportbike:

- Retention of Resale Value: (Demand)

- Overall Appearance: (Mistaken for 600cc machine)

- Fit/Finish: (Polished package)

- Fuel Range: (very slight)

- Tires: (Dunlop/Bridgestone)

- Brakes: (Max stopping power)

- Suspension: (All)

- Handling: (Chassis/Suspension)

- Engine: (Peak power, acceleration, top speed, excitement, track-readiness)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



So who wins out in the Japanese manufacturer 250 wars? The real winners are us as a buying public, thanks to Honda finally recognizing the huge sales numbers that Kawasaki has enjoyed for so many years, from continuing to offer its highest selling streetbike to worldwide markets.



Honda deserves a big thumbs-up for finally stepping up to the plate and bringing a direct Ninja 250 competitor back to the USA motorcycle market. More choices breed better competition. The end result being improved performance and quality of the products, and a tighter lid on the MSRP asking prices to us consumers!







Date of Test: 10/1/2011

Tester/Author: Gary Jaehne (GaryJ) In the interest of full disclosure I should preface this article by mentioning that I’ve seen over 150K miles of pavement pass under the wheels of Ninja 250s during the last 10 years. Miles logged on both the old-generation (pre ’08) and the current-offering models. Those deep roots on Japan’s mostly uncontested (for a lot of years) 250cc entry-level sportbike made Honda’s release of the CBR250R earlier this year an event of great interest.Despite a strong desire over the last six months, since the bike hitting the showroom floors, unfortunately the opportunity to swing a leg over a 2011 CBR250R and take it out on the road for comparison to the Ninja had eluded me. Thanks to the generous offer of a fellow BARFer (- "Ben") that opportunity finally arrived last weekend! The Ninja 250R vs. CBR250R Real World comparison article below is the product of that opportunity. Hope you enjoy the read.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------There has been no shortage of 250 shootout comparison articles appearing in all the glossy print publications and online motorcycle forums, since the CBR250R was first introduced early this year. I’ve read the majority of those comparison articles, finding some of them to be more accurate, comprehensive and unbiased than others.One major publication’s shootout contained major errors regarding specifications (fuel tank capacity) for one of the bikes, resulting in totally bogus claims in rating the bikes in the associated categories; and arguably the overall ranking.Despite the coverage the 250 comparison topic has gotten, I still felt that a void existed for a solid down-to-Earth, ridden to the bike’s full potential, Real World form of unbiased evaluation of the two bikes. This article is targeted at filling that void, for those with an interest in such a perspective.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The bike was purchased new a few months ago by a recent MSF graduate, as his first motorcycle. The odometer was showing about 3K miles, with the bike being 100% untouched from showroom stock, when I picked it up for the one day test riding opportunity.Optimizing lever position, tire pressures, and setting the one (and only) user adjustment for the suspension (rear shock preload) being the only mods done to the bike once it was in my possession. These steps being performed to ensure an opportunity for the best possible showing by the bike, during the upcoming test ride.During this one day test riding experience, the CBR250R was not babied. The bike was ridden up to the most extreme level of its potential performance. The objective was to meet, and preferably exceed, the most demanding level of testing that had been done in all of the previous ride reports and shootouts in the major magazines and internet forums.The goal was to perform a true Real World test to ferret out the absolute performance potential of the bike (on the plus side), as well as to uncover potentially previously overlooked limitations and shortcomings (on the down side) under the most extreme demands the bike will ever see in actual use by future owners.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Mirrors: The mirrors are large in size, well-shaped, and positioned wide enough (on long stalks) to extend beyond the width of most rider’s shoulders. The result being a very clear view of what’s going on behind.• Clutch Lever/Action: The amount of resistance on the lever pull of the clutch on the CBR is the lightest of any bike I can ever remember riding. A single pinky finger would be more than adequate to get the job done. The pull is so light that it’s hard to believe there’s enough pressure being applied to the clutch plates to keep things hooked up. The extremely light pull is very unusual for a motorcycle, and takes a bit to get used to; but the engagement is smooth and positive and all seems to work fine.It was a real shock the first time I stopped for a gas fill-up during the test ride to find that the gas cap came off right in my hand (no hinge)! I couldn’t believe that in this day-and-age that a new streetbike would have an unattached gas cap that you needed to find a place to put while filling the tank at the pumps. It’s been at least 20 years since streetbikes started coming with hinged gas caps. Was Honda out sick the day that message went out? Big fail here.: Finding a metal cross-brace bridging across the top opening of the filler hole on the fuel tank, preventing insertion of even the small diameter unleaded fuel pump nozzle into the hole, was another surprise at the first gas stop. The biggest challenge created by this obstruction is trying to avoid back-splash of fuel spraying up onto the painted surface of the gas tank while filling. Not sure why this form of fuel entry restrictor was used on the CBR (as most other bikes just have a smaller hole restrictor, to ensure unleaded only); but it’s a pain.The placement of the loop tab that is intended to allow for catching with a rider’s boot for extending the sidestand into use is a total fail! The footrest assembly and shift lever mechanism sit directly above, nearly totally blocking access. This item looks like a total afterthought that was squeezed into whatever space was left, by a junior engineer, after the rest of the bike was already on the drafting table.An item that had me initially scratching my head to figure out what it was, is a black plastic piece (located just above the right foot peg assembly) that covers the coolant reservoir and filler cap. It’s an item that doesn’t have the usual Honda high quality engineering signature; looking like another afterthought part that got tacked on after the bike’s initial productionViewing the two bikes from the side provides a good comparison tool for evaluating what works (from a styling cue), and what doesn’t. The CBR’s upper and side fairing panel combination lacks a natural horizontal flow with the chassis of the bike. It looks more like someone decided they needed to slap a piece of bodywork on an already designed naked bike, than something that was crafted into the original designers CAD drawings.The mirrors are decently positioned on the Ninja, and aesthetically have a much more modern and sportier look than the CBR. This visual appeal comes at a price however. The artsy trapezoidal shape of the glass area reduces the overall window for visibility of what’s going on behind.The artfully sculpted flow and shapes of all the bodywork and panels on the new-gen Ninja 250 have gotten nothing but rave reviews from all that have commented upon seeing the bike for the first time, over the last three years. The very tasteful appearance giving the impression that an outside designer, of Italian descent, was used on this bike, versus an internal Kawasaki team member.----------------------------------------------------The thinking process on Honda’s part, in terms of who their target buying audience was in making the decision for using a single cylinder engine design in their 250cc sportbike, is an area that many (including myself) have wondered about since the bike’s initial disclosure to the public.The answer to the question on whether such a decision would end up being a hit or a miss in real world use can only be found by riding the bike. The 200+ miles of real world test riding on the CBR last weekend provided the needed data to formulate some solid opinions on Honda’s success or failure on that front.There’s no question that the added grunt (such as it can be with only 250cc’s to work with) of the single slug CBR serves a useful purpose when the riding is being done in stoplight-to-stoplight traffic around town, or in slow speed point-n-shoot riding out on the backroads.Getting the jump on the cage traffic off stoplights, after splitting lanes up to the front, is an area the CBR really shines! Just dump the soft resistance clutch lever and off you go, with a great lurch forward for the first 50 feet into the intersection. This quick responsive and initial pull is a valuable attribute for someone doing a lot of city commuting; especially in a city like San Francisco with a lot of hills.Amazing as it seems, despite the moderate overall power output of the engine, the front wheel can actually be coaxed to get some air between the tire and the ground; at least if done with the help of a little creative throttle and clutch work. A day riding the CBR250R leaves the impression of piloting a mini hooligan machine, with bodywork.The secret weapon, normally used for getting maximum performance out of 250cc sportbike, is a lot of tap dancing on the shift lever - while working the engine in the upper RPM (10K – 14K) range. Unfortunately with the inherent RPM limitations of the conventional single piston design thumper engine that was elected for use in the CBR, that secret weapon has been neutered.The engine has decent initial pull, which gives the false impression of more things to come. Sadly that promise fizzles out with power dropping off sharply at a relatively low RPM; requiring another shift.Short shifting would normally be the approach to capitalize on a thumper’s performance. In the case of the CBR250R having a mild peak of 16 ft/lbs. of torque to work with, and over 350 pounds of weight to pull (minus rider), that method fails to deliver in most riding conditions. One gear ends up being too high - and not having enough pull to get the job done; with the next gear down resulting in the engine quickly bumping into the 10,500 RPM rev limit.Trying to fully work the little motor for spirited riding can end up being an exercise in frustration. A situation where eventually just accepting the limitations of the bike’s acceleration and pulling power and otherwise just enjoying the ride, becomes the recipe.There were a few different shootout tests in the media where the two bikes were actually tested on a dyno, side-by-side, to get quantifiable numbers. Averaging out the findings, selecting only from the most reputable-unbiased media sources, the numbers play out to be in the ballpark of those listed below:: --------The seat-of-the-pants feelings I’d gotten during the first 100 miles of riding the CBR closely mirrored those numbers; with the Ninja 250R's parallel twin being up a solid 10-15% on peak power over Honda's single-jug design.In the quest to acquire my own form of quantifiable measurement of the power deficit of the CBR250R, under actual riding conditions, I looked for a few opportunities to directly test the MPH numbers against what I’d seen on the Ninja. Locating a few “special test ground” areas that were made available for the testing, the following numbers were seen:Fighting to overcome the effects of wind resistance on the front area of the bike became the major limiting factor to the CBR's maximum obtainable top speed. In initial testing the bike showed it was unable to reach the last 1K of the total RPM range while trying to pull 6th gear. The outcome being a rather meek 84 MPH (indicated).In a second test, dropping down to 5th gear in the same section resulted in the engine having enough power to finally pull the tachometer up to near redline. The outcome being a couple more MPH, with things topping out around 88 MPH (indicated).For comparison, the Ninja 250 has shown to be reach an indicated 100 MPH, under similar conditions.One of the special test areas includes a very steep uphill climb on a long straight that immediately follows a fairly wide-open corner. The steep climb really taxes the capabilities of little 250cc bikes. The best pull that the CBR could achieve in that section resulted in a 66 MPH (indicated) peak with the bike being in 4th gear at that time.Again for comparison, by really screaming the Ninja up into the 12K and above range, an additional 10 MPH+ is achievable, for a 77 MPH peak (approximate, as indicated). This delta between the speeds achieved in pulling the steep hill showed that the small lower RPM torque advantage (maybe 1 ft/lb?) of the CBR fails to offset its near 20% shortcoming in peak HP, against the Ninja.The combination of these two quantifiable tests, and the overall impressions of the engine’s performance during the CBR test ride, clearly illustrated that I wouldn’t want to take to the grid on a racetrack and try to do battle in the “Production” classes against a sea of Ninja 250s. In mildly modified form, it would definitely be a “David-and-Goliath” massacre!- Every form of riding - except stop-n-go city riding:- Exclusively used for around town, stop-n-go city riding/commuting:----------------------------------------------------The Honda being equipped with EFI (fuel injection) was a big banner waving point by Honda and the media during the bike’s initial introduction. I was anxious to find out, from firsthand riding experience, if the EFI on a mild-mannered, 250cc entry level streetbike would produce the anticipated level of gain (over carbs) that many had anticipated.There’s no question that the instant start-up, and quick ready-to-ride nature of fuel delivery that the EFI provides is superior to the carburetors on the Ninja. One other area I expect a gain will be seen is in maintaining a more ideal fuel-air ratio when major changes in elevation are encountered during a ride. The limited one day of testing, with less than 2,000 ft. from sea level to peak, didn’t provide a chance to prove or disprove that theory.The one area where the EFI felt a little lacking was in the usable range of incremental throttle. The limited overall power output of the 250cc single motor likely being a factor to the all-or-nothing throttle position that I often found to be needed while riding the backroads. The throttle ended up spending a lot of time being up against the mechanical stop, just to maintain the desired pace.The EFI in use on the CBR250R platform works well, and is a win for the Honda. A win despite the EFI not quite living up to the gotta have it expectations for enhanced performance (over carbs), that many had anticipated.The carburetors on the Ninja 250 do a decent job, with two flaws. An extended warm-up time; and a noticeable hiccup at just-off-idle throttle position in the 4K-5K RPM range (with stock jetting).----------------------------------------------------It’s impossible to know whether the single cylinder engine design or the EFI (fuel injection) is the major factor in the fuel economy difference (MPG) between the two bikes. Perhaps the improvement boils down to being a combination of the two?The final outcome is about a 10-15% advantage in fuel economy for the CBR, across all forms of riding.- Pure commute riding by original owner: 66 MPG- Shared moderate to spirited riding during my testing on backroads: 55 MPG- Consistent spirited riding (full-throttle often used): 48 MPGThe fuel tank on the CBR holds more than a gallon less go juice than the Ninja (rated at 4.8 gallons), with a specification of 3.4 gallons total capacity. The offsetting of the smaller fuel tank capacity, against the increased MPG, results in the maximum number of miles between gas stops on the two bikes being close.The Ninja would likely edge out a win by a small margin. 170 miles would likely be the mark for fill ups during spirited backroad riding, and 200’ish miles being the point where the bike would begin sipping on fumes when ridden in a conservative throttle manner.- Economy:- Range:----------------------------------------------------Being entry level priced machines, the suspension on both bikes are pretty basic; using old-school technology (damping rod forks). A spring preload adjustment on the rear shock is the only adjustment.The damping performance of the suspension is an area that fell a bit short of my expectations. The compression damping is OK, albeit a bit on the harsh side when encountering sharp-edged bumps. This aspect of the suspension’s behavior was not unexpected however as this is the signature of the fork technology (damping rod style) used on all lower cost bikes.Overall the suspension should be more than adequate for those riders that primarily use the bike for basic transportation and commuting purposes.For heavier riders, or riders that plan on taking the CBR off the city streets or major highways for recreational riding on the less smooth backroads, the suspension story is not as rosy.To achieve the desired rider sag, with my 170 pounds on board, required increasing the shock preload setting by two steps (from #2 to #4 position). The rebound on the rear shock is a little fast too; but acceptable for most riding conditions that the bike will likely see.The springs are very soft; definitely far softer than the Ninja. The only fit for the stock springs would likely be a sub-120 pound, conservative commute use only rider. The telltale strap that I put on the forks, and reset before each stint of riding, quickly returned to a location marking near full (130mm) travel. Adding 10-20mm of additional fork oil might be a temporary cheap-fix to the tendency to use up all the travel (soft bottom out)The rebound side was where the CBR really failed to perform. There’s a serious lack of rebound damping! The forks bounce up and down multiple times, in a cyclic pogo-stick fashion, in response to a single rapid depression.This behavior results in the bike wiggling and wobbling before settling again, when trying to recover after hitting dips or bumps in a corner. Consciously using a light trailing of the front brake to keep the front end settled, when recognizing the onset of a road condition that will create such behavior, was the workaround.A usually nasty kicker dip/bump on Stage Road really exposed the real world impact of the suspension shortcomings on the CBR. The bike wiggled, bucked and wobbled so violently in response to this road hazard that the behavior could be considered a safety risk for some riders.The excessively soft springs and bouncy rebound behavior on the CBR250R forks were totally reminiscent of the front suspension performance that I’d experienced on the early-gen Ninja 250s for so many years. Fortunately the new-gen Ninja 250 forks got a serious shot of improvement in both areas. Looks like Honda is one generation behind at this point, in the front suspension category.The Ninja definitely has the upper hand in the suspension category. The stock fork springs are adequate for most all forms of riding; even for slightly heavier (190 lbs or less?) riders. The compression damping is not that much different than the CBR, but the rebound is much more refined and keeps the bike a lot more under control on less than ideal road surfaces.----------------------------------------------------The frame design and overall chassis of the CBR was well thought out in terms of providing a decent level of rigidity for aggressive cornering activities. The bike tracks quite true and straight, even at speed. The deliberate “bump the bars” test, used as a method of testing the tendency of a bike to fall into headshake, passed with flying colors.The rake/trail numbers are solid, providing a good compromise between decent turn-in and straight line stability. The overly soft fork springs being the only flaw in the armor in that area; appearing primarily when encountering bumpy pavement.The bike showed a good prowess for carrying front trail braking deep into turns without any tendency for standing-up. Some mild chatter occasionally experienced, due to the (soft) front suspension being compressed down close to its limits, was one additional area of note.The Ninja’s geometry and chassis design also allow for pushing the bike to a pretty high level of cornering speeds and forces without upsetting things. The new-gen bike deserves a lot of credit as being a huge improvement over the flexy-frame, hinged-in-the-middle, behavior that the old-gen Ninjas had previously exhibited.The better performing forks and shock provide the added edge in overall handling to the Ninja.----------------------------------------------------The Honda, as with most modern sportbikes, uses a 6-speed gearbox. The shifts were smooth and fairly uneventful, on both upshifts and downshifts during the entire test ride. The transmission didn’t, however, behave in a manner that would prompt a comment of “buttery smooth”, but it did the job just fine.A subtle firmness in getting the mechanism to change between gears was noted. It’s likely that the fairly low mileage on the bike that I was testing had an impact on that aspect of the shifting performance. I suspect things will loosen up noticeably with time and use.6th gear seemed a bit more like an overdrive on the Honda, than the Ninja. The combination of the motor’s range of power output and amount of horsepower consumed in working to overcome the bike’s wind resistance at freeway speeds made 5th gear a better choice in many situations. In top speed testing, this definitely proved to be the case.The Ninja’s transmission performs at a similarly acceptable level to the Honda.. From a comparison perspective I’d say there’s very little difference in the shifting behavior of the two bikes,----------------------------------------------------The only noticeable difference in the brakes between the two bikes, appear in the rotor design. The rotors on the CBR being conventional round discs at both ends; compared to semi-wave design items used on the Ninja.The single disc front brake is quite adequate for getting the job done. The pads and rotor have decent bite and good feel; enabling getting the CBR slowed quite effectively. This being done while using two fingers (or less). Despite the spirited level of riding, during the 200+ miles of backroad testing, no noticeable fade or other shortcoming in the braking performance was ever noted.It required getting back on the Ninja, the day after the CBR250R test ride, to finally recognize any notable difference between the braking performance of the two bikes. Up to 90% of maximum threshold braking level the CBR and Ninja are comparable. It’s at that final, most extreme, hardest possible late braking level, where the slight edge in maximum bite and slowing potential tips the scales in favor of the Ninja’s brake components.----------------------------------------------------The muffler on the Honda is real monster (big)! To say that its appearance is not exactly a complementary element to the overall looks rating of the CBR250R is big understatement. The good news is that despite the massive oversize and somewhat ugly appearance of the muffler, some degree of the “thumper” heritage of the engine still comes through in the sound of the bike; at least when getting on the gas hard.It was almost comical to be on this tiny little entry level 250cc motorcycle, and yet be barking with enough authority to draw attention to the bike from fellow riders hanging out at the local sportbike watering hole, when heading out for a ride.The Ninja’s muffler isn’t exactly a work of art, but it’s much smaller size and uniform round shape manages to do the job of meeting the stiffening government regulations without becoming an eyesore. The exhaust is whisper quiet. Not a bad thing when trying to run in stealth mode, but definitely not a sound that will earn any respect.----------------------------------------------------The comparison often done by magazines in comparing the small differences in numbers off a spec sheet rarely translates over into actual on-bike riding impressions. This proved to be the case in riding, and evaluating the feel of, these two bikes.If one adds the weight of the extra gallon+ of fuel in the Ninja, to the wet-weight numbers, the CBR should tip the scales lighter by only about 10 lbs. Definitely not enough to significantly impact either bike’s handling, in either direction (from my riding impressions).The narrow tires and lighter weight of the CBR (and the Ninja) over their bigger bore cousins, results in a very flickable machine. The tighter and twistier the road, the more at home the bike feels. On more open sections of road where the corners widen out and the allowable speed is higher, the CBR feels a bit nervous and out-gunned.The Ninja is just as happy as the CBR, when carving up tighter roads at lower speeds. Where the Ninja excels however is when things open up. The chassis feels more planted and secure under those conditions.359 lbs. (w/3.4 gallons of fuel)374 lbs. (w/4.8 gallons of fuel)----------------------------------------------------Honda elected to go ½” wider on the rear wheel of the CBR; at 4.0”. This results in a one size larger 140 rear tire being mounted, versus the Ninja. The only real advantage that I can see in the 140 size tire selection is an increase in available options for aftermarket rubber. The low HP output of either bike does just fine with a 130 sized tire, so getting grip to the ground is not an area where a bigger rear tire offers any value-add.The CBR uses the same sized tire up front as the Ninja, being a 110/70/17. The IRC “Road Winner” is the OEM tire of choice used on the Honda. It’s a bias-ply tire. I started out with fairly low expectations in performance of these OEM tires that had already logged 3K commute miles by the bike’s owner, before my test ride adventure. To my (pleasant) surprise in actual use the tires ended up performing quite decently. 200+ spirited miles on the backroads did leave signs that they’d been worked hard, and put away wet however.Bridgestone BT-045 or Dunlop GT-501 tires are the two choices most commonly seen as OEM rubber on the new-gen Ninjas. They’re also bias-ply tires, and despite the 130 size used on the rear, perform at a very good level; perhaps just a notch up on the IRC skins.Upgrading to better rubber, after the stock tires are done, is the best approach on both bikes.----------------------------------------------------The gauge layout on the Honda is really well thought out. The speedometer is a digital design, using large, easy to read numbers that are located dead center on the console. The analog tachometer is positioned directly above the speedo readout, making a tight little area where all the key information is concentrated on the console. Nice!The CBR includes a time-of-day clock. That’s a nice touch that’s generally reserved for higher dollar machines. A fuel gauge is also included in the user readout. The information is displayed as a very small grey LCD bar graph, which takes more than a quick glance to read. Due to the small fuel tank capacity, the accuracy of the information proved marginal at best. With only one bar still showing, the bike only took about 2 gallons (of the 3.4 total capacity) to fill.The separate analog speedometer and tachometer spread the information out and require a little more effort for data gathering by the rider. The fuel gauge is analog and much larger than the CBR, but its accuracy is truly a joke and doesn’t warrant bringing any extra points to the bike’s rating. The removal of the analog engine temperature gauge that the old-gen Ninja used to provide, from the new-gen bikes, loses more points in the instrumentation category.----------------------------------------------------The most glaring difference in the CBR’s ergonomics (to the Ninja 250) became obvious after traveling less than block into the very first ride. It was the reach and position of the handlebars. The bars are located further forward, and rotated a bit more outward. At just under six feet tall, the reach felt right on the verge of being a bit too high and extended for optimum bike control positioning. Over the course of the 200+ miles of riding the backroads, the slightly extended reach did become more familiar, and ultimately did not impair even the most spirited forms of riding on the bike.Thanks to some input from a riding friend (that’s a few inches taller) who had complained about having a difficult time molding into an ideal position with the tank contour/seat/bar orientation on the new-gen Ninja, a taller rider’s perspective on the CBR was achieved. He felt the slightly longer reach to the bars, combined with the slightly greater span between the seat and foot pegs (pegs a bit lower on the CBR?) and the sculpted shape of the fuel tank provided a better fit for bigger riders.Most other attributes of the CBR felt quite familiar (to the Ninja 250) once out on the road. The windscreen is a bit smaller on the Honda, and as a result did seem to provide a little less wind protection while out on the highway.The higher footrest positioning, and tighter overall spacing between seat, bars and pegs makes the Ninja a better fit (ergonomically) for riders under the 6 foot, and sub-200lb level. Minus the tighter cockpit fitment for larger riders, the overall layout of the controls on the Ninja provide a riding environment that easily allows for 200 mile plus days of riding, without creating a need for a Chiropractor visit.- Riders over 6’, or 200 lbs:- Other riders:----------------------------------------------------Likely in response to minimizing costs for this entry level bike, some usability items were left off the spec list. The combination of an absence of a center stand (as provided on the old-gen Ninja, but also gone on the current model), and lack of welded bosses on the swingarm (for spools to support a typical aftermarket rear stand,) will make rear wheel and chain maintenance much more of a challenge for many riders.The previously mentioned time-of-day clock is a convenient feature the CBR possesses, and Ninja lacks.The feature list starts and ends pretty quickly for the Ninja and the CBR250R, due to their low-end price point. With a plus one/minus one hit list in both cases, the features list is a draw.----------------------------------------------------Despite the Japanese roots of the Honda and Kawasaki namesakes, both bikes share a birthplace of Thailand. This shared manufacturing point-of-origin may be the reason for the very similar levels of quality seen in the two bikes. A level I’d consider “decent – but not flawless”.The lack of the use of thread locking agent on some of the critical hardware (i.e. foot peg brackets) on the CBR, came as a surprise during the time spent with the bike. A bit atypical if one looks at the CBR as being a Honda (as per the name/logo on the gas tank), and considers their long-standing reputation for quality.The quality of the welds on the main frame are far better than what I’d found on the Korean Hyosung 250 last year, but still a bit below the standard of what’s typically seen on the more mainstream Honda products manufactured in Japan. .The nearly 40K miles of extreme level riding on a new-gen Ninja 250 provides a solid history on which to rate the overall durability and quality of that bike. The motor’s been rock solid bulletproof, and shows no signs of slowing down. No other items have failed, broken or rattled off prematurely over that same span of hard use, giving the Ninja 250 a pretty solid rating in the quality category; especially for an entry-level priced motorcycle.I suspect the Honda will provide similar reliability in extended real world use. Unfortunately being a first-year model, that proof will need to be forthcoming as the years, and miles, of use by their owners pass.----------------------------------------------------For 2011 the MSRP for the Ninja 250 had dropped slightly from the previous year, to $3,999. This was likely driven by the Kawasaki's recognition that the soon-to-be-released Honda CBR250R was going to be a serious direct competitor (from Japan) and would be coming in at a price level targeted at encouraging entry-level bike buyers to "".For 2011 the MSRP of the CBR250R came in resetting the benchmark to. Unfortunately searching the web failed to come up with Honda's official MSRP price for 2012, but all indications point to a likelihood of that number creeping up to at least the announced price point of the Kawasaki; at. This increase likely being a natural response to the changes in the currency exchange rates with the US $.(? TBA) -----------------------------------------------------Honda’s recent 250cc entry-level sportbike is a very good first effort (as one would expect from the big “H”). The bike does everything reasonably well, and some things very well. There’s no question that Honda has created another very viable option for the decision making process being done by those looking to purchase a low-cost, fun riding, 250cc sportbike.For bikers that live in the city, and do 90% of their riding from stoplight-to-stoplight in urban traffic, the CBR250R is a very solid choice and should be considered the winner in that performance category.The slightly expanded ergonomics of the Honda provides a package that will be a better overall fit for taller/larger riders that are interested in a small displacement machine. For those riders, the CBR250R is again well worth considering as a good choice.For experienced riders that want to stay loyal to the team red banner (Honda), the CBR250R can provide enough performance to keep pace with many other riders on larger displacement machines, right up to the point of very spirited riding on the backroads. The limitations for outright performance by the 250cc single cylinder engine design in this application is the one aspect that needs to be recognized, and accepted, by those who choose the CBR250R over the Ninja.Below is a quick checklist of the categories where the Honda got the nod in this evaluation; for those reviewing their priorities in purchase of a new 250cc sportbike:The Ninja 250 packs a lot of performance in a tiny package. The bike’s refinement of design, attention to detail, and peak engine performance provide a great package! It’s a package that can serve the needs of everyone from a first-time newbie looking for a great starter bike, to a very experienced pilot looking for some small cc thrills on the backroads - or even the racetrack. The proven reliability is also an area that’s hard to ignore when making a bike buying decision. The proven resilience of its resale value over time is another facet where the Ninja shines.Below is a quick checklist of the categories where the Ninja got the nod in this evaluation; for those reviewing their priorities in purchase of a new 250cc sportbike:---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------So who wins out in the Japanese manufacturer 250 wars? The real winners are us as a buying public, thanks to Honda finally recognizing the huge sales numbers that Kawasaki has enjoyed for so many years, from continuing to offer its highest selling streetbike to worldwide markets.Honda deserves a big thumbs-up for finally stepping up to the plate and bringing a direct Ninja 250 competitor back to the USA motorcycle market. More choices breed better competition. The end result being improved performance and quality of the products, and a tighter lid on the MSRP asking prices to us consumers! Attached Images Last edited by Gary J; 10-07-2011 at 06:41 PM .. Reason: "Price" section added, by request