Kawasaki Ninja ZX-6R Forum banner

MCN 2017 superbike shootout

2K views 25 replies 11 participants last post by  honestSquid 
#1 ·


I usually don't agree with these shootouts, and this year is no different, but it's always interesting to see figures as stock and what they have to say about them.

I just can't believe they picked the Honda as the winner. It was slowest in acceleration, least powerful, about in the middle of the group in lap times, and not all that great on the street either. They even said it wasn't the best at anything, but relatively good at everything...so how the hell can you pick that as the winner?? That logic makes no sense to me.

No, I've never ridden one, but from what I've seen and heard from others so far the Honda went from being a turd, to a turd with electronics! :eviltongue:

Interesting to see the power figures. Any one of these would be absolute beasts to ride on a track once you get rid of the ridiculous exhausts and emission restrictions! Now I really want a liter bike :D...but when I'll be ready to buy one, I'm going to want to test out a few of them and actually get a feel for what they're like to ride.
 
#2 ·
The test was more about what they thought the best over-all bike would be if you were going out to buy a super bike that did it all. I pretty much automatically pull Ducati out of the test since they're using a 1300cc motor with pre-euro 4 emissions, that puts the Honda at 2nd place for lap times in their test...if I remember correctly. The Honda's have always been known to do everything well. This new one is a good deal lighter than the last model with an ok increase in power.
My guess is they picked the Honda because it made everyone feel confident while riding it, they basically said as much while talking about riding in the rain (a dumb time to test super bikes).
As far as track times, this was a pretty small course and I would expect in other tests that the results will be almost flipped around...with the ZX10R and the Aprilia taking the lead.
I wasn't overly surprised by what they picked, I also don't really consider this a great test...I'll be waiting for a better track comparison of all the bikes.

Just my two cents though!
 
#3 ·
The other thing I don't get about their logic in picking the winners is how they change from year to year despite the bikes being the same lol. They said the Ducati was the winner in this test in 2016, and the Yamaha was the winner in 2015....ummm...they haven't changed. They were the same exact bikes in 2015 and 2016....wtf?? lol Obviously there are some inconsistencies in the way they test, or their choices are biased in some ways. I wouldn't be surprised if they get some money from manufacturers to sway a certain direction :devious

Although I would like to ride each one if I was to make a solid decision, for the moment my opinion on which I would get still doesn't change. For me it's been a toss-up between the Ducati, Aprilia and Yamaha, pretty much in the last 2 years. Out of those I've only ridden the Ducati at the track, and also an RSV4, but it was a 2012 model, so not the beastly 190-hp one.
 
#5 ·
I take all of those test results with a grain of salt now. I remember reading the Sportrider test after the ZX9R was redesigned in 1998 and was competing with the R1. The ZX9R performed better on the street and was faster around the track, but they picked the R1. There aren't really any bad sportbikes now, it's just a matter of finding the right fit for you or as a buddy said "...get the one that 'moves' you". Well, maybe that 09-14 R1 wasn't really a great bike.
 
#8 · (Edited)
I used to pick up MCN every Wednesday, but only to keep an eye on the standings for some of the other series that were racing, and for the classifieds of people selling off their race gear (with wets on wheels being almost mandatory) to keep my rides going with a steady source of spares.

However, unbiased is pretty much the last thing I'd call them and their writing capabilities are rather suspect at times. "Testing them to their absolute limit"? In a straight line at Bruntingthorpe? A two mile long, former aircraft runway wouldn't test a moped properly. Rockingham isn't far from me and may be one of the dullest tracks in the UK. It's not a great testing track, it's just pretty much the most accessible to their offices about half an hour from me.

As for opinion as to the ultimate anything, that's entirely down to the individual rider. I think if they were truly unbiased, it's most likely either the ZX10R or the S1000RR would have won in terms of 'best all-round'.

Their quality seems to have diminished to the point where they're a published group of mediocre individuals, spinning meaningless diatribe about motorcycles over a pint in the pub. In the 90's, it was worth buying for some things. These days? Pfffft!
 
#9 ·
Good to know from a local! I've always suspected as such, and I've always taken these reviews with a grain of salt as well. Personally when it comes to superbikes and supersports, I'm really only interested in how they perform on the track, and it would be nice to have someone that's fast as hell and is unbiased, ride them back-to-back at a decent track and see what the thoughts on each bike are, as well as lap times.

Such a test was done on a bit smaller scale a couple years ago when the new R1 came out. They compared the 1199R Panigale, the RSV4 RR (I think), and the new R1. They had Neil Hodson ride the bikes, somewhere in California if I recall, along with the guys from whatever magazine it was that was doing the review. Interestingly enough Hodgson was the only one who went faster on the 1199R, by a significant margin too. Basically the conclusion overall was that the 1199R was the fastest bike but also the hardest one to ride and because it is such a beast, it requires someone of "well beyond average" talent to really get the most out of it, whereas for most of us average Joes, the R1 and RSV4 were easier to ride and therefore easier to go faster.
 
#14 ·
Not only is this true, but their choice could be entirely influenced by factors that don't matter or are less of an issue for you. Someone chose a 300 as their ultimate ride? More power to them. What might not be evident is that they're 5' 3" and managing a larger machine is tricky. I'm 5' 10" so that doesn't affect my choice. Even aftermarket mods are often a matter of aesthetic taste more than something that actually improves the bike.

The only person who can decide the ultimate for you is you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gawernator
#16 ·
I can tell you that I am not really liking my (New to me) R1 2013. I guess there are things I like about it but overall I am not entirely impressed. Stock suspension sucks, as usual. The clutch sucks. It shifts poorly. Fueling is not great. There are things I like about it, the sound, the grunt and it looks pretty. But if I had my way, I would have bought something else. This is really hard to say. It's like coming out and saying that you are GAY. The shit of it all is that I have put Ohlins on it front and rear, a pipe and rearsets. Decisions, decisions.
 
#18 ·
Yeah it happens. When I bought my brand new Ducati 1198, I was sort of a noob then. Didn't know a whole lot about bikes, but I bought it because I liked the way it looked and the sound of the V-twin. When I rode it the first few times I was all smiles, but after a while I realized it was a terrible bike to have as a daily rider/commuter. Riding it in the city sucked ass. It wasn't until I took it to the track and learned how to ride better and improve my own skills that I started to really appreciate it. Took me about 1.5-2 years, but after that, once I reached a certain pace and I made it into a track-only bike, that's when I really started to like the bike. Had I not done that I probably would've sold it much sooner because as a street bike it was not very good.

And funny thing is when I took it for a test-ride at the dealer, I had just test-ridden a 2009 R1 minutes before I got on the 1198. I didn't care too much for the R1 at the time, but granted it was like a 5-minute ride only so not a very good test.
 
#20 ·
Funny shit there. Ya MCN know all about it. I had a 2008 Cbr1000 before the R1 and it was a lot more forgiving. I just wanted a cross plane engine because I had never had one before. It's just hard to work the bugs out of this one. I have tons of riding experience but I don't like to work too hard to go fast. The Zx6 is easy to boogie on. The R1 is fun but it is a lot of work. I am not sure I am up to it. As far as using it for the track, I already have a track only Zx6 so it doesn't really make sense to have a $11,000 in another track bike when I rarely go to the street track.
 
#21 ·
No i know you do, I wasn't implying that you should make it a track bike, just saying that some of these bikes suck in certain conditions (like urban environment), so I'm not surprised that you're not a huge fan of the 2009-2014 R1.
 
#22 ·
I just can't believe they picked the Honda as the winner. It was slowest in acceleration, least powerful, about in the middle of the group in lap times, and not all that great on the street either. They even said it wasn't the best at anything, but relatively good at everything...so how the hell can you pick that as the winner?? That logic makes no sense to me.
Because Honda pays them the most to make sure that they win. MCN is hardly unbiased.
 
#23 ·
I guess, for a non-racer, or a 'new to literbikes' rider, they might be interested in which one is easiest to ride. Which is easiest to ride fast. Which is least likely to punish me for a mistake? Which imparts confidence that will allow me to learn more quickly?

Also, for someone who might only have one bike, which is the best for the street while still being reasonable on track could be a good question.

I guess it's hard to say, "This is the best bike." It should come down to "this is the best at: ..."

For some, that may make Honda the best bike, if they're looking for confidence and easy to ride quickly. But I think it would be more honest to be more specific with what each bike is for.

Nuance doesn't sell, though.
 
#24 ·
Don't get me wrong, I totally get that. But the MCN guys even said the Honda was NOT the best on the street. It wasn't the easiest to ride except when they rode in the rain briefly (and that could really be more about the tires than the bike). That's why I think it's funny that they would name it the winner when it wasn't the best at anything, and mostly average.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top