Best used 600cc supersports bike for £6,000 max?

[BroadsRS6]

My mate's lad is ready for his first venture into fast bikes, having been learning his way on a KTM 390. Previously a KTM 200.
I'm thinking CBR600RR. Is that the sensible option would you say? He wants something fast but isn't ready for an R1 or the like.
Anyone got or owned one? I suggested R6 but he fancies something a bit more placid!
(My initial suggestion of a Ducati 748 was met with derision!)

[Jazoli]

Daytona 675 would be my choice.

[Prof Prolapse]

GSXR 750.

It's identical to the 600, same frame etc, but more midrange which makes it a joy. Very friendly bikes (but no rider's aids).

[NS400R]

Take a look at insurance on the 600RR. My son is in the same position. Insurance is horrific.... Sadly it us likely that insurance will dictate his choices.

[Japcreation]

I came back into biking at the age of 30 (I'll be 46 this weekend) after a 10 year break. I bought an old and tired FZR1000 for £500 to see if I wanted to get back into it properly and rode it until it broke 6 months later.

An FZR600 Foxeye followed for a couple of years, but then I was ready to invest in something new.

So, in 2008, I went shopping with my mind torn between and R6 and an R1. The thoughts of "if I'm going to do it, I might as well go the whole hog and buy an R1". The salesman actually discouraged me from getting the R1 as he said that I would get far more use and fun out of the R6 as it is less likely to bite and handles better. The seat height is slightly higher on an R6 too which benefits me @ 6'1 and a bit. I've never regretted buying it once. I only regret not using it more (just over 10000 miles on it), but family and work have both evolved over the years and there are only so many hours in the day!!

I'm no street racer, but with a good pair of tyres and good weather (doesn't even need to be that warm), it will easily allow you drag your knee around many a corner/roundabout. Top speed is way in excess of anything you need on the road and acceleration will get you into trouble with the police in a few seconds if you let it (it does sound lovely when you get the revs up through 5 figures - K&N filter + Akra can).

Not sure what else I can say really.

[dibblecorse]

In fairness a 748 is a rubbish suggestion, they are a nightmare to ride quickly, extreme riding position, not that quick and it will be years and years older than an equivalent Japanese supersport 600. the Daytona 675 and GSXR750 are the best suggestions thus far, truth is none of the 600's are bad bikes, they all stop, go and turn very similarly as the formla is the same throughout.

[black-k1]

BroadsRS6 said:

My mate's lad is ready for his first venture into fast bikes, having been learning his way on a KTM 390. Previously a KTM 200.
I'm thinking CBR600RR. Is that the sensible option would you say? He wants something fast but isn't ready for an R1 or the like.
Anyone got or owned one? I suggested R6 but he fancies something a bit more placid!
(My initial suggestion of a Ducati 748 was met with derision!)

A couple of quick questions. Who has decided he "isn't ready for an R1 or the like"? What is that decision based on?

In simple performance terms, and just doing a quick google, the CBR600RR (2006 model) does 156mph and the standing quarter in 10.7 seconds. The R1 of the same vintage does 175mph and the standing quarter in 10.4 seconds. Lap times of most circuits for a CBR600RR will be within a second or two of those for an R1. If you are riding them flat out, then there is really bugger all between them. If you're not riding them flat out then the limit on the performance is the rider and it doesn't matter what the bike is capable of, only what the rider chooses to do.

There is a very good reason why there isn't really a sports 600 market any more. The difference in absolute performance between a sports 600 and and sport liter bike, is bugger all, especially on the road. The liter bike has the huge advantage of tractability. That makes riding them a whole lot easier. It also allows the rider to focus on the road rather than encouraging them to focus on "wringing the bikes neck" to get that same level of performance.

If your mates lad is looking for a sports 600, and not looking for a liter bike, then make sure it's for the right reasons and not for some illogical, irrational and ill thought out sense of "making it safer" or "it's the right way to do it".

[Prof Prolapse]

black-k1 said:

A couple of quick questions. Who has decided he "isn't ready for an R1 or the like"? What is that decision based on?

In simple performance terms, and just doing a quick google, the CBR600RR (2006 model) does 156mph and the standing quarter in 10.7 seconds. The R1 of the same vintage does 175mph and the standing quarter in 10.4 seconds. Lap times of most circuits for a CBR600RR will be within a second or two of those for an R1. If you are riding them flat out, then there is really bugger all between them. If you're not riding them flat out then the limit on the performance is the rider and it doesn't matter what the bike is capable of, only what the rider chooses to do.

There is a very good reason why there isn't really a sports 600 market any more. The difference in absolute performance between a sports 600 and and sport liter bike, is bugger all, especially on the road. The liter bike has the huge advantage of tractability. That makes riding them a whole lot easier. It also allows the rider to focus on the road rather than encouraging them to focus on "wringing the bikes neck" to get that same level of performance.

If your mates lad is looking for a sports 600, and not looking for a liter bike, then make sure it's for the right reasons and not for some illogical, irrational and ill thought out sense of "making it safer" or "it's the right way to do it".

As a person who bought a GSXR-750 rather than the litre, and whilst I've no claims to be a particular sportsbike fan, I'm just going to respectfully offer an opposing viewpoint here.

We all know the throttle goes both ways, but there's more to it than that. With these massive performing bikes, the power comes on instantly, and in every single gear. In the £6,000 price range especially the bikes are all old school tech, few rider's aids, big power, physically larger. A lack of concentration on any bike can be fatal, but you're guaranteed to end up in a worse place if you have more torque with no need to downshift, with the same momentary lapse.

Yes, you can murder yourself on any 600cc and 1000cc bike, but I think it's not an imperceptible difference in "friendliness" either. If you give it too much on the GSXR 600/750 coming out of a bend, it may forgive you, there's just not the low down torque to easily break traction, and further up you'll need to downshift. But on the big power bikes it really has a lot more far lower down. On the road I think this makes a massive difference, I found the GSXR-750 a pussycat to ride, you really could just not worry and enjoy the experience, on the litre I was constantly backing off, with no thought to the gearing. Personally I don't think that's what you want as a novice, I really don't scare easily, but, beyond the hilarious straight line speeds, I just don't think as a novice the litre bike is as fun for the sportsbike experience most are looking for on the roads (although I would argue probably the better bike).

As for the demise of the 600cc sports category I do and don't agree. If you want outright performance you want outright performance why lower capacity bikes existed in this niche, seems to be just a relic of back when people bought bikes due to racing categories. But the "sports 600" category is far from dead, it's enjoying it's resurgence with more of a road bias. The CBR650R, RS660, Ducati Supersport, all around what 110bhp-120bhp? Same as the R6, CBR600, GSXR600 of the day, the whilst we can argue the semantics of the categories, to me they're back and finally making sense as an alternative. A road biased, affordable, fast, sporty bike.

Actually come to think of it a CBR650R might be a good choice? I keep looking at them myself. So cheap. I just can't seem to get past the fact I secretly think I'd always question my own masculinity for not buying the Fireblade. A I did when I got my 750cc and had to defend my sexuality to people on a regular basis.

Edited by Prof Prolapse on Wednesday 26th May 11:12

[DarthtaterM16]

black-k1 said:

BroadsRS6 said:

My mate's lad is ready for his first venture into fast bikes, having been learning his way on a KTM 390. Previously a KTM 200.
I'm thinking CBR600RR. Is that the sensible option would you say? He wants something fast but isn't ready for an R1 or the like.
Anyone got or owned one? I suggested R6 but he fancies something a bit more placid!
(My initial suggestion of a Ducati 748 was met with derision!)

A couple of quick questions. Who has decided he "isn't ready for an R1 or the like"? What is that decision based on?

In simple performance terms, and just doing a quick google, the CBR600RR (2006 model) does 156mph and the standing quarter in 10.7 seconds. The R1 of the same vintage does 175mph and the standing quarter in 10.4 seconds. Lap times of most circuits for a CBR600RR will be within a second or two of those for an R1. If you are riding them flat out, then there is really bugger all between them. If you're not riding them flat out then the limit on the performance is the rider and it doesn't matter what the bike is capable of, only what the rider chooses to do.

There is a very good reason why there isn't really a sports 600 market any more. The difference in absolute performance between a sports 600 and and sport liter bike, is bugger all, especially on the road. The liter bike has the huge advantage of tractability. That makes riding them a whole lot easier. It also allows the rider to focus on the road rather than encouraging them to focus on "wringing the bikes neck" to get that same level of performance.

If your mates lad is looking for a sports 600, and not looking for a liter bike, then make sure it's for the right reasons and not for some illogical, irrational and ill thought out sense of "making it safer" or "it's the right way to do it".

I'm thinking along the same lines here. I was going to agree with the GSXR750 suggestion but it got me thinking why not just jump up to a GSXR1000 instead? They're friendly bikes at low speeds from my experience and it will only go as quickly as you want it too at the end of the day.

[CaptainSlow]

Daytona 675 for sure, not the underseat exhaust model though.

I found Triumphs cheaper to insure than the Jap makes too for some reason.

[black-k1]

Prof Prolapse said:

black-k1 said:

A couple of quick questions. Who has decided he "isn't ready for an R1 or the like"? What is that decision based on?

In simple performance terms, and just doing a quick google, the CBR600RR (2006 model) does 156mph and the standing quarter in 10.7 seconds. The R1 of the same vintage does 175mph and the standing quarter in 10.4 seconds. Lap times of most circuits for a CBR600RR will be within a second or two of those for an R1. If you are riding them flat out, then there is really bugger all between them. If you're not riding them flat out then the limit on the performance is the rider and it doesn't matter what the bike is capable of, only what the rider chooses to do.

There is a very good reason why there isn't really a sports 600 market any more. The difference in absolute performance between a sports 600 and and sport liter bike, is bugger all, especially on the road. The liter bike has the huge advantage of tractability. That makes riding them a whole lot easier. It also allows the rider to focus on the road rather than encouraging them to focus on "wringing the bikes neck" to get that same level of performance.

If your mates lad is looking for a sports 600, and not looking for a liter bike, then make sure it's for the right reasons and not for some illogical, irrational and ill thought out sense of "making it safer" or "it's the right way to do it".

As a person who bought a GSXR-750 rather than the litre, and whilst I've no claims to be a particular sportsbike fan, I'm just going to respectfully offer an opposing viewpoint here.

We all know the throttle goes both ways, but there's more to it than that. With these massive performing bikes, the power comes on instantly, and in every single gear. In the £6,000 price range especially the bikes are all old school tech, few rider's aids, big power, physically larger. A lack of concentration on any bike can be fatal, but you're guaranteed to end up in a worse place if you have more torque with no need to downshift, with the same momentary lapse.

Yes, you can murder yourself on any 600cc and 1000cc bike, but I think it's not an imperceptible difference in "friendliness" either. If you give it too much on the GSXR 600/750 coming out of a bend, it may forgive you, there's just not the low down torque to easily break traction, and further up you'll need to downshift. But on the big power bikes it really has a lot more far lower down. On the road I think this makes a massive difference, I found the GSXR-750 a pussycat to ride, you really could just not worry and enjoy the experience, on the litre I was constantly backing off, with no thought to the gearing. Personally I don't think that's what you want as a novice, I really don't scare easily, but, beyond the hilarious straight line speeds, I just don't think as a novice the litre bike is as fun for the sportsbike experience most are looking for on the roads (although I would argue probably the better bike).

As for the demise of the 600cc sports category I do and don't agree. If you want outright performance you want outright performance why lower capacity bikes existed in this niche, seems to be just a relic of back when people bought bikes due to racing categories. But the "sports 600" category is far from dead, it's enjoying it's resurgence with more of a road bias. The CBR650R, RS660, Ducati Supersport, all around what 110bhp-120bhp? Same as the R6, CBR600, GSXR600 of the day, the whilst we can argue the semantics of the categories, to me they're back and finally making sense as an alternative. A road biased, affordable, fast, sporty bike.

Actually come to think of it a CBR650R might be a good choice? I keep looking at them myself. So cheap. I just can't seem to get past the fact I secretly think I'd always question my own masculinity for not buying the Fireblade. A I did when I got my 750cc and had to defend my sexuality to people on a regular basis.

Edited by Prof Prolapse on Wednesday 26th May 11:12

We all know that size is important!

I agree with the theory of what you have said regarding instant torque but, what I don't know is how often that is an actual problem for inexperienced rider. My "gut feel" says it's a problem that impacts experienced riders more as you have to have the confidence to believe it won't be a problem in relation to the amount of throttle being applied to actually apply that amount of throttle. I'd suggest that self preservation concerns tends to ensure inexperienced riders are considerably more cautious.

[Drawweight]

I think the fear of the back end breaking away due to the torque of a big bike is massively overstated on normal road conditions. If it’s gonna slide it’s gonna slide on a wet greasy road and you don’t need a big bike for that to happen.

The big danger and the biggest cause of single bike accidents is arriving at a corner too fast for your abilities and again size has little to do with that. Especially given the performance of a modern 600 bike.

[Prof Prolapse]

I'm honestly not looking to be a pedant or argue the toss unnecessarily, but in both instances you mention there Drawweight, power/torque output really is objectively a factor.

As for it not happening (and apologies for lowering the tone), I had to watch a young chap paralyse himself highsiding a Blade just a year ago, under the circumstances it's extremely difficult to imagine how he could of done that with a CBR600, but I accept that's n=1, and in any instance it was entirely avoidable as well. I do fully accept that's another reason I'm perhaps somewhat biased.

I'd probably still recommend a litre bike and some restraint though. Just trying to balance the discussion.

[BroadsRS6]

dibblecorse said:

In fairness a 748 is a rubbish suggestion, they are a nightmare to ride quickly, extreme riding position, not that quick and it will be years and years older than an equivalent Japanese supersport 600. the Daytona 675 and GSXR750 are the best suggestions thus far, truth is none of the 600's are bad bikes, they all stop, go and turn very similarly as the formla is the same throughout.

In fairness, you are entitled to your opinion, but would get laughed out of any of the Ducati Owners Club meetings for saying they are rubbish! They are pretty good machines, actually. Especially the 748R, but they fetch silly money.
I owned an early 748 and yes of course they have their downsides. They are not very comfortable at town speeds and only really feel happy when using them as a sports bike should be, rather than a commuter. Fine by me.
No they are not that powerful but a bit of perspective here. Would anyone think of a Kawasaki H2 750 triple as being slow? Nope, but the 748 not only has over a third more bhp but weighs a lot, lot less so it's not exactly sluggish! 155 mph capability.
On the plus side they will hold their value, they are one of the best looking motorcycles ever created, handle very well, rev really well for a twin and they sound absolutely fantastic. They are also a lot rarer and more interesting than a UJM in line 4. So to balance things i have to fight the 748 corner a little here.
To answer the other point the lad just does not need 160+ bhp yet and wants a 600 or similar to get another year under his belt before buying his dream bike, a Ducati 1299. (I may well be ready for a change and sell it to him next year, we will have to see.)
I'd think GSXR750 probably the ideal choice, all things considered.

[BroadsRS6]

Prof Prolapse said:

I'm honestly not looking to be a pedant or argue the toss unnecessarily, but in both instances you mention there Drawweight, power/torque output really is objectively a factor.

As for it not happening (and apologies for lowering the tone), I had to watch a young chap paralyse himself highsiding a Blade just a year ago, under the circumstances it's extremely difficult to imagine how he could of done that with a CBR600, but I accept that's n=1, and in any instance it was entirely avoidable as well. I do fully accept that's another reason I'm perhaps somewhat biased.

I'd probably still recommend a litre bike and some restraint though. Just trying to balance the discussion.

I would agree with your previous point. The tendency among many bikers i speak to is to say ''go for the biggest, fastest bike you can afford and moderate the throttle accordingly'', but you rightly pointed out there is more to it than that. Or there would be no 500s, 600s, 750s, etc. Hell why not just get rid of 400s as well? !
If a relatively inexperienced rider wanted to get into modern Ducatis i would be suggesting a Panigale 899. I would not be suggesting the 1299 at all. Yes the throttle works both ways but the very big Dukes, 1198, 1199 and the 1299 i presently own can be widow makers if you get it wrong, they are extremely explosive and not as forgiving as a Fireblade, for example.
On the isle of Man 3 years ago my 1199 lifted the front wheel 2 feet in the air half way round an 80 mph bend which was most interesting, in a very morbid kind of way. I had simply taken one liberty too many and it was showing me who's boss. Admittedly the 1299 has a far nicer character despite being more powerful. But it doesn't suffer fools!
Anyway, we've had a long chat and he is looking for a bike this weekend.
Thanks for all input.

[black-k1]

Now I understand. If you had said lining up the sale of your bike next year was the top priority I would have better understood!




I think the he needs to get a CBR600RR for about a year then buy a Ducati 1299.

[black-k1]

BroadsRS6 said:

Prof Prolapse said:

I'm honestly not looking to be a pedant or argue the toss unnecessarily, but in both instances you mention there Drawweight, power/torque output really is objectively a factor.

As for it not happening (and apologies for lowering the tone), I had to watch a young chap paralyse himself highsiding a Blade just a year ago, under the circumstances it's extremely difficult to imagine how he could of done that with a CBR600, but I accept that's n=1, and in any instance it was entirely avoidable as well. I do fully accept that's another reason I'm perhaps somewhat biased.

I'd probably still recommend a litre bike and some restraint though. Just trying to balance the discussion.

I would agree with your previous point. The tendency among many bikers i speak to is to say ''go for the biggest, fastest bike you can afford and moderate the throttle accordingly'', but you rightly pointed out there is more to it than that. Or there would be no 500s, 600s, 750s, etc. Hell why not just get rid of 400s as well? !
If a relatively inexperienced rider wanted to get into modern Ducatis i would be suggesting a Panigale 899. I would not be suggesting the 1299 at all. Yes the throttle works both ways but the very big Dukes, 1198, 1199 and the 1299 i presently own can be widow makers if you get it wrong, they are extremely explosive and not as forgiving as a Fireblade, for example.
On the isle of Man 3 years ago my 1199 lifted the front wheel 2 feet in the air half way round an 80 mph bend which was most interesting, in a very morbid kind of way. I had simply taken one liberty too many and it was showing me who's boss. Admittedly the 1299 has a far nicer character despite being more powerful. But it doesn't suffer fools!
Anyway, we've had a long chat and he is looking for a bike this weekend.
Thanks for all input.

We can all give anecdotes of things that did and didn't happen. I feel for Prof because he was put into a situation that every single one of us fear, probably more than having an accident ourselves, and I value Profs. opinion on this more because of his experience.

All that said, anecdotes are no substitute for evidence and the reality is that there is no evidence to suggest that there is any increased risk associated with and increase in the capacity/bhp of the bike ridden.In fact, it's the opposite. The evidence specifically shows there is no risk increase. If the reason for choosing a smaller bike is based on a perception of "safety" then that perception is wrong.

If someone wants a 400, 600, 750 etc., and there are many who prefer the riding experiences and the relative economy they offer, then good on them. everyone is, and should be, free to buy what they want.

[Jazoli]

Prof Prolapse said:

The CBR650R, RS660, Ducati Supersport, all around what 110bhp-120bhp?

Not quite, the CBR650R is 90bhp, the RS660 is about 97 and the Ducati has 110, so not really a direct comparison with supersport 600's but still plenty.

[Donbot]

Big difference in the cost of insurance between a 600/750 and a litre bike ime.

I really liked my GSXR750. Was a really nice all round, do anything bike.

[Rob 131 Sport]

Donbot said:

Big difference in the cost of insurance between a 600/750 and a litre bike ime.

I really liked my GSXR750. Was a really nice all round, do anything bike.

The GSXR600 or 750 in the 30 Year Anniversary colours look superb.

I’ve ridden on test ride a GSXR600 (2016 Model) and was most impressed. You’ll love it.