What happened to 250 - 400cc bikes?

[ph9]

Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong places, but it seems that there aren't too many new bikes in this capacity range. Is it due to Euro 5, or different learner laws, or..?

For example, the Suzuki website shows the GSX-R125, then the next largest bike is the SV650.

I've also seen a few Youtube reviews in which the reviewers say things like, "This 500/650/750cc bike is a perfect beginner's bike" - which seems a bit bonkers.

[Pebbles167]

Definitely looking in the wrong place.

A whole class of bikes in exactly the range you say are on the UK market and proving popular, ie: Ninja 300-400, KTM Duke/RC 390, Honda CB300R/500R etc.

Granted, unlike the days of the past none are 4 cylinder and none are two stroke either. They are mostly singles or twins built in India, Malaysia, China etc, and in my mind not as exciting as the older stuff.

Although Kawasaki have just released the ZX-25R, a 250 4 Cylinder with a massively high redline! Sounds amazing, unsurprisingly not going to be sold in the UK would love one.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.motorcyclenews.co...

[ph9]

Thanks. I must be looking in the wrong place! However, I also checked the Kawasaki site, and that only seemed to show the Ninja 125 then the Ninja 650 (no 300\400). Also, I couldn't see the CB300 on Honda's site - it's 125's then a jump to 500's.

[mikey_b]

Bear in mind that most learners, at least those old enough to do Direct Access, are going to be doing much of their training on ~600cc machines anyway. An SV650 isn't going to rip your arms off - bikes in general have gone the way of cars and got bigger and heavier and more powerful, but are very easy to ride still.

I learned (20 years ago) by having a day doing a CBT on a 125, then another day on a 125, then days 3, 4, and 5 were on a 500cc Kawasaki. Perfectly do-able even without any experience, in fact in some ways the 500 was easier than the 125.

[Panamax]

Pebbles167 said:

Granted, unlike the days of the past none are 4 cylinder and none are two stroke either.

Yes, I think it's like the disappearance of 6-cylinder car engines and there being relatively few car engines now available between 2 litres and 4 litres.

[Walter Sobchak]

Pebbles167 said:

Granted, unlike the days of the past none are 4 cylinder and none are two stroke either. They are mostly singles or twins built in India, Malaysia, China etc, and in my mind not as exciting as the older stuff.

Although Kawasaki have just released the ZX-25R, a 250 4 Cylinder with a massively high redline! Sounds amazing, unsurprisingly not going to be sold in the UK would love one.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.motorcyclenews.co...

This is where they became boring to me, the modern bikes in that cc range just seem so dull and pedestrian compared to something like an RS250 or an RVF400, that 250 4 cylinder screaming Kawasaki is an exception though!.

[carinaman]

I wonder when the mooted KTM Duke 490 twin will come to market.

Admittedly it's nearer a 500 than 400.

[Markgenesis]

mikey_b said:

Bear in mind that most learners, at least those old enough to do Direct Access, are going to be doing much of their training on ~600cc machines anyway. An SV650 isn't going to rip your arms off - bikes in general have gone the way of cars and got bigger and heavier and more powerful, but are very easy to ride still.

I learned (20 years ago) by having a day doing a CBT on a 125, then another day on a 125, then days 3, 4, and 5 were on a 500cc Kawasaki. Perfectly do-able even without any experience, in fact in some ways the 500 was easier than the 125.

This, a bike sales guy told me the 300/390 type bikes are a strange market as most who do DAS will want at least a 600, i watched tons of Youtube vids when learning, American "first bike" vids were recommending Ninja 300's etc but the training in America is like our CBT, infact it's not even a requirement in some states, so first bike there is not like first bike here.

My first bike in 2020 was a GSXR600, i just seen it as an upgrade from the 650 Gladius i learned on, i just kept the Gixxer under 6K for a few weeks till i got used to it.

Last year (still a novice rider) i bought a 2006 Hayabusa, both bikes have been absolutely fine, infact the Busa is very easy to ride, it's a lovely big thing.

[Panamax]

Interesting article here about why 500cc cylinders are particularly efficient in car engines. Whether there's something different for bikes I don't know. It's all about thermal efficiency,
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a15358174/why-0-...

"A 500-cc cylinder with a stroke length larger than its bore diameter benefits the combustion process by minimizing the engine’s internal surface-to-volume ratio as the piston nears top dead center."

[Iminquarantine]

Panamax said:

t's all about thermal efficiency,

Bikes have had nowhere near the devlopment as cars and are less efficient and higher maintenance. Also if you buy anything from a mid-range bike, fuel efficiency tends to be lower on the priority list of buyers.

[trickywoo]

Iminquarantine said:

Bikes have had nowhere near the devlopment as cars

I don’t think that is anywhere near true. A lot of bike engines have more in common with a F1 engine than even high end cars. Bikes have been using titanium engine parts pretty routinely for 20 years. The electronics revolution since around 2010 has also put them at least on par with cars.

[five50]

Did I read somewhere that the Yamaha R3 (300cc) is the biggest selling Yamaha motorbike in the US?

Maybe the world is just changing slightly and the old model / manufacturer categories are changing.

A good number of manufacturers also offer A2 (i.e. detuned to 42bhp) versions of larger / more powerful bikes - eg Triumph with the Trident and other bikes, which obviously brings some production economics rather than having to build completely different bikes at different power outputs.

I think that generally there is a good level of investment in lower cc / lower power bikes at the moment generally (if not exactly in the 250cc-400cc category) - look at Aprilia RS660 (offering something quite different and to my eyes preferable to a super sport 4cyl 600cc screamer), Yamaha R7, MT07, Triumph Trident, Tiger Sport 660 etc.

I don’t think its fair to say that this class is full of boring bikes - eg 44 Teeth track review of new KTM 390:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlEcCDhV78o

Edited by five50 on Thursday 6th January 20:52

[five50]

And ok man maths slightly on the cc’s here, but is there a better looking bike across any size range than the Yamaha R7 60th Anniversary??

https://www.yamaha-motor.eu/gb/en/products/motorcy...

A stunner!

I’d look at it more that the world is moving away from 1000cc / 4cyl sports bikes as being the default centre of gravity - with each manufacturer carving out their own niches - and maybe I’m getting older, but not sure that is a bad thing.

Edited by five50 on Thursday 6th January 20:51

[five50]

Maybe one other change in recent years has been the growth of maxi scooters - I have an XMAX 300 (cc) - I bought it after a break from biking (after my Fireblade was stolen) and honestly it is a remarkable capable vehicle for 99pc of road scenarios - much more so than I would have given credit for previously.

Edited by five50 on Thursday 6th January 20:53

[NITO]

five50 said:

And ok man maths slightly on the cc’s here, but is there a better looking bike across any size range than the Yamaha R7 60th Anniversary??

https://www.yamaha-motor.eu/gb/en/products/motorcy...

A stunner!

I’d look at it more that the world is moving away from 1000cc / 4cyl sports bikes as being the default centre of gravity - with each manufacturer carving out their own niches - and maybe I’m getting older, but not sure that is a bad thing.

I wish more manufacturers would go down the 7xx cc route. Something special about the 750cc mark for me. Pleased that Yamaha have gone that way, wish the Aprilia 660 had a few more cc’s.

I agree, the 1000’s have become a bit pointless, they have their place but they’re not as much fun to ride. I tend to use an old ZXR750 in the summer and I love it. I have a few 1000Cc+ bikes but I spend more time consciously coming off the throttle than on it both to preserve license and life. If wildlife comes out at you at 130mph you’ve no chance, so you’re forever watching your speed instead of enjoying the bike. It’s like a ruined orgasm lol.

[mikey_b]

NITO said:

I wish more manufacturers would go down the 7xx cc route. Something special about the 750cc mark for me. Pleased that Yamaha have gone that way, wish the Aprilia 660 had a few more cc’s.

I agree, the 1000’s have become a bit pointless, they have their place but they’re not as much fun to ride. I tend to use an old ZXR750 in the summer and I love it. I have a few 1000Cc+ bikes but I spend more time consciously coming off the throttle than on it both to preserve license and life. If wildlife comes out at you at 130mph you’ve no chance, so you’re forever watching your speed instead of enjoying the bike. It’s like a ruined orgasm lol.

For sportsbikes, I'd agree too. What, really, is the point in a road bike that will do >100mph in first gear? Legally, you can literally never make use of it's full potential. However, the biking church is a lot broader than sportsbikes, and indeed most >1000cc bikes aren't sportsbikes at all, but things like adventure bikes, retros, tourers, and cruisers. These use large capacities to generate big torque at lower revs, for an effortless and rapid ride without having the thrash the nuts off it. Still fun, just in a different way, and much more usable on the road - especially on longer journeys.

[catso]

Panamax said:

Interesting article here about why 500cc cylinders are particularly efficient in car engines. Whether there's something different for bikes I don't know. It's all about thermal efficiency,
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a15358174/why-0-...

"A 500-cc cylinder with a stroke length larger than its bore diameter benefits the combustion process by minimizing the engine’s internal surface-to-volume ratio as the piston nears top dead center."

Interesting, I've long been a proponent of the 500cc/cylinder being the ideal displacement and in recent times I have tried to ensure all of my vehicles are there, or thereabouts.

[NITO]

mikey_b said:

For sportsbikes, I'd agree too. What, really, is the point in a road bike that will do >100mph in first gear? Legally, you can literally never make use of it's full potential. However, the biking church is a lot broader than sportsbikes, and indeed most >1000cc bikes aren't sportsbikes at all, but things like adventure bikes, retros, tourers, and cruisers. These use large capacities to generate big torque at lower revs, for an effortless and rapid ride without having the thrash the nuts off it. Still fun, just in a different way, and much more usable on the road - especially on longer journeys.

You’re absolutely right Mikey, for the Adventure and Cruiser bikes it’s fine 100-160hp range, even a naked is ok, but the race reps pushing close to 200hp are just too quick for the road imho. My F4 312RR has the speedo rising faster than the rev counter in any useable gear, it’s quite a bizarre sensation and not one I can honestly say I enjoy!

[Donbot]

Panamax said:

Interesting article here about why 500cc cylinders are particularly efficient in car engines. Whether there's something different for bikes I don't know. It's all about thermal efficiency,
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a15358174/why-0-...

"A 500-cc cylinder with a stroke length larger than its bore diameter benefits the combustion process by minimizing the engine’s internal surface-to-volume ratio as the piston nears top dead center."

It's more to do with design requirements than efficiency not being possible.

See the Honda NC750. Very efficient engine, but the bike is only appealing to a small market.

[Scobblelotcher]

NITO said:

mikey_b said:

For sportsbikes, I'd agree too. What, really, is the point in a road bike that will do >100mph in first gear? Legally, you can literally never make use of it's full potential. However, the biking church is a lot broader than sportsbikes, and indeed most >1000cc bikes aren't sportsbikes at all, but things like adventure bikes, retros, tourers, and cruisers. These use large capacities to generate big torque at lower revs, for an effortless and rapid ride without having the thrash the nuts off it. Still fun, just in a different way, and much more usable on the road - especially on longer journeys.

You’re absolutely right Mikey, for the Adventure and Cruiser bikes it’s fine 100-160hp range, even a naked is ok, but the race reps pushing close to 200hp are just too quick for the road imho. My F4 312RR has the speedo rising faster than the rev counter in any useable gear, it’s quite a bizarre sensation and not one I can honestly say I enjoy!

I own an S1000RR and tend to agree, the performance of my bike and other competitors is really far too much for the road. I can’t deny loving the wild engine, the noise and acceleration even if only for short bursts.

I got sent this video the other day of a S1k being ridden hard which shows the craziness (which I don’t condone on public roads) - https://youtu.be/nlteeg1H3nM

I think 100-120bhp is the sweet spot for road bikes. 170bhp+ is really too much.

Edited by Scobblelotcher on Friday 7th January 22:51