Reading the reviews of the new, 3rd generation, 2010 Kawasaki Z1000 (Zed,) I again have to ask: why won’t the Japanese motorcycle manufacturers build a TRUE naked sport bike? That is not to say the new Zed is a toad, just that many riders have been waiting for a no-holds-barred, naked bike and no one seems to hear us.
Euros have the Ducati Streetfighter, the MV Brutale, KTM SuperDuke R and a few others, but Japan has yet to offer its best! In America the Buell 1125 was our only possible contender, but “was” is the operative word. Buell is no longer an option. (I’ll spare you and will not go down that ranting, Harley bashing road again!)
To me the perfect naked motorcycle would be any modern, 1000cc inline four, TRUE super sport (R1, CBR, GSXR, ZX10) stripped of the fairing, with a standard top triple clamp for your bars of choice and few, if any, other changes. Leave the engine, electronics, frame, suspension and brakes intact.
But the latter is where me and the manufacturers diverge. What makes the perfect motorcycle for me is apparently an insurance/liability nightmare for them. A true naked sport bike, done to my standards, would have an even more impressive power to weight ratio than your lowly CBR, ZX10, GSXR1000, etc. I can visualize the personal injury attorneys foaming at the mouth.
Seriously though, who needs to do 190MPH on the street? That’s a “throw-away-the-key” stay in jail and a death sentence if Betsy the cow wanders into your path. So here’s another wrinkle. Perhaps we don’t need a 1000ccs? How ’bout a naked 750? To me, and I’ve believed this for years, the power a 750cc inline four makes, is the perfect match of horsepower and torque for the street! They’re quick and fast, and have a wide enough power-band to be “useful” without having to keep it pegged/WFO. And if you’re so inclined, you can still plow Betsy at 170MPH or so!
So what’s a guy/girl to do?
In my case, thinking I had the basis for the perfect naked bike with my GSXR750, I set out on converting it into a street fighter. Two things immediately presented themselves as readily apparent:
1) It was an EXPENSIVE project! And (2) the thing was frickin’ ugly!
The logic began to fail me. I’ll spend enough to buy a complete new motorcycle to net something so fugly not even it’s mother could love it!? Nah, abort! Aesthetics aren’t that important to me, but “rat bikes” don’t really float my boat either. And especially when it takes 20 large to complete them! So, back to the drawing board and research I went.
I soon came to believe — perhaps wishfully so — that a Kawasaki Z1000 would be a reasonably “close competitor” to my GSXR750. I’ll admit it, I liked the way the damned thing looked. I hate it when that happens!
And although I commend Kawasaki for building the new, MUCH improved 2010 Z1000, the prior generations were slow, ill-handling, mushy braked, gutless wonders. “Close competitor” to my GSXR750, not even!!! Yes, I liked the controllable low-end torque and outstanding ergos, but the enemic top-end, grab-n-pray brakes, rubber band frame and hobby horse suspension, TRULY, would have been the death of me! Had I wanted such a lousy handling, poorly performing thing as my 2006 Z1000, I would have bought a Harley. (Just kidding, it wasn’t THAT bad!) ☺
So here I am again, coming full-circle, back exactly to where I was. Going from a GSXR to a Z1000 was obviously setting myself up for failure. But reading the biased opinions on the forums, you’d think the “Zed” was faster than a MV F4 and better handling than Valentino’s M1 Yamaha. Sadly though, that’s not the old-gen Z1000′s reality.
So now, with a CBR1000RR sitting in the garage, but eying the 2010 Z1000, I’m finding myself falling into the same flawed logic as with the last Z1000: I REALLY like the way it looks, but do I want one based mostly on aesthetics? Is the handling really so terrible that it will kill me? It wouldn’t take THAT much money to make it competitive, would it? In street terms, not on the track, the differences aren’t THAT pronounced, are they? Lots of rationalizing going on here, huh?
Well, at least with prior generations of Z1000s, they actually were THAT bad. True liter bikes aren’t just in a different class, they’re on a completely different planet by comparison! But how close does 2010 actually come to a true liter bike? I mean really?Sure, I’ve heard the guys on the forums say they’ll “hang” with R1s and GSXR1000s on their 2003-08 bikes, but I’d have to think, those must be some pretty darned shitty riders if a Z1000 can stay with them! With equal riders, even a 600cc sport bike will leave gen-1 or 2 Z1000′s for dead.
So, back to reality. What about the new one? Is the 2010 Z1000 the right bike for me? Probably not. Is it closer to being the right bike for me than the prior generations? Absolutely!
I’m going to have to seriously test ride the bike before purchase. Those seductive wheelies and great low-end the Z1000 is known for, enticing as it is, are as meaningless out in the twisties as my forum friend’s claims that they’re hangin’ with R1′s. The new bike does appear to have great potential, but I need to know that first-hand this time.
Ok. “Riding naked” got me. clever.
If the reviews are accurate, Kawasaki might actually be on to something! Sure, the pipes get jettisoned before the bike rolls out of the showroom, but I like the wht/org paint scheme. White’s the new black ya know?
It remains to be seen how the Zed will stack up against its roughly $11,000 naked competition, but if what I’m reading is actually true, the Z1000 may be a Ducati Monster and Triumph Speed Triple killer. We’ll see…
A naked ZX10 though? Ahh, no.
I flew to Cali last weekend and went on a ~150 mile ride on and around Ortega highway. I think this bike is all it’s cracked up to be. My current bike is an ’07 GSXR750 that I ride on street and track… and I loved the Z1000. It handles beautifully, the brakes are great, it has lots of usable power. And now that I’ve ridden it, the looks are even starting to grow on me.
You really need to test ride one. A proper ride. You might like it.
As a Gixxer rider, and to be impressed by the Z1000, speaks absolute volumes! I MUST ride one! Thanks, Tammy!
Insurance / Liability nightmare? How do 1000cc sports bike fit into that equation? The reason they don’t make them is there’s not enough of a market to justify production costs. They have smart people doing these sums to make sure that the millions they spend on a new model can actually be re-couped in sales!
Having owned a 2003 Z1000 and a 2006 GSX-R1000 I feel like I have an opinion that is slightly relevant here than your average Joe’s.
Firstly, I can’t get over how much you’re paying out the Z1000 as a bike. But not just one specific point though, it seems like just because it’s not a sports bike you seems to think it’s not an adequate bike, and you really must have a super sports because you’re riding demands it!
The acceleration from the power that the Z1000 delivers is close to the GSXR1000. I could wheelie easily in first and second gears. You said it had lousy handling, can you give an example how your GSXR handled better than the Zed? Believe it or not, nakeds have much better handling than sports bikes due to the wider and higher bars. Clip-ons provide more corner stability and a lower centre of gravity but now we’re talking about different things.
Even on canyon roads, an aptly skilled Z1000 rider will stay with a sports bike any day of the week. It’s only on a race track that a GSXR or similar will truly leave a naked bike behind and this isn’t because of your ‘lousy handling’, ‘gutless’ performance and ‘mushy’ brakes. It’s because of aerodynamics and gearing. If you ever did a track day with a sports and a naked, you’d know what I mean
Anyway, get a clue and keep the rubber side down!
peace out
James:
1) Yes! A TRUE naked 1000cc sport bike, IE, a naked ZX10, GSXR1000, R1 or CBR1000RR — not something dumbed-down like the Z1000 — would have a MUCH greater power-to-weight ratio than any of the aforementioned bikes! When the insurance industry learned what absolute beasts a TRUE naked sport bike would be, they and personal liability lawyers would have a field day with them!
2) I like you, had a GSXR(750) (that was WAAAAAAY faster and better handling than ANY Z1000,) and I have a CBR1000RR. So yes, I intimately know the difference between a sport bike and the “commuter bike” the Z1000 was.
3) No. I’m saying: for my style of riding, with the riders I typically ride with, the Z1000 was simply not enough bike. I went from one of the fastest riders to dead last in the groups I ride with. Yet, when I rode with any of the Z1000 clubs, I was the fastest one in the groups? Go figure…
4) Acceleration: I beg differ here. As do the magazines and every unbiased motorcycle website and forum: The Z1000 is NOT EVEN close in performance when compared to a ZX10 or other Sport Sport. I mean seriously, it’s not even close!
From Sport Rider Magazine
Bike | Tested | Quarter mile | 60/80 | 80/100 | Top Speed
ZX-10R (’07) 7/07 9.908 @ 148.31 2.7 2.78 184.3
Z1000 (’07) 9/07 10.923 @ 124.18 3.34 3.53 150 (approx, not tested) <——
ZX-10R ('08) 6/08 9.93 @ 146.9 2.86 2.85 181.1
ZX-6R ('08) 7/08 11.07 @ 127.98 3.73 3.84 154.4
As you can see, not even close to the 1000's, but about equal to a 600cc…
5) Agreed, the ergos are much better than the GSXR's or other super sports, and nakeds can potentially beat a true sport bike — just NOT a Z1000! When a 2003 to 2008 Z1000 is pushed HARD, they lose ALL of their composure!!! I know that first hand and if you read the Z1000 forums, you'll find most of those riders know the truth as well. Perhaps, calling the Zed "gutless" is understating it's engine performance, but I'll stand by the rest of my comments. The handling is lousy and the brakes AWFUL!!!
6) And on the track, stock for stock with equal riders, a GSXR1000 (CBR, R1, ZX10, etc) will positively annihilate a Z1000! No ifs, ands, or buts! If you don't beleive me, just look at the lap times!
Guess I "have a clue" after all, huh?
Well I’ve been allowing my friends to ride my Z as well because I’ve been totally impressed with it and I have limited naked bike experience. I really trust their input because they lots of riding experience on bike of this class and performance.
They have owned the ’05 Z1000, Speed-triple, Tuono’s, GSXR1000, Ninja 636, B-King’s etc. and have over 40years of riding under their belts including at the track. I’ve taking their input and as they say, “finally became a motorcyclist”, with this buy. :dance:
But based off of my own riding and them riding the bike, Kawasaki has finally done it right this time. We were all impressed by the power, cornering, braking, weight and balance of this bike. I was mostly impressed at how good it looked. LOL…. I hope this help you in your decision but I don’t that you’ll be disappointed if you get the new one.
lets face it most of us cant use the full potential of most modern road rockets, i have raced many forms of motorcycle racing and seen many racers turn up with all the latest equipment and aftermarket party pieces only to be obliterated by some guy on an old red rocket. most modern motorcycles out perform the average rider. i have riden the old z 1000 with all its faults but found it thouroughly enjoyable to ride adjusting my riding style to suit the bikes minor flaws. cant wait to own the 2010 z1000 sounds awsome as it looks (lets face it shumacher would be a threat on the starting grid in an old fiesta)? its the riders ability not the bikes lack of it.
I wasn’t going to comment, although I find myself compelled to because I have just read the biggest load of BS ever! The article just sounds like a complete slag off with regard to the Z1000. If you think it’s slow (gutless!!!!????) then I am inclined to think you haven’t even ridden one. Sure it’s not the fastest bike in the world, but it wasn’t designed to be. If you want out and out top speed then yeah go buy a ZX10, Fireblade or R1, you are comparing 2 completely different bikes here. The fact is apart from you not being able to get away from me on your Gsxr750 on a rideout, you will have to stop after a short period of time to stretch out, whilst me? I will just keep on going!!!
I could go on about you talking absolute bollocks for a while, but won’t waste my time. Sounds like a typical American view to me, all about HP and 0-60′s and quarter mile times, come to Europe and ride some REAL roads, then we’ll see who’s faster.
“Gutless” was a bit of an overstatement. The Z1000 isn’t slow — it just isn’t very fast either. And yeah, I owned one and rode circles around all the other Z1000′s I rode with. The problem was riding with good handling bikes. Sean, you have to admit, the (old gen) Z1000′s were very ill-handling motorcycles, right? With equal riders, in the twisties, good handling bikes leave the Zed for dead, EVERY time!
As for duration, I was probably good for six or seven hundred miles per day. On my GSXR or my CBR1000RR, I’m only good for about 500 — and I do it all the time. I find though, most of my rider buddies only like to ride 400 miles or so, so the point is kinda moot in my case…
For me, buying a Z1000 was a mistake. I don’t commute, ride freeways or straight roads. The Z does just fine as a commuter — it’s just NOT a sport bike. In a nutshell, that’s all I’m saying…
I think my biggest issue with your blog is that you start it off as a discussion regarding the new 2010 Z1000 – how it compares to European naked bikes. The problem is that you haven’t even ridden the 2010 Z1000 but use your old Z1000 experience as a basis for explaining why your GSXR750 is a better bike.
Next time it might be better to test ride the centre point of you article before you write it? Just a thought.
The 2010 Z1000 was not yet available when this was posted.