2011/12 C14 vs. 2012 Ninja 1000 ABS

[Gearhead82]

snip

But, before you fall in love with either, do one thing. Call your insurance agent and get a quote for the yearly premium.   Some bikes become very attractive once this is figured in to the deal.  My C-14 is dirt-cheap compared to something that fit into the "sport bike" category.  A money savings that is enough to pay most of the bike payment.

I agree with this.  I would probably own a ZX-14 right now except my yearly premium is $580 for the Connie, VS. close to $3000 for the ZX-14 if I remember correctly. 

[jjsC6]

I really wish I had saved the links, since I have several numbers.  It is maddening.    I did confirm it in more than one place before keeping the number, but I had other numbers too.  But same thing for the 1000.

Look up just a few posts from this: " The Concours 14, tested 6-08 by the same mag, shows a time of 10.52".

I guess the real point to take home is: the numbers tent to vary some, but the Concours 14's acceleration/speed is easily very similar to the Ninja 1000.

We are going to have to agree to disagree then.  I think the Ninja is definitely a faster bike by 1/2 second in the quarter mile.  Some day I'll have to dig up all of my tests on the Concours (I have tons of magazines).  I've ridden the Ninja and I can assure you that if feels very noticeably faster than the Concours.

[wally_games]

We are going to have to agree to disagree then.  I think the Ninja is definitely a faster bike by 1/2 second in the quarter mile.  Some day I'll have to dig up all of my tests on the Concours (I have tons of magazines).  I've ridden the Ninja and I can assure you that if feels very noticeably faster than the Concours.

I'm sure the light weight and feel of the 1000 would make it "feel" faster even if it were the same speed. If you had those track times on a Honda Trail 90, it would feel like it was the fastest bike on the planet, IMHO.

[maxtog]

I'm sure the light weight and feel of the 1000 would make it "feel" faster even if it were the same speed. If you had those track times on a Honda Trail 90, it would feel like it was the fastest bike on the planet, IMHO.

Agreed.  Lighter feel, more bent over position, probably more vibration, lower gearing, louder sounds, faster turning, less wind protection.  All the cues for going fast.   How many humans would detect a fraction of a second faster or slower given such different conditions, anyway?

[rcannon409]

Is speed and power a big deal anymore when selecting  a bike?  Really, its tough to find something slow unless you stop in at a Harley dealer.

[EpicBadass]

Wait so does this mean the butt dyno isn't accurate? 

[tin-tin]

I know this is a concours forum so its a little biased. I have a 08 and I'm not trying to doubt. But it is just giving misinformation. The 1/4 mile numbers seem a little bit biased... ok.. a lot biased. I have ridden both and I would like to say that the bike that I own is the fastest thing out there too.

Just take it for what it is. A great ST bike with great wind protection and comfort.

[jjsC6]

Agreed.  Lighter feel, more bent over position, probably more vibration, lower gearing, louder sounds, faster turning, less wind protection.  All the cues for going fast.   How many humans would detect a fraction of a second faster or slower given such different conditions, anyway?

Sorry guys, but I've read enough road tests on both bikes, and I referred to actual tests within three months apart by the same magazine.  I'm not just going by seat of the pants, but I'm using seat of the pants to say that I believe what those tests say.  Maybe ya'll would like to write Cycle World and tell them that you don't believe they tested them properly 

[rcannon409]

There are no biased quarter miles being given.  Sport Rider and Motorcyclist have nothing to gain by fudging Concours 14 times. They are two random mags I grabbed. Both of the mags show the c14 as being faster than the Ninja 1000. That is evidence.  Bias is coming to a conclusion despite evidence to the contrary.

[jjsC6]

DELETE DUPLICATE POST

[jjsC6]

There are no biased quarter miles being given.  Sport Rider and Motorcyclist have nothing to gain by fudging Concours 14 times. They are two random mags I grabbed. Both of the mags show the c14 as being faster than the Ninja 1000. That is evidence.  Bias is coming to a conclusion despite evidence to the contrary.

I have not seen that.  Are you saying that both magazines tested both bikes and using the same magazine they got faster results for the Concours?  What months magazines are they?    I have a subscription to Motorcyclist and and I don't recall that.

Thanks

[rcannon409]

the 4-11 Sport Rider it shows a time of 11.30 and speed of 123.46. The Concours 14, tested 6-08 by the same mag, shows a time of 10.52@130.5, a eternity in drag racing. 

Motorcyclist has a test of the 11 Concours in the  5-11 issue showing a time of 10.84 @ 127.7   The Motorcyclist test of the 08 happened back in June of 08 and the time is 10.52@130.5.

Each magazine tested the Ninja 1000 in the early part of 11. Sport Rider 4-11 shows the Ninja 1000 at 11.3@123.46.  Motorcyclist did not list a time for the Ninja in their test.

The z 1000 was faster than the Ninja, but it is 25lbs lighter and packs a gallon less fuel.

[tin-tin]

The only evidence I have is my test ride of the 1000 with a couple of buddies riding zx10rs vs my own C14 riding with the same people. The 1000 was faster in all situations including from a standstill. And I actually know how to ride the C14.

I love my C14 and all my friends give me dirty looks when it starts getting cold or the ride gets long or it gets rainy. Thats what the bike is and it is fast for a 700lb bike. Its just not 1000 fast and I'm ok with that because I would rather have my C14 when I am really touring. It is what it is.

[Scaffolder]

That settles it!!! MY OLD 2008 SILVER WAS THE FASTEST COLOR ON RECORD. LOL!!! I know it was faster than my BLUE 2010.

[tin-tin]

That settles it!!! MY OLD 2008 SILVER WAS THE FASTEST COLOR ON RECORD. LOL!!! I know it was faster than my BLUE 2010.

Nope using internet information. I checked Snopes.com. The blue is faster.

[cltsig]

Wow!  Thanks for all the great feedback everyone.  I'll likely do the 2012 C14 if a good deal is to be had; otherwise, maybe a 2011.  Anyway, things that swayed me towards the C14 include:
-Chain drive - forgotten what a hassle that was
-insurance - one year of higher rates on the Ninja almost negates the difference in purchase price
-wind protection/heated grips - extends my riding another few months/year
-electrical - I'll use a GPS so it's nice to have it factory ready

I had a 2008 and loved it (other than the heat) and it was plenty fast enough for me.  I saw something that I thought I could make work and I needed to explore with all of you fine folks to be sure it was or wasn't right.  Seems it isn't and the C14 is what the doctor ordered.  Nothing else compares for the money.

Thanks again.  Feel free to continue debating milliseconds to 60, colors, etc. 

[rcannon409]

The only evidence I have is my test ride of the 1000 with a couple of buddies riding zx10rs vs my own C14 riding with the same people. The 1000 was faster in all situations including from a standstill. And I actually know how to ride the C14.

I love my C14 and all my friends give me dirty looks when it starts getting cold or the ride gets long or it gets rainy. Thats what the bike is and it is fast for a 700lb bike. Its just not 1000 fast and I'm ok with that because I would rather have my C14 when I am really touring. It is what it is.

Could not agree more. Once the speed gets to a certain point a person is just talking about  going to jail or losing a license .03 seconds quicker.

[jjsC6]

the 4-11 Sport Rider it shows a time of 11.30 and speed of 123.46. The Concours 14, tested 6-08 by the same mag, shows a time of 10.52@130.5, a eternity in drag racing. 

Motorcyclist has a test of the 11 Concours in the  5-11 issue showing a time of 10.84 @ 127.7   The Motorcyclist test of the 08 happened back in June of 08 and the time is 10.52@130.5.

Each magazine tested the Ninja 1000 in the early part of 11. Sport Rider 4-11 shows the Ninja 1000 at 11.3@123.46.  Motorcyclist did not list a time for the Ninja in their test.

The z 1000 was faster than the Ninja, but it is 25lbs lighter and packs a gallon less fuel.

I find it interesting that when the Concours first came out there were tests that had it at such good times, but none of the tests since then have been anywhere near that fast.  Maybe some pre-production ringers when the bikes first were sent to the press?  BTW, the only really impressive time since - the one in Motorcyclist that shows 10.84 at 127 is a "corrected" time.  I know a little about drag racing, and have in fact drag raced several of my Corvettes.  Corrected times need more definition.  Then only true correction factor allowed is for altitude, but many people use temperature corrections as well. There are some real issues with doing this.  What you gain in horsepower in cold air, you sometimes loose in actual track conditions. 

This is also one of the concerns with comparing times.  Are all of them corrected?   What were the weather conditions (it does make a difference - I know that by first hand experience).

[maxtog]

-insurance - one year of higher rates on the Ninja almost negates the difference in purchase price

Yeah, insurance can be a b****.  We are fortunate that most insurance companies don't just look at displacement now (because that used to be all they focused on).

I had a 2008 and loved it (other than the heat)

Well, that was pretty much solved with 2010+.  Add in the better 2010+ do-dads (heated grips, higher mirrors, larger screen, grip mounted computer control, screen memory, traction control, exhaust heat shield, glovebox, ABS, etc) and you will be loving it even more.

and it was plenty fast enough for me.

I would hope so.  Very few Concours owners have any interest in drag racing or worrying about fractions of a  second in the 1/4 mile.  And for those that are, there are still plenty of modification options.

Thanks again.  Feel free to continue debating milliseconds to 60, colors, etc.

Yeah, really.   Good luck with your hunting!   Hope to see you back.

[rcannon409]

I find it interesting that when the Concours first came out there were tests that had it at such good times, but none of the tests since then have been anywhere near that fast.  Maybe some pre-production ringers when the bikes first were sent to the press?  BTW, the only really impressive time since - the one in Motorcyclist that shows 10.84 at 127 is a "corrected" time.  I know a little about drag racing, and have in fact drag raced several of my Corvettes.  Corrected times need more definition.  Then only true correction factor allowed is for altitude, but many people use temperature corrections as well. There are some real issues with doing this.  What you gain in horsepower in cold air, you sometimes loose in actual track conditions. 

This is also one of the concerns with comparing times.  Are all of them corrected?   What were the weather conditions (it does make a difference - I know that by first hand experience).

Sport Rider does print corrected times. I suppose they have no choice, really, due to testing bikes in all seasons.