2012 CBR 250R vs 2012 Ninja 250R

[Low rider]

Forum Sponsor

Every time I ride a bike with ABS I "FEEL THE FLUTTER."
On a bike ABS sucks.
Like I said, I feel that it is only good for inexperienced riders and said riders in the rain.
I want so badly to disconnect my wifes ABS, but she will not allow me.
And by the way. After 43 years of riding I have never seen a patch of oil large enough to make any rider fall down.
Before you go off, I ride to work on the 401 from Oakville to Yonge and Eglington every day in the summer, rain or shine.
Been riding that route for 16 years now. And before that, I had to ride into Markham.
And yes, I have had a situation where, if I had ABS, I would not be typing to you right now.
I hate ABS and Linked brakes.
It just sucks. I want to control my brakes.

Or a spot of grease off a big truck's ball or U-joint that just got serviced. Or the patch of oil that a vehicle's main crank seal or poor fitting oil filter seal has allowed to leak out while it was waiting in line at the lights..

And of course no biker ever gets caught out in the rain..

I admit that in order to realize and defend the virtues of ABS on a bike, you have to have imagination. And faith.

You have to imagine that you might ride for years and years and never ever feel a flutter in your brake lever of your ABS-equipped bike. This can be due to at least two things..and both can be related.
Either your skill behind the bars, or you have yet never encountered a scene where ABS might have made the difference between a hit and a miss. Perhaps skill and defensive riding have increased your odds of never feeling that flutter. Or it might happen tomorrow..
And what you also aren't allowing for, is that there are many different riders out there, (especially new ones where ABS can extend their learning curve) and all to varying skill levels...many of which who will never be as skilled a rider as you possibly are.

 

[Jay72]

Don't quote me on this, but I believe most bikes run on at least a 2 year cycle, meaning if there was a new version in 2012, the next will be in 2014 or later. I also recall reading that the Ninja 250R was left mainly unchanged for years, until the recent refresh (I think in 2007), so there might not be any changes beyond colour when the 'next' one roles out. Of course, if Kawasaki loses too much money to Honda (or ABS is actually mandated), they might come out with something sooner.

If you are still looking for more info/comparisons, there is a similar thread on CBR250.net, however it is of course biased:

http://www.cbr250.net/forum/cbr250-...-new-rider-first-bike-cbr250r-ninja-250r.html

I'm sure if you search on ninjette.org you can find a similar thread if you want to compare between the two forums.

Hey just to let you know you are close, but off by a tiny bit, from pre gen to new gen the change in the ninja took place in 2008, and they do change the colour each year, I think is was around November of last year when they introduced the new colour scheme of the ninja.

 

[Legend]

I voted for the Ninja. I am in the same boat, looking at both the CBR and the Ninja 250. They are very close on paper depending on what you are looking for. At this point I am looking to get a Ninja, the CBR has a few things over the Ninja but I am not a huge fan of the overall look and colours. The Ninja, I get the colour I want (green) and the overall style I prefer. I do wish the rear was larger like the CBR but that can be upgrade with a few dollars later.

I popped into one local dealer and got a price of about 5500+tax for the 2012 Ninja but that was just after a quick 15 min chat, hopefully there is some room there for a better price.

 

[TheNewDude]

I voted for the Ninja. I am in the same boat, looking at both the CBR and the Ninja 250. They are very close on paper depending on what you are looking for. At this point I am looking to get a Ninja, the CBR has a few things over the Ninja but I am not a huge fan of the overall look and colours. The Ninja, I get the colour I want (green) and the overall style I prefer. I do wish the rear was larger like the CBR but that can be upgrade with a few dollars later.

I popped into one local dealer and got a price of about 5500+tax for the 2012 Ninja but that was just after a quick 15 min chat, hopefully there is some room there for a better price.

Which dealership did you go?
I got a quote of $5700 OTD from Burlington. And the sales guy was very nice.

I was leaning more towards the CBR because I hear the FI is maintenance free where as the Carb engine can require some maintenance. Plus the CBR oil change intervals are almost double that of the Ninja.

So even though the Ninja (non ABS) is $200 cheaper than the CBR (ABS), overall you save money in maintenance.

That's what I've been able to determine so far.

I've also thrown the NINJA 400 in my mix, but they are a lot more $$. $8000 was the best deal i was able to get on a Ninja 400....

 

[conundrum]

I've also thrown the NINJA 400 in my mix, but they are a lot more $$. $8000 was the best deal i was able to get on a Ninja 400....

I did think about the 400R, but after reading some reviews I didn't see the point, given it IS the 650R with a sleeved down engine. Considering the 650R isn't a light-weight, the performance numbers weren't that different between the 250s (either CBR or Ninja) and the 400R. The price also didn't make sense (around $1000 cheaper than the 650R), and given what you'll save getting either 250, you can put that extra towards a future bigger bike -- at least that's how I saw it. Also although fuel injected, the Ninja 400R still doesn't have ABS as an option, so that was a con for me as well (again, personal preference).

One 'hidden cost' of the CBR250R is the first service, as if you/they follow Honda's recommendations, it involves checking the valves and possibly reshimming the bike. This is not cheap, but all the dealers I talked to had no issues throwing in first service free (on a new 2011 among other discounts), so if you did go the Honda route its something to keep in mind.

Another good option that I'm not sure you considered is getting a used Ninja 250R. Given as others have pointed out once the bike initially depreciates (aka leaves the lot) they don't seem to drop very much at all, so you could buy a used one, ride for 1-2 years, and get back pretty much what you put into it. Only reason I didn't really do this with my CBR was since the bike had only been out for about a year, buying used didn't mean saving a whole lot, and I decided to suck up the initial depreciation to have a brand new bike (still hoping to get most of it back if I sell in 1-2 years).

 

[Nofear]

Soo... ABS is put on bikes just for fun and to make more money...? Where do you get your information from?
I'm sure MOST new riders would prefer abs and having their both tires on the floor vs doing endos/stoppies.

I said you don't really need it on a 250, since there is not much stopping power (so you'll really have to grab a handful to lock up the wheel). Read below...

Unfortunately, you, like too many other riders, do not really 'get' ABS.
ABS should be transparent and not show itself for years and years. Or....on the other hand it might reveal it's value in the first few minutes after leaving the dealership in the rain and some minivan pulls out in front of you inviting a T Bone.

I do understand ABS, yes it will help you stop much quicker in slippery situations and prevent wipe outs, but the whole point of a starter/learner bike is to learn. You wont learn if you don't lock them up at least once, and no... locking them up doesn't mean you will crash necessarily. What happens when OP gets on a 600 or a litre bike without ABS and has to stop in a hurry? OP would be more prepared if he had experienced locking up before, while learning.

I can't argue that ABS on any bike is a good thing in rain, but how many times are you caught riding when it is pouring? It's good to learn to adapt your riding style to the conditions, it will save you many more times than ABS ever will.

And no..it's not "as simple as that"..

It really is that easy... You can't go wrong with either bike, so why not get the one you personally like more?

 

[nesobriquet]

Debating ABS (on bikes, NOT cars, as I too have cursed ABS in a car more than once...although not all systems are created equal and ignorance quickly labels all the same) (nor are ABS systems identical in bikes as Low rider's post would seem to indicate...I recommend him try an ABS equipped Honda, or similar bike that doesn't do cheap ABS) is quickly becoming as controversial as oil threads. And that's a shame..one matters and the other is a useless waste of bandwidth.

 

[knowledge]

More fuel efficient -I get 400km+ a tank on my ninja, they are both so fuel efficient it doesn't make a difference

HOW? Even before I put the exhaust on, I would only average 350 from a full tank(375 if I was lucky). Now with my full system I get like 300 on a full tank. Wtf?

 

[Slono]

[/COLOR][/B]HOW? Even before I put the exhaust on, I would only average 350 from a full tank(375 if I was lucky). Now with my full system I get like 300 on a full tank. Wtf?[/COLOR]

If you don't rev the engine high and aren't aggressive with the throttle it's REALLY easy to achieve that mileage on the ninja 250R. When I followed the dealership's recommended break in period I was getting over 400+ km per tank. I remember seeing my trip meter at 580km and I laughed. Mind you I rode very conservatively and never went above 100km/h. After my full exhaust upgrade and my jet kit upgrade combined with my high speed freeway travels I usually get around 340km on a full tank now.


With that being said I do believe the CBR250 is much more fuel efficient. Read any review out there and that's what they'll say. You have to ask yourself what kind of riding you'll be doing too. I recommend the ninja over the CBR for freeway / highway use because it's faster. You'll have more top end to accelerate if you need to. I got my ninja up to 160km/h while in full tuck traveling INTO the wind with a combined weight of 200lbs on the bike. This didn't take long either, as accelerating up to 140km/h was easy and beyond that the accel rate didn't decrease by that much. I'd like to see a CBR250 reach that speed...


The rear tire size is a moot point... You can simply slap one size up on the ninja if you really care. The old fashion looking dash on the ninja is exactly that, old fashioned. The tach and speedo as well as the fuel gauge are all analog. But if you can appreciate the needles moving up and down like you would in a muscle car then it won't be an issue. They did however, update the gauge faces so they look more modern on the 2011 and 2012 models too and they look much better than the pre 2011 models.

 

[Low rider]

Most modifications involve throwing more fuel through the engine to gain more horsepower. what do you think will happen to gas mileage?

 

[knowledge]

The rear tire size is a moot point... You can simply slap one size up on the ninja if you really care.

Maybe for a person just getting into riding...but other than that? How can your rear tire size be a moot point? Sizing up even just from 130 to 140 changes the geometry of the bike up. And you'll notice that anyone who's done that to put on "better tires" have less lean angle to play around with when they're riding the bike close to its edge. The rubber's better, but they can't use as much of the tire surface. & you can't forget that it changes how the bike handles in general and (although it's less important) the flickability of the bike

The only way the rear tire size would be a moot point would be if they made GOOD 130-size radials for the kawi 250 and you didn't have to size up from stock

Most modifications involve throwing more fuel through the engine to gain more horsepower. what do you think will happen to gas mileage?

I know. Which is why I said that even when my bike was stock, I never came close to that with shifting at low revs.

edit: nvm I just realized that I got my car mileage mixed up with my bike lol. I remember getting just over 500 one time from riding conservatively. Never came close to 580 though but it's still more believable.

 

[vkhamphi]

Debating ABS (on bikes, NOT cars, as I too have cursed ABS in a car more than once...although not all systems are created equal and ignorance quickly labels all the same) (nor are ABS systems identical in bikes as Low rider's post would seem to indicate...I recommend him try an ABS equipped Honda, or similar bike that doesn't do cheap ABS) is quickly becoming as controversial as oil threads. And that's a shame..one matters and the other is a useless waste of bandwidth.

+1 Honda's ABS system will not give that flutter sensation Low Rider described.

 

[Slono]

Maybe for a person just getting into riding...but other than that? How can your rear tire size be a moot point? Sizing up even just from 130 to 140 changes the geometry of the bike up. And you'll notice that anyone who's done that to put on "better tires" have less lean angle to play around with when they're riding the bike close to its edge. The rubber's better, but they can't use as much of the tire surface. & you can't forget that it changes how the bike handles in general and (although it's less important) the flickability of the bike

The only way the rear tire size would be a moot point would be if they made GOOD 130-size radials for the kawi 250 and you didn't have to size up from stock


I know. Which is why I said that even when my bike was stock, I never came close to that with shifting at low revs.

edit: nvm I just realized that I got my car mileage mixed up with my bike lol. I remember getting just over 500 one time from riding conservatively. Never came close to 580 though but it's still more believable.

They don't make size 130 kawasaki ninja 250R specific tires, but they do have a large selection of other tires (like the Pirelli Rossi IIs for example) in the OEM size that the ninja 250 needs. There are radial tires that fit the ninja. For example lots of people have been the Bridgestone Battlax series tires on the 250R with fantastic results. Increasing the size of your rear tire isn't always the best decision, but it can be depending on the application. Yes, it will decrease the "flickability" of your bike along with a couple other things but if you it bugs you that much, and you care that much about size, then there are options. That's the only thing I meant when I said it was a moot point. If you really care about size, it can be done.

 

[Spiider]

I saw the CBR250 tagged at $4599 yesterday at KW Honda...just some more info.

 

[Jayv]

Choosing which one to buy because one is faster is than the other is kinda funny.

It's similar to choosing a Honda Odyssey over a Dodge Caravan because the Honda has a higher trap speed.

 

[Nofear]

[/COLOR][/B]HOW? Even before I put the exhaust on, I would only average 350 from a full tank(375 if I was lucky). Now with my full system I get like 300 on a full tank. Wtf?[/COLOR]

I bought it new, not used so that might have something to do with it.

After break-in I started to get 400km+ on a tank when I'm not riding aggressively and just commuting (Seriously, what's the point of riding aggressively on a 250? Most of the time I'm in 6th gear).
If I start keeping the revs up higher and accelerating faster cause I'm having some fun or trying to get around traffic I'll get 350 to 375km. Maybe you're just cruising around in at higher revs than I normally do?

If I really tried I could probably squeeze 450km out of a tank.

 

[Legend]

Which dealership did you go?
I got a quote of $5700 OTD from Burlington. And the sales guy was very nice.

Guelph area. Which shop did you go to?

 

[knowledge]

They don't make size 130 kawasaki ninja 250R specific tires, but they do have a large selection of other tires (like the Pirelli Rossi IIs for example) in the OEM size that the ninja 250 needs. There are radial tires that fit the ninja. For example lots of people have been the Bridgestone Battlax series tires on the 250R with fantastic results. Increasing the size of your rear tire isn't always the best decision, but it can be depending on the application. Yes, it will decrease the "flickability" of your bike along with a couple other things but if you it bugs you that much, and you care that much about size, then there are options. That's the only thing I meant when I said it was a moot point. If you really care about size, it can be done.

Did you mean the Rosso 2? I've never heard of the Rossi 2. And even that starts at 140, not 130. I never denied that there were radials that could be improvised for use...I said that no solid radial tires (ie demons or ct2s exist for use on the 250). Like I said above, flickability is the least of my concern (even if it's less flickable, it's still flickable enough). It changes the geometry of how the bike handles in general and you'll see that someone on 130s can lean further than someone on the 140s can. Imo, that is why you can't make a better argument for performance by upping the rear tire size. You could only make one for safety...and even that wouldn't be as strong since braking would be your only angle.

Fault's also partly mine...I'm used to hearing "moot" as an adjective for a very weak/irrelevant/etc. point but I just looked it up and it has debatable as a secondary definition

I bought it new, not used so that might have something to do with it.

After break-in I started to get 400km+ on a tank when I'm not riding aggressively and just commuting (Seriously, what's the point of riding aggressively on a 250? Most of the time I'm in 6th gear).
If I start keeping the revs up higher and accelerating faster cause I'm having some fun or trying to get around traffic I'll get 350 to 375km. Maybe you're just cruising around in at higher revs than I normally do?

If I really tried I could probably squeeze 450km out of a tank.

I got it with 323 kms on it...so pretty close to new. But who knows how the previous owner partially broke it in.

As for the point of being aggressive on a 250, some people say that it's more fun to ride a slow bike fast than a fast bike slow. My problem is that usable power is only in the higher ranges (vs a bigger bike still being fairly quick at lower rpms). I ride out of the powerband when there aren't any cars around, but as soon as I encounter traffic, it's back to the powerband. But even when I called you out, I still had the milage from when I was riding conservatively in mind. Anyways, I guess all that's left for me to assume is that the previous owner didn't break it in for 323 kms (if that even matters).

--------
and just so I'm not threadjacking too hard...the cbr250s are starting to grow on me. I used to think that the 250r was miles ahead in styling, but the cbr250 really doesn't look too bad. The 140's noticeable to me, but it isn't to a lot of people

 

[Scuba Steve]

Did you mean the Rosso 2? I've never heard of the Rossi 2. And even that starts at 140, not 130. I never denied that there were radials that could be improvised for use...I said that no solid radial tires (ie demons or ct2s exist for use on the 250). Like I said above, flickability is the least of my concern (even if it's less flickable, it's still flickable enough). It changes the geometry of how the bike handles in general and you'll see that someone on 130s can lean further than someone on the 140s can. Imo, that is why you can't make a better argument for performance by upping the rear tire size. You could only make one for safety...and even that wouldn't be as strong since braking would be your only angle.

Fault's also partly mine...I'm used to hearing "moot" as an adjective for a very weak/irrelevant/etc. point but I just looked it up and it has debatable as a secondary definition


I got it with 323 kms on it...so pretty close to new. But who knows how the previous owner partially broke it in.

As for the point of being aggressive on a 250, some people say that it's more fun to ride a slow bike fast than a fast bike slow. My problem is that usable power is only in the higher ranges (vs a bigger bike still being fairly quick at lower rpms). I ride out of the powerband when there aren't any cars around, but as soon as I encounter traffic, it's back to the powerband. But even when I called you out, I still had the milage from when I was riding conservatively in mind. Anyways, I guess all that's left for me to assume is that the previous owner didn't break it in for 323 kms (if that even matters).

--------
and just so I'm not threadjacking too hard...the cbr250s are starting to grow on me. I used to think that the 250r was miles ahead in styling, but the cbr250 really doesn't look too bad. The 140's noticeable to me, but it isn't to a lot of people

Wrong a ninja 250 will lean further on a 140 BT003 than any stock tire period. There is no way to drag the front fairing witout lowsiding on the stock tires throw on a set of 03's remove the peg feelers and the front fairing will drag without losing the bike.

 

[Nofear]

As for the point of being aggressive on a 250, some people say that it's more fun to ride a slow bike fast than a fast bike slow. My problem is that usable power is only in the higher ranges (vs a bigger bike still being fairly quick at lower rpms). I ride out of the powerband when there aren't any cars around, but as soon as I encounter traffic, it's back to the powerband. But even when I called you out, I still had the milage from when I was riding conservatively in mind. Anyways, I guess all that's left for me to assume is that the previous owner didn't break it in for 323 kms (if that even matters).

Break-in period is the first 600km on the ninja, the first 300km they said keep it under 4000rpm (This is impossible on roads 60km/h and over) and then 300-600km keep it under 6000rpm, from then on take it as high as you want. You should take it to the redline a few times before 1000km to get it settled. That's how I did it, and it seems to have worked well.

As for riding in the powerband, most of the time in traffic I don't, even though most would say you should just in case. I'm in 6th gear 90% of the time cruising at 50km/h and above, it's a 250 that doesn't get any power 'til 8000rpm anyway. Some may say you should stay in the powerband just in case you need to avoid something with power, but even riding in the powerband on a little 250 isn't going to save you from anything with speed. I just adapt my riding style to try and completely avoid situations like that as best I can.

Forum Sponsor