Any thoughts of the CBR500 as a compromise solution? Looks sweet with the full fairing but 47 HP is plenty for highway use and the cc should be insurance friendly. I am more partial to the CB 500F but the CBR is a beautiful looking bike. 
R3 vs Sv650 (and do looks matter?)
- Thread starter bigpoppa
- Start date
bigpoppa
Well-known member
Any thoughts of the CBR500 as a compromise solution? Looks sweet with the full fairing but 47 HP is plenty for highway use and the cc should be insurance friendly. I am more partial to the CB 500F but the CBR is a beautiful looking bike.
I keep hearing that the cbr500 is essentially the same as the other 300s in terms of performance, (R3, ninja 300) and if thats the case, why pay extra?
If im wrong someone correct me
CBR500 has 47 HP
Ninja 300 has 39 HP.
CBR300 has 30.4 HP (from what I just looked up; some sources have it as 31 HP).
R3 has 42 HP.
So, the CBR500 has a whopping 7 more HP (than the R3 which you are considering). You might want to hit a Honda dealer and sit on the CBR300 and CBR500. From what I have noticed from sitting on both is that the 500 is a bit of a bigger bike all around (albeit subtly). I am 5'11. At 6'2 you might appreciate the extra size of the CB500.
bigpoppa
Well-known member
I can do that
I do wonder though how much that 7 hp translates? Is it really going to make a noticeable quick difference?
Also does the cbr 500r have more lower end torque?(Like the cbr300?)
BigEvilDoer
Well-known member
R3 has 21 foot pounds.
Ninja 300 = 20 foot pounds.
CBR 500 = 30 foot pounds.
HP is nice, but torque is better.... ;-)
Drennan57
Well-known member
Not entirely as the 500 is much heavier then the 300. BUT the torque is much greater and as a result the 500 rides like a "bigger" bike compared to the 300's. By this i mean it's more stable (holds it's line in the wind better), handles hills better etc.
I don't know if you have sat on any of them yet but at 6'1 the 300's just aren't comfortable to me. I'd imagine you would feel the same being even taller. If you want a cheap alternative to learn on with a low seat height give the Ninja 500 a look. I actually like the retro styling.
catzo
Well-known member
The difference between the cbr500 and 300s is minimal. Essentially the 500 is a slightly bigger started bike with slightly more oomph. It would be a good starter bike for someone your weight. Theres a bigger difference between the 500 and a 600 or 650 than there is between a 300 and the cbr500. At your weight and height a 500 might be a good idea. It has that extra bit or torque and size that you could really benefit from. It wont be as light and nimble to handle though, but only slightly less.
What you said about being able to wring out a 300 is definitely true though. With a 300 you could redline it through all 6 gears and still be relatively near the speed limit. And youll have alot of fun learning this way. Whereas on my bike, which is only 1 step up from the cbr500 and comparable to the sv650, will hit licence suspending speeds on any road in ontario in second gear.
Youre going to have to exercise some restraint if you start with the 650, but its doable. Just dont take it near the redline for the first little bit
What you said about being able to wring out a 300 is definitely true though. With a 300 you could redline it through all 6 gears and still be relatively near the speed limit. And youll have alot of fun learning this way. Whereas on my bike, which is only 1 step up from the cbr500 and comparable to the sv650, will hit licence suspending speeds on any road in ontario in second gear.
Youre going to have to exercise some restraint if you start with the 650, but its doable. Just dont take it near the redline for the first little bit
Last edited:
Definitely different. The CBR500 looks so sweet with the red paint. Reminds me of the older red VFR750s. The Honda is "new" whereas the SV 650 is a really well sorted out package which has been around a long time. The Suzuki would sound so sweet with an aftermarket exhaust. The CB 500s are available used around $5000. That savings versus the SV 650 will buy a lot of fuel, gear, riding course and other things you could spend your money on.
I would pay to buy a new SV 650 because it is a bike you could keep for years and years. People go back to them and it is a very well regarded machine. At that price point though there are so many bikes... It also puts you into KTM 390 territory. That gives you a 4th bike to consider.
Edit: Just to mess with you:
http://www.visordown.com/versus/versus-honda-cbr500r-vs-ktm-duke-390/23815.html
If insurance was friendly another sweet bike is the Honda CBR650F. Used they are a little less than a new SV 650. Perhaps a little less beginner friendly than the SV 650 or Ninja 650 but not as peaky and unpredictable as a 600 SuperSport. Beautiful bike.
bigpoppa
Well-known member
bingo
Definitely different. The CBR500 looks so sweet with the red paint. Reminds me of the older red VFR750s. The Honda is "new" whereas the SV 650 is a really well sorted out package which has been around a long time. The Suzuki would sound so sweet with an aftermarket exhaust. The CB 500s are available used around $5000. That savings versus the SV 650 will buy a lot of fuel, gear, riding course and other things you could spend your money on.
I would pay to buy a new SV 650 because it is a bike you could keep for years and years. People go back to them and it is a very well regarded machine. At that price point though there are so many bikes... It also puts you into KTM 390 territory. That gives you a 4th bike to consider.
Edit: Just to mess with you:
http://www.visordown.com/versus/versus-honda-cbr500r-vs-ktm-duke-390/23815.html
Lol i cant take you seriously now, the RC is supposed to have really aggressive riding position...
and I have never heard good things about KTM build quality....
(They regularly fall apart and have serious build issues)
There really doesnt seem to be much difference between the 300s and cbr500r (what does that extra 10 torque mean anyway? It'll have more power mid range or down low?)
I'll go take a look at the cbr500r tomorrow but in all honesty
i'll stick to the R3 or Sv650 thanks
bingo
Lol i cant take you seriously now, the RC is supposed to have really aggressive riding position...
and I have never heard good things about KTM build quality....
(They regularly fall apart and have serious build issues)
There really doesnt seem to be much difference between the 300s and cbr500r (what does that extra 10 torque mean anyway? It'll have more power mid range or down low?)
I'll go take a look at the cbr500r tomorrow but in all honesty
i'll stick to the R3 or Sv650 thanks
Well... If ergos are that important...
You have narrowed it down to some really nice bikes. If you look on Kijjiji and autotrader you might find some of the earlier SV 650s with fairings. Might see one you like for around $5000. Crazy how these bikes hold their value. That's why it is a bike I can see buying new. Sell it 3-5 years later for $5000 or so and that sub $8000 purchase price does not seem so out of line.
I would still take a look at that CBR500. 10 ft/pds of torque is a significant number compared to what the R3 has (that is actually 50% more torque).
The CBR500 is a very different bikes from the 300cc sport bikes. Articles and comparisons like this help explain it much better than I ever could:
http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/reviews/honda-cbr500r-vs-kawasaki-ninja-300-batting-500
http://www.visordown.com/versus/versus-honda-cbr500r-vs-kawasaki-ninja-300/23540.html
Last edited:
My Buddy has a Ninja 300 and takes his wife for rides from time to time. Mind you, he is a smaller guy. The CBR 500 with the heavier weight and an engine with more torque would handle that duty better than the R3. The SV 650 would probably fare even better.
Some thoughts from the aforementioned article:
"While the CBR’s engine is truly all new, it’s hardly cutting edge. The nearly equal bore and stroke (67mm bore and 66.8mm stroke) imply what the 500 actually is: a torque-rich, low-revving machine." Which results in: "Honda gave the 500s a modest, 8500-rpm redline—not as crazy low as the NC700’s 6500 rpm, but well below the Ninja 300’s 13,000."
Again from the same article. Something to think about being a tall guy:
"Specific power was just one mandate. The new CB series also had to be “full sized.” Fans of the Ninja 250R and 300 who found those bikes too small will delight in the Honda. It has very similar proportions to the Kawasaki but feels scaled about 15 percent larger."
and...
"Two physical factors reinforce your senses. First, Honda gave the CBR a prodigious amount of legroom—1.3 in. greater than the Kawasaki—but it actually feels like more. Second is heft. With its 4.1-gallon tank full, the Honda weighs a portly 430 pounds—actually 2 lbs. heavier than a Ducati Panigale S. Seriously. The Ninja? Try 386 lbs., wet. As a result, the Honda feels compact and manageable even for lighter, shorter riders, but the Kawasaki is a feather, a mere tiffin of a motorcycle beneath you."
This next bit of prose is telling. There is another thread on here where a new rider is kind of annoyed how his 300cc bike behaves in city traffic. As you can see from this part of the review the CBR500 does well in an urban environment:
"Start your journey and the Honda still feels like the larger, more substantial machine. It has a lot more low-end torque than the Kawasaki, along with a light, progressive clutch and seamless off-idle fueling. Brand-new riders will appreciate the CBR’s city manners—the 500 kicks off enough torque to pace four-wheel traffic without using more than, say, 54.8 percent of the rev range. It’s amazingly smooth, too; after hitting a sweet spot at 4000 rpm, where the vibration drops to near zero, tingles increase toward the redline, though they’re never offensive. If you think all 180-degree parallel-twins are squirmy machines, you haven’t sampled Honda’s effort."
Again it really depends on what you want. Some reviews have chosen one of the 300cc bikes instead of the CBR500 in a shootout. If you are out in the canyons and doing a lot of switchbacks I can see the allure of one of the 300cc bikes (they are way ahead of what was available when I came of age in the 1980s). However, there is something nice about the CBR500 in the urban environment:
"Smooth beyond all expectations, the Honda coddles the rider with its easygoing nature, low-buck suspension that gets flustered only over the worst pavement, and an ergonomic package that makes shorties and tallies equally happy. Add the things Honda usually does well, too: Clear, wide mirrors, a great seat, good aerodynamic coverage (especially considering the size of the fairing), and shiny, stout plastics. By contrast, the Ninja looks and feels a bit boy racer, not exactly temperamental on daily commutes or short highway rides, but definitely a bit out of its element."
All of your choices are nice bikes. It really comes down to what you want.
I love the look of naked bikes but I am starting to consider a middleweight sport tourer for my next bike. Storage to commute to work with, a fairing to make the highway slogging more pleasant etc.
What you want in a bike may change a lot after a season or two. This is why so many recommend going used for your first bike (and also because the odds of you dropping your first bike is very high). From that point of view a used example of one of the 300cc wonders or a used CBR500 might make a better choice (for now) than a brand new SV 650.
Some thoughts from the aforementioned article:
"While the CBR’s engine is truly all new, it’s hardly cutting edge. The nearly equal bore and stroke (67mm bore and 66.8mm stroke) imply what the 500 actually is: a torque-rich, low-revving machine." Which results in: "Honda gave the 500s a modest, 8500-rpm redline—not as crazy low as the NC700’s 6500 rpm, but well below the Ninja 300’s 13,000."
Again from the same article. Something to think about being a tall guy:
"Specific power was just one mandate. The new CB series also had to be “full sized.” Fans of the Ninja 250R and 300 who found those bikes too small will delight in the Honda. It has very similar proportions to the Kawasaki but feels scaled about 15 percent larger."
and...
"Two physical factors reinforce your senses. First, Honda gave the CBR a prodigious amount of legroom—1.3 in. greater than the Kawasaki—but it actually feels like more. Second is heft. With its 4.1-gallon tank full, the Honda weighs a portly 430 pounds—actually 2 lbs. heavier than a Ducati Panigale S. Seriously. The Ninja? Try 386 lbs., wet. As a result, the Honda feels compact and manageable even for lighter, shorter riders, but the Kawasaki is a feather, a mere tiffin of a motorcycle beneath you."
This next bit of prose is telling. There is another thread on here where a new rider is kind of annoyed how his 300cc bike behaves in city traffic. As you can see from this part of the review the CBR500 does well in an urban environment:
"Start your journey and the Honda still feels like the larger, more substantial machine. It has a lot more low-end torque than the Kawasaki, along with a light, progressive clutch and seamless off-idle fueling. Brand-new riders will appreciate the CBR’s city manners—the 500 kicks off enough torque to pace four-wheel traffic without using more than, say, 54.8 percent of the rev range. It’s amazingly smooth, too; after hitting a sweet spot at 4000 rpm, where the vibration drops to near zero, tingles increase toward the redline, though they’re never offensive. If you think all 180-degree parallel-twins are squirmy machines, you haven’t sampled Honda’s effort."
Again it really depends on what you want. Some reviews have chosen one of the 300cc bikes instead of the CBR500 in a shootout. If you are out in the canyons and doing a lot of switchbacks I can see the allure of one of the 300cc bikes (they are way ahead of what was available when I came of age in the 1980s). However, there is something nice about the CBR500 in the urban environment:
"Smooth beyond all expectations, the Honda coddles the rider with its easygoing nature, low-buck suspension that gets flustered only over the worst pavement, and an ergonomic package that makes shorties and tallies equally happy. Add the things Honda usually does well, too: Clear, wide mirrors, a great seat, good aerodynamic coverage (especially considering the size of the fairing), and shiny, stout plastics. By contrast, the Ninja looks and feels a bit boy racer, not exactly temperamental on daily commutes or short highway rides, but definitely a bit out of its element."
All of your choices are nice bikes. It really comes down to what you want.
I love the look of naked bikes but I am starting to consider a middleweight sport tourer for my next bike. Storage to commute to work with, a fairing to make the highway slogging more pleasant etc.
What you want in a bike may change a lot after a season or two. This is why so many recommend going used for your first bike (and also because the odds of you dropping your first bike is very high). From that point of view a used example of one of the 300cc wonders or a used CBR500 might make a better choice (for now) than a brand new SV 650.
bigpoppa
Well-known member
I know the sv650 doesnt have a windshield, but do the fairings really make such a huge difference on the highway? (also someone said you can get the fairings for the sv650?)
I hope some others can chime in too. I ride to work as much as I can because our riding season is so darn short.
Up to about 90 km/hr I don't mind riding a naked bike. After that the wind can start to get to you. Mind you, all of that wind makes it easier to keep yourself at 120 km/hr and not go faster.
Even a bikini fairing and a modest windscreen can make a big difference versus a completely naked bike.
I imagine the extra weight/heft of the CBR500 would be a little more stable on the highway and not as prone to cross winds.
From what this says the CBR500 is 5000 rpm at 60 mph (just shy of 100 km/hr here):
http://www.cycleworld.com/2013/05/22/2013-honda-cb500f-and-cbr500r-first-ride-review-photos/
From what they say here the R3 is pretty frenetic at those speeds. Try 6500 rpm or so:
http://www.r3-forums.com/forum/289-yamaha-r3-general-discussion/3553-how-mutch-will-rev-60mph.html
"R3 is not the motorcycle you want if this is a consideration.
Dynos show nothing below 5000, and wont do anything decent until 7000."
On the highway the lower rpm on the 500 and heft would probably make for a more relaxing time on the highway. But how many highway miles are you going to do at this point? Hard to tell...
Again, what you want in a bike may well be different in a season or two (or three). You really can't go wrong with any of your choices. They are all beginner friendly and there is enough there to keep you interested for more than a season.
