RiderForums.com - Kawasaki Motorcycle Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Let me explain a little better. I have a wonderful Street Triple 765 RS + nice windscreen that is basically superior to the Ninja in every way except one. The way the Ninja leans side to side feels more satisfying than the 765. Anyone else have a similar observation? The Ninja makes me want to seek out curves. I don't get that sensation on the 765. Leaning on the Ninja feels like a fun video game. The Street Triple makes me feel sketchy from time to time, I don't know. The Triumph is probably the more capable corner carving machine in the right hands, but the Ninja has some secret leaning sauce sensation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,312 Posts
I don't own a Triumph but by its specs - it should be superior in every conceiveable way to the Ninja - especially the handling. I found my 650 to be a capable but pedestrian handling bike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
First I just want to point out that I didn't suggest it was more flickable, just that the Ninja felt more "fun" for some reason. Also I'm not talking about compression/rebound, clearly Triumph is better there. Okay I pondered this for a while, and I think I can answer my own question. Beyond body position, I think the deal is that my Street's handling is so nimble and so eager to lean that it's unnerving to me. The Ninja takes more input to move, and at the urban speeds that I ride at, somehow it translates into a better feel / feedback. If I may re-word it in a second way, the fact that it takes more effort imparts better precision/feel at "low" speeds. I guess I'm more comfortable with the pedestrian machine. =P

The Street is an amazing bike, but there are little things that I've never adjusted to. Vibes in the left bar, mirror blur for days, sloped seat always shifting my pants and sending me into the gas tank, and it's eager to stall from a stop, and the clutch engagement is far out and grabby. The Ninja is infinitely easier and 100% reliable to blast off from a stop light when lane splitting, N650 never stalls out instead it's hopping the front wheel. The Street is soft in the lower revs, or lofting the front, it's a pita to get just right. It's like death by a 1000 paper cuts. Perhaps too much track dna in the Street. I use the Ninja to commute, but I've been grabbing it for weekend rides too, the Triumph is starting to collect dust.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Well I agree that the triple is better than the ninja as a do them all bike, but not a better bike in every single way for reasons already mentioned by OP.
The ninja also got higher handlebars, shorter gearing, softer suspension and smaller turning radius which all make it a better commuter bike and more beginner friendly.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
504 Posts
First I just want to point out that I didn't suggest it was more flickable, just that the Ninja felt more "fun" for some reason. Also I'm not talking about compression/rebound, clearly Triumph is better there. Okay I pondered this for a while, and I think I can answer my own question. Beyond body position, I think the deal is that my Street's handling is so nimble and so eager to lean that it's unnerving to me. The Ninja takes more input to move, and at the urban speeds that I ride at, somehow it translates into a better feel / feedback. If I may re-word it in a second way, the fact that it takes more effort imparts better precision/feel at "low" speeds. I guess I'm more comfortable with the pedestrian machine. =P

The Street is an amazing bike, but there are little things that I've never adjusted to. Vibes in the left bar, mirror blur for days, sloped seat always shifting my pants and sending me into the gas tank, and it's eager to stall from a stop, and the clutch engagement is far out and grabby. The Ninja is infinitely easier and 100% reliable to blast off from a stop light when lane splitting, N650 never stalls out instead it's hopping the front wheel. The Street is soft in the lower revs, or lofting the front, it's a pita to get just right. It's like death by a 1000 paper cuts. Perhaps too much track dna in the Street. I use the Ninja to commute, but I've been grabbing it for weekend rides too, the Triumph is starting to collect dust.
I probably see your point now. Put another way, the Ninja is more predictable while the Triumph is, perhaps, skittish. I've grown very accustomed to my Little Red Ninja and enjoy having a bike that handles easily and reliably.

I've never ridden a Street Triple, but I appreciate that you've started this thread since the Street Triple is on my short list if I ever decide to replace my Ninja650R.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
216 Posts
Apart from how they distribute their weight the thing that affects how a bike turns the most are rake and trail.

Triumph Rake, trail
24.3°, 95.3 mm (3.75 in)

Ninja
Trail 2006-2011)106 mm (4.2 in)[8]
102 mm (4.0 in) (ER-6n)[11] (2012-) 110 mm (4.3 in)[10
Rake (2006-2011)25°[10]
24.5° (ER-6n)[11] (2012-) 25

The Triump has nearly a degree less rake and nearly 15mm less trail and so would be LESS STABLE at speed. Its a hooligans bike.
The ninja is geared a little more around stability and that may be part of why you feel about them the way you do. Interestingly the er6n has half a degree less rake and less trail. Just exactly how that was achieved with the same frame, forks, swingarm etc is a mystery :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
There's a nearly identical post on another forum comparing MT-10 (grabby clutch, "hard" to launch) vs FJR1300 (easy to launch with gradual clutch engagement). Another factor that was called out is the rotational inertia of the engine. ie, perhaps the Ninja has more flywheel effect, and the 765 doesn't so it can spool up faster. wrt to the Ninja being a lot easier to consistently launch quickly and stealthily than the 765, not the leaning feeling.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top