I was thinking the other day (no honestly I do sometimes) about my bike. I've been considering changing my 2004 for a 2008 onwards but the other day I read a few posts on here about the newer 1000RRs not being quite as well built as the slightly older models and it got me thinking. Are the latest and greatest models that much faster than a circa 2004?
Progress has to be made dude so if you fancy one have a test ride and make your mind up .would you swop your bike for an old BSA ? (thought not) lol.
well having had the 2011 blade on the road till last summer, then going to the 2004 R1 i can honestly say i dont think the newer bikes make you any quicker at all on the road... you can still go stupidly crazy fast and get in just as much trouble and cant say i've noticed any change in pace compared to the guys i ride with.... however what i would say is that new bikes allow you to do it slightly easier... on the blade everything was effortlessly smooth and refined, the R1 (might be the bike and not year) is a bit wilder but tbh, thats half the enjoyment.... on the track i'm certain the blade will come into it's own over a older bike which is why i opted (that and a certain late night field incident) to use the blade on track and buy an older bike for the road.
Last year I changed from a mint RR5 to a new 12-11 bike. With the benefit of hindsight I may have kept the money in the bank and kept the RR5. However, the only way you are going to know that is to change, a test ride will convince you to upgrade but once the polish has faded you recognised the value of what you had and not what you have got. I couldn’t keep up with my friends when I had my RR5 and guess what, I still can’t keep up with them, indeed I have become slower on bends and more concerned about dropping the new bike thereby making me slower still? Your call but I would stick if I could go back!
Interesting, Carl. I think that's what I'd end up thinking. I've certainly never felt like I was getting left behind or even struggling to keep up when we've had our Northern rideouts. Part of me thinks it'd actually be quite nice to look after this one for a good few years and spend any money that I'm desperate to spend on adding little bits and bobs to it.
having had an RR5 an this RR9 I think the RR9 does handle slightly better but not to the point that I would change I still had the RR5. maybe its looking back with rose tinted glasses but I always felt I was faster on my last blade??
the 2008 onwards models are much easier on my wrists. i tried my mates 2005 blade on roads i usually ride and found my fingers went numb and wrists were bad , went on the same roads on a new blade ,found bike a lot more comfortable over long distances on b roads. the clip ons are a couple of inches higher and less downward angled on the newer blades from 2006. (the reason i sold my 1999 r1 that i had had for 11 years is because it was killing my wrists ,tried a cb1000r for 2 years but it was too slow.)
I would but I'd honestly never forgive myself if I dropped it or something. Also, as large as my ears are, I don't think I could get the necessary two pairs of earplugs in to avoid permanent hearing damage Thank you though, mate.
I've absolutely loved the handling of my RR4 ever since I had the suspension set up by a suspension expert blokey. Totally transformed the bike. Made me instantly considerably quicker. No joke.
yes I had my suspension set up by phillip mcCallen made such a difference.have yet to get this blade so have to pull the finger out and set it up as I know its off by a country mile.
no surprise mate - makes such a difference for peanuts.... always gets me people (fair play to them if they have money to burn) who spend £1,000's on suspension upgrades etc but are still running OE tyres and havent had the original suspension set up to their weight / riding style, it can transform the bike in a few hours for less than £100 quid....
