Kawasaki ZX-9R Ninja Buyer's Guide

Faster than a FireBlade, more agile than a Hayabusa, comfort on par with a ZX-12R and much better looking than the lot of them – small wonder the ZX-9R C1 has got an identity crisis. The kid in the Kawasaki uniform, who grew up thinking he was a sports bike and exhibiting some pretty antisocial behaviour, has been told to go and join the sports-tourer class. So there he sits in the naughty chair, glowering out from the corner at the softies, picking and flicking the scabs on his knees, knowing he’ll get his own back come playtime.

Back when he was a sports bike, the Kawasaki was always a bit bigger than the others in his class, but not fat, and certainly made up for any additional girth with power. When it came to sports, the others had flasher equipment, but he was just as fast. Only when it came to the very cutting edge of competition was the ZX-9 found marginally wanting and perhaps this was as much a result of his big, friendly nature, as it was of having slightly cheaper kit.

While the others wouldn’t think twice of twisting knees and damaging backs on their ways to sports supremacy, the Kwak was more laid back, comfortable company. But a ‘sports-tourer’? It still hurts to be labelled thus. Especially when you’re so much quicker through a set of turns than anything else sharing the designation; especially when you’ve been consistently putting out between 130 and 140bhp in Dyno examinations for the past ten years and hitting 170mph in track events.

Perhaps the only justifiable tag that sticks to the nine-year-old ZX-9R is that of ‘bargain’, for bargain it certainly is. A pristine bike can be had for £2500; 20 per cent less than a VFR or Blade of similar age. Bang-for-buck-wise, only an original Yamaha R1 comes close, but try and find one of those that hasn’t been interfered with…

Maybe, with time, the Kawasaki ZX-9R will learn to live with its expulsion from the sports bike fold. As such a stable bike, and so forgiving, we’d expect it to. Or perhaps it’d be kinder to call it an all-rounder, because the big-hearted Ninja will certainly have a go at anything, from obliterating Continental Europe, to trickling to work. It’ll have a major a hoot around Cadwell Park, then whoosh you sedately home.

So if your bum looks big in a FireBlade and isn’t ready for an Andrex-soft, puppy-toothed VFR, then consider adopting a wide-mouthed ZX-9R C1 whale shark. It’s very much like a younger sports bike, only bigger.

You can bet the engineers at Kawasaki took it personally the day Honda stole their recipe for world domination. They must have been spiting sushi on seeing the FireBlade’s spec’ sheet; four straight cylinders, 900 cubic centimetres! Over at Honda they should, I like to think, have been rolling around on the drawing boards, shouting about the sweetness of revenge. It was 1992 and Honda had launched a killer offensive in a big bike battle that Kawasaki had been wining for nearly 20 years.

The Kawasaki crew were tasting the bitterness of their own medicine, for they had invaded Honda’s territory two-decades back. In 1972 the first Kawasaki 900-four was announced, out-muscling Honda’s CB750-four that had been dominating the streets and spread-sheets for three years. With 130mph and 82bhp, the big and butch Z1 knocked the 67bhp Honda into the pansies, both style and performance-wise. Big multis had been Honda’s game and Kawasaki had beaten them at it.

Over subsequent years the Japanese factories stretched engine capacities, went to six cylinders and back, got all V-four about things, fitted turbos and fuel injection, but nothing had the impact of that first big Zed. Nothing until Kawasaki did it again in 1984, once more with four straight cylinders and 900cc. Enter the GPz900R, a slimmer, lighter, faster type of bike that redefined the direction large capacity machines would take thenceforth. Steering, weight, controlled suspension and balance… it was streets ahead – notably those on the Isle of Mann. It was eight years until a bike had this kind of impact and that bike was the FireBlade.

When Kawasaki made their attempt to reassert 900cc dominance with the 1984 ZX-9R B1, they even tried to play the heritage card by rolling out a Z900 and GPz900R for the launch event. But the bike was no competition for Honda, especially as they’d just released their new Fox-eyed Blade. It may have been slightly more powerful, but it was 30kg heavier – it felt like more. The Honda was super-lively, would change direction if your chip money shifted in your leathers; the Kawasaki required significantly more input to turn. The B-model also had a problem rear linkage that made the back-end feel very harsh and this was exacerbated by the standard tyres. Kawasaki were still losing the big multi game and even tweaking the rear linkage, fitting better rubber and sticking fashionable six-piston brakes on the front forks for the B4 model brought the bike no closer to the competition.

In 1998 Kawasaki launched the ZX-9R C1, effectively a whole new bike. Just as Honda had done with the Blade, Kawasaki looked to their 600 to come up with the C1. The engine got a bigger bore and shorter stroke and the heavy, chain-driven alternator was dropped for a crank-end version with lighter magnets. Plug-top mini-coils shaved more ounces from the electrics. Using bucket-and-shim valve actuation let the engineers make the cylinder head narrower and crankcases, now the dimensions of the 600, contained a smaller clutch and were trimmed to shave yet more weight. A new frame was shorter and lighter, using the motor to aid rigidity and USD forks were junked in favour of butch, 46mm conventional legs that alone saved 2kg.

Now over 30kg the lighter, making 130 real bhp, the ZX-9R had all but pulled level with the FireBlade. Then Yamaha’s R1 came screaming past everything. The Kawasaki boys must have been screaming ‘double-bugger’ into the karaoke mike that night.

The 1998 bike was much easier to ride and impressively fierce if you yanked the carbs all the way open, but again was outstripped, a bit too big and blunt to slice the latest sports bike bacon. But again size was as redeeming as it was unfashionable. It was the most comfortable of the bunch. Suspension could be adjusted to be softer than the hard-arse of yore and overall it became a smoother animal, a much better road bike.

If the ZX-9R has a vintage year, it’s 1998. The C-model, with its solid green, red or black paint schemes and single headlight is the best looking and subsequent models brought little extra to the performance package bar garish graphics. The C1 didn’t win road tests, but then it was being tested as a pure sports weapon, not a big, fast, comfortable road bike with a touch of the psycho about it. Which is just what it is. 170mph for £2500 has never looked so good….

900 History Lessons

Kawasaki Z1 (1972 – to Z900 (1976)

Specs: 903cc, 82bhp, 240kg, 133mph

Prices: From £1500 for a ropey 1976 import Z900, through £6000 for a reasonable ‘74 bike, to £15,000-plus for a mint ’73 Z1.

Good stuff: Paint, chrome, presence, beauty, smell, noise, reliability and ease of maintenance.

Bad stuff: Price for a good one (if found); bendy bedstead handling, finding spares. No, actually, nothing.

The original muscle bike: high, wide, fast and lose, with a chrome masterpiece of a four-into-four exhaust. If you had one of these back then, you were one cool cat. US-models got a KZ designation so imports are easy to spot. Later hogged out to 1015 to become the Z1000 – still good looking and big classic presence, but not a 900, so I’ll shut up.

GPz900R (1983-)

Specs: 908cc, 112bhp, 215kg, 150mph

Prices: A1-models in good, original nick are still fetching £2500. Condition rather than year-based: £900-£2500.

Good stuff: Solid performer, comfort, history.

Bad stuff: Suspension likely to be knackered, rotten pipes, cables etc. Easy to spend two grand tidying one up.

Completely dominant in its day as the first big bike designed as an all-round sports package. A tough buy these days as durability was not top of the design list and you can get better for the money. Mid-eighties sentimentalists only.

ZX-9R B1 1994-1996

Specs: 899cc, 125bhp, 215kg, 167mph

Prices: £1500-£2200

Good stuff: Speed, stomp, comfort, growly motor.

Bad stuff: Weight, girth, flawed suspension and poor standard tyre fitment.

The FireBlade had been out for two years and we were expecting a savage Kwak reply. Instead we got something bigger and heavier than Honda’s offering. Aitch had the new Foxeye; K had iffy paint, a flawed rear linkage, mismatched tyres and a serious performance deficit everywhere but in a straight line. It did have Ram-Air, big horsepower and USD forks, though.

ZX-9R B4 1996-1998

Specs: 899cc, 127bhp, 215kg, 167mph

Prices: £1750-£2400

Good stuff: Speed, stomp, comfort, growly motor, brakes.

Bad stuff: Weight, girth, and the fact the rest of the world was moving on far faster.

First real revision: power up a tad, six-pot brakes, revised suspension, slicker gearbox and a passenger grab-rail did not a Blade-beater make. Still too big to boogie, it was already being re-designated a sports-tourer by the press. Trouble was, there were already plenty of good/better sports-tourers out there – VFR, Thunderace – and if you wanted a battering ram of a sports thing, there was the GSX-R1100W.

ZX-9R C 1998-2000

Specs: 899cc, 143bhp, 183kg, 170mph

Prices: £2200-£2700

Good stuff: Speed, stomp, relative comfort, roaring airbox, road handling.

Bad stuff: Not much. A little heavier than the opposition, and perceived as a bit of a softie.

Complete revamp, great single-colour paint on the C1 and enormous power from shorter-stroke motor should have done the trick, but then Yamaha’s R1 redefined the game again. Didn’t win any track tests, but with RWU forks, wheelbase and weight pared from every component, now leaner and blue-black-or-greener, it matched anything as a road bike. Got crashtastic removable sub-frame. Grab-rails. Sales perked up. In 1999 C2-model appeared with two-colour graphics.

ZX-9R E/P 2000-2004

Specs: 899cc, 150bhp, 186kg, 170mph

Prices: £2500-£3900

Good stuff: Speed, stomp, relatively roomy comfort, roaring airbox, road handling.

Bad stuff: Not much. A little heavier than the opposition, and still suffers from lack of race-winning, hardcore kudos.

Some 130 changes for the millenium’s turn. From off the bike, you might notice the sleeker tailpiece, twin headlamps, braced swingarm and four-piston calipers replacing the six-potters that went before. On bike, there’s a perceptible braking refinement and seven more horses to rarely be needed, but it’s ostensibly the same bike gusset-of-the-leathers-wise. Same goes for P-models (2002-on) which were restyled.

What’s fast and what makes a good fast bike? A number from a magazine road test? The potential to claim a Top Trumps winning figure down the pub? Or being projected through the air at a rate that gets heart thumping and enlivens the senses. If it’s the latter, then the ZX-9R is right up there, and the ticker can start pumping hard before you even get rolling.

A 9R is big, blunt, intimidating looking thing. It’s also a bit of a surprise as it’s lifted off the sidestand. How can something so big weigh so little? Barking into life with a massive shudder, it grumbles and vibrates as the clutch bites. The big, hollow feeling bike growls up the road, clears its throat momentarily at 3000rpm, then smoothes out and purrs along, civilized as you like, gathering power with revs in a linear and unspectacular manner.

Things soon start to happen faster. At 7000rpm an urgency enters the engine note and thrust picks up; by 8000 the airbox is roaring, and by 10,000 it sounds like there’s an act of God going on under the tank, a whole hurricane packed into a space the size of a motorcycle helmet. At each change of note another wave of shunt kicks in, with each gear more of the same. It’s intoxicating, grin-worthy and very naughty. Sports-tourer… you won’t get this kind of rush from a VFR800 or Sprint ST. But then despite smooth fuelling, the ZX-9 doesn’t have the low down drive of the Triumph or the civility of either bikes’ ride.

By today’s standard the Kawasaki’s ride feels ‘choppy’, especially at the back. All is fine on the smooth, but throw in a few potholes and drain covers and the hard rear spring can have you kicked out of the seat. And although the bike steers with little effort most of the time, it’ll try to sit up when a big bump is struck fast mid-bend. Most of the time though, compared the latest head-waggling midget bikes, the ZX-9R is all stability and spacious comfort.

Arms reach around a wide tank to bars set at a height midway between full-on race-rep and VFR. There’s a nice sense of balance, a sharing of weight between wide saddle, shoulders and tucked up legs. There’s more strain on arms and legs than a bespoke sports-tourer, but the screen is a match for most and motorway can be despatched by the 19-litre tankful.

The ZX feels most at home on dual carriageway - yowling from one smooth roundabout to next, squeezing the brake, keeping it smooth, then hammering out on a wave of sound. The six-piston front brakes don’t have the direct feel of up-to-the-minute stoppers, but they’re powerful enough to reach the limits of forks and tyre with a couple of fingers.

This old-timer needs to be held down against a tendency to run wide mid-bend, but then so do most big bikes. A bit of set-up time would help, but it’s still quite a bit quicker all round than even a new VFR or Sprint ST. It’s not as comfortable and is harsh at the back end, but then what the hell? Five hundred quid change buys an awful lot of piles ointment.