FZ6N - Opinions

[mnkyboy]

Not that I'm in a huge hurry...however I am looking at the FZ6N as my next bike.

I require an everyday/commuter ride with long distance capabilities. Only this and the BMW F650GS has appealed to me. I am not looking for a 'rip the tarmac up' sort of bike...I ride like a nana. I'd probably stay with my 250 but theres just not enough torque to sit at 110(ish) all day.

Anyone who has one can you give real time feedback on reliability etc on either bike.

[skelstar]

Haven't seen many about, haven't really been posted about around here...except this (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=36418&highlight=FZ6N) thread maybe.

[skelstar]

I think FZ6N is very much the R6 engine...so quite revvy and probably far more sporty than the BMW. Have you considered a ER-FN instead? They seem to be 'the go' for the non-tarmac shredders.

<img src="http://www.bikez.com/pictures/kawasaki/2006/23497_0_1_2_er-6n_Image%20credits%20-%20Kawasaki.jpg">

[James Deuce]

The FZ6 is horrible (IMO). YOu expect great things from the R6 derived engine, and it just never happens. It handles oddly too and the brakes are nasty.

[mnkyboy]

I went to Mt Eden Motorcycles and sat on the er-6n...not to my liking. The seat was too narrow...didn't feel right. I unfortunatly have 'big bones' ;) I don't need the 'sporty' side....although it'd be a bit more fun than my cruiser.

[James Deuce]

If you like the VN250, I'd seriously consider having a look at a VN900 CLassic. Lovely bike that.

[Pwalo]

Come on fella, there's only one thing to do. Go out and ride as many different bikes as you can. I reckon you should try the Bandit 650 as well. Comfortable, easy to commute on, and will easily handle a bit of touring.

[skelstar]

Would have thought you'd champion your own bike P?

SV650 Nekid is a good looking bike in the right frame-colour

<img src="http://www.motorcycleconnect.com/Suzuki/2007/Standard/SV650_ABS/SV650_ABS_1.jpg">

[Cajun]

I went to Mt Eden Motorcycles and sat on the er-6n...not to my liking. The seat was too narrow...didn't feel right. I unfortunatly have 'big bones' ;) I don't need the 'sporty' side....although it'd be a bit more fun than my cruiser.

i know someone who has a er6n he is 120kg+ 6'3+.

Also due to fact its a twin it would be narrow feeling compared to a 4(fz6)

[RantyDave]

I am looking at the FZ6N as my next bike.
Legend has it that they have kinda glitchy fuel injection - not that I've ever actually ridden one. Likewise they're supposed to be a bit dead at the bottom and a bit lively at the top - perhaps a little too much left over sportsbike DNA?

Give one a go is all I can suggest. Also try the Bandit 650, Hornet 900 and if buying from new consider sitting on your hands until the naked version of the Triumph 675 is available.

Dave

[James Deuce]

Legend has it that they have kinda glitchy fuel injection - not that I've ever actually ridden one. Likewise they're supposed to be a bit dead at the bottom and a bit lively at the top - perhaps a little too much left over sportsbike DNA?

Dave

NOT, argh!

Rev, nothing, rev more, nothing, rev more, nothing, spurt, it's over. Really frustrating to ride. If you stay under 6000rpm, the fuel injection is like an on/off switch going from open to closed to open.

R6 derived, but none of the R6's headbanger character.

[Hitcher]

There's always the GSF650S Bandit, if one is looking for a highly competent and just straight-out good fun middleweight...

[pritch]

The Brit bike mags panned the Yamaha. From memory, they said they had thought nobody made really bad bikes anymore but the Yamaha proved them wrong. It is very peaky which would be OK if it had a slick gear box and a light clutch but it has neither.
None of the testers wanted to ride it, they said it just wasn't worth the trouble.

[Devil]

While the FZ6n is not for me, I didn't feel that it was anywhere near as bad as Jim2's experience. Found it buzzy and fairly peaky yes, but no moreso than a GSR600. Thought the FZ had better suspension and mirrors than the GSR as well.

My opinion, just buy a hornet 900. Reliable, enough torque and much smoother than the FZ. Better day to day bike.

[FkNAmerican]

In my experience people over here in the States have a love-hate relationship with the Fz6. Some people love 'em and others hate 'em. More peeps hate them however :(

At a bike meet last Sunday I saw two MV Agusta Brutale's.......now those were nice. Also saw a guy on the new KTM 990 "Super Duke". That looked unique and cool as hell.

If your looking for a motorcycle on the sporty side that you can put some serious miles on then you cant go wrong with:

Suzuki SV 650
Suzuki Bandit
Kawasaki Ninja 650 (my personal pick of the bunch if you cant afford the MV Agusta Brutale or KTM)
and I think over there in NZ you guys call it a Honda "Hornet".
Also, you might wanna try an FZ-1. Those are alot less controversial....as in lots of peeps like them.

[skelstar]

Yep FZ1N look friggin awesome. Haven't seen any in Welly yet though...

<img src="http://static.blogo.it/motoblog/FZ1N.jpg">

[Hitcher]

Any day now somebody will do a comparison between the FZ1 and new Z1000...

[SPman]

Mst had a test ride organised on an FZ6n, but, while they were getting the bike ready, she saw a nice new silver FZ1 - took that out for a run ...... still hasn't ridden an FZ6.
Not that keen on the new FZ1's though. The only part we like better than the old bike is the fairing - you can keep the rest.

[The Pastor]

Any day now somebody will do a comparison between the FZ1 and new Z1000...

z1000 = faster and better but ugly?

fz1 = good all round fast (but not as fast) and sexy?

That was my uneducated guess?

[James Deuce]

z1000 = faster and better but ugly?

fz1 = good all round fast (but not as fast) and sexy?

That was my uneducated guess?

I wouldn't think so. My money is on the FZ1 as a better all round bike and MUCH faster than a Z1000.

[skelstar]

It would be a comparo that I'd be real keen to read though..

[FROSTY]

dude if ya want a nice easy bike to ride--try a bandit 600 or the xj600 --dunno why but theyre pretty relaxed to ride.

[Bnonn]

I am not looking for a 'rip the tarmac up' sort of bike...I ride like a nana. I'd probably stay with my 250 but theres just not enough torque to sit at 110(ish) all day.
Heh, better get the Beamer then. The FZ6 is pretty powerful and will rip the tarmac up very nicely above 8k rpm. However, below that it is very docile and manageable, and is a breeze to ride around town. I commute on my FZ6N every day and I love it. It's a very stable bike, comfortable for long distances, gets good mileage, and has a brilliant community (the faired version is incredibly popular as an all-rounder in the US; see the FZ6 forums on Sportbikes.net (http://www.sportbikes.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=69)).

For your needs I would say the FZ6N would be ideal. As long as you don't go crazy with it, it will be very forgiving, provided you have some riding experience. If you want the power, it is there. It will cruise at 110 very comfortably and have plenty of power left over for passing. It's comfortable long distance. It's very reliable, and every possible issue you could encounter has a veritable knowledge-base behind it on the FZ6 forums, along with numerous HOWTOs and an active and friendly community for support. I really couldn't overstate how much I think the FZ6 is a good choice for a medium-skill rider with a bit of experience wanting to do pretty much anything.


The FZ6 is horrible (IMO). YOu expect great things from the R6 derived engine, and it just never happens. It handles oddly too and the brakes are nasty [...] Rev, nothing, rev more, nothing, rev more, nothing, spurt, it's over. Really frustrating to ride. If you stay under 6000rpm, the fuel injection is like an on/off switch going from open to closed to open.

R6 derived, but none of the R6's headbanger character.
What the heck have you been riding? A Triumph Rocket? You're welcome to your opinion, but you're the first person I've ever met to bad-mouth this bike. A lot of bike journalists think it's wimpy below 8k rpm and thus "boring", but the truth is that its fairly weak torque in the lower rev ranges makes it a perfect commuter. I just don't want too much pickup down there when I'm in stop-and-go traffic. Obviously the engine won't perform the same as an R6 of the same year, because it's been retuned to be more docile, but it's still got plenty of power. Get it above 8k rpm and it turns into a completely different bike; it's like having two completely separate engines. Once you hit that mark, it screams for more until the 14k rpm redline and pulls hard the whole way. I can't see how you wouldn't find it enjoyable, but maybe if you're used to a liter supersport or something...

As for handling, didja tweak the rear suspension? The rear preload is a bit soft and I agree that the front suspension, at least, needs 15w oil instead of the stock 5 (better springs make a marked improvement too), but again, to what are you comparing it? I find it handles just fine. If you're expecting it to get around as quickly as a supersport, again, you're going to be SOL; but that's not what this bike is intended to do. It's a budget standard, intended for all-purpose riding, not trackdays. Its brakes and suspension are perfectly adequate unless you're expecting it to be a supersport—but it's not one, so that would be silly, right? Certainly they're better than a lot of similar-specced and -priced bikes out there.


Legend has it that they have kinda glitchy fuel injection - not that I've ever actually ridden one.
Not particularly; certainly nothing like Jim suggests, and not even compared to something like a Hornet 900. As with any bike, there is a slight jerk between the off and on throttle, which takes a little getting used to, but it's hardly a show-stopper, nor is it specific to the FZ6. It's not something that happens all the way up until 6k rpm either. I think Jim must have ridden a faulty bike or something.


The Brit bike mags panned the Yamaha. From memory, they said they had thought nobody made really bad bikes anymore but the Yamaha proved them wrong. It is very peaky which would be OK if it had a slick gear box and a light clutch but it has neither.
None of the testers wanted to ride it, they said it just wasn't worth the trouble.
Again, I haven't seen these reviews. All the reviews I've read have been US ones, and although they criticized the engine for being weak in the low rpm range (which I've covered above), they uniformly were very positive about the bike in general.

Anyway, if you're thinking of buying one, you can't go wrong having a look at the FZ6 forums and asking some questions there. There are dozens of people there who ride one every day, and range from n00bs to pros in experience and skill levels.

[SPman]

I wouldn't think so. My money is on the FZ1 as a better all round bike and MUCH faster than a Z1000.
Having ridden both, I'd agree with that. (the old models)
The Z1000 was a bit nimbler though.

[James Deuce]

What the heck have you been riding? A Triumph Rocket? You're welcome to your opinion, but you're the first person I've ever met to bad-mouth this bike. A lot of bike journalists think it's wimpy below 8k rpm and thus "boring", but the truth is that its fairly weak torque in the lower rev ranges makes it a perfect commuter. I just don't want too much pickup down there when I'm in stop-and-go traffic. Obviously the engine won't perform the same as an R6 of the same year, because it's been retuned to be more docile, but it's still got plenty of power. Get it above 8k rpm and it turns into a completely different bike; it's like having two completely separate engines. Once you hit that mark, it screams for more until the 14k rpm redline and pulls hard the whole way. I can't see how you wouldn't find it enjoyable, but maybe if you're used to a liter supersport or something...
.

I was looking at replacing my 2004 R6 because I couldn't get on with it in commuter traffic and I thought the FZ6 would be just the thing. The back to back comparison gave a stark impression of just how badly Yamaha "retuned" the FZ6 engine. I don't know where you are getting your impression that the FZ6 makes "power" above 8000rpm. I found a Suzuki GSX600F a much better all round bike than the FZ6, lacking only top end in comparison, but a much fatter bottom end and mid range, making it a much better bet as a "my first big bike" than the FZ6.

I respectfully disagree that no bottom end torque makes for a good commuter. Commuting is the time that you need instant low end snap more often than any other time you ride. Acceleration is an evasion tool, and below 10000rpm the FZ6 has nothing. The FZ6 engine is vibey, gutless, and hugely disappointing after riding an R6 with same engine architecture. The fuel injection was nightmarish, making it impossible to smoothly negotiate low speed corners with any commitment.

I ended up buying the Zed, despite its suspensions shortcomings, because the engine is actually connected to the throttle, not an on/off switch and a selection of different strength rubber bands. Much easier to fix suspension than a fundamentally flawed ECU.

[Bnonn]

Lol, nightmarish eh. All I can say is you must have ridden a dud.

[skelstar]

Impressions of power and usablility is clearly an individual experience. I'd leave it at that. Besides, nobody should buy a bike on peer review alone.

[davejenknz]

If you want an opinion from an actual owner, then read on.
I was in the market for a naked middleweight. My first choice was an SV, but found the SV uncomfortable; bars to far away and pegs too rear set.
The CB900 / FZ1 were just too heavy for what I wanted this time around.
The FZ6 was/is a perfect fit, nice and comfy.
The motor is just a gem, there are bands of power to suit your style of riding. From 4000-7000 (5500 @ 100kph) pulls hards enough to overtake with no fuss. I never have to drop gears to overtake at 100kph. From 7000 its gets real interesting but in any gear apart from 1st you're breaking the speed limit, 10000-12000 rocket ship. I've seen 12000 (2000 more to the read line/limiter), thats 100kph in first but don't think that I'll be doing that too often.
I have the 2005 model and cannot fault the throttle, no lag or fuel shutoff problems here.
I get 20 km/ltr at normal commuting pace.
The suspension is OK, non-adjustable front and a 7 position rear. @90kg I'm on position 4.
Brakes are up to the job.
General finish is very good.
The best forum I've found is http://www.sportbikes.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=69
These guys (mostly from the USA) are fanatical about the FZ6. Worth a visit.

The bad bits:
It is a buzzy engine. Various bits of the bike vibrate at certain rpms, the worst for me is the seat vibes at 5500 (103kph), ball tingling. After that the vibes are there but more muted. Apparently the clutch lever rattles at 8000, but then I've not ridden at that rpm, through it but not at it
However there was a mod posted on the above forum tonite to remove some of the seat bungs to cure the seat vibes, so I'll see if that has the desired effect.

The mirrors on the faired model vibrate, however the naked ones (attached to the bar) do not.

Its quiet. Not that thats a bad thing in my opioion, but there are a number of aftermarket exhausts that improve power at bit (5%) and noise (100%).

The clutch is a bit binary, either on or off and at the end of the lever travel. I'm still trying to get smooth changes after 2 months.

The digital tach is sometimes real hard to see, 2007 models have reverted to analogue.

MY riding is 95% commuting and the rest having a bit of fun. And fun can definately be had on the FZ6. I do the occasional 3-4 hour weekend rides and get a numb bum after about 100ks. Lets face it its no tourer but comfort seats are available either from Yamaha or after market.

So there it is, It is what it is, a general purpose bike that does everything well enough. If you want a recommendation, you've got mine. Oh and my son (30 years my junior) can't keep off it, never seen him smile so much.

[MSH]

i know someone who has a er6n he is 120kg+ 6'3+.


Sounds like me after a couple too many pies....

[Bnonn]

I think the clutch lever problem is not a general one; it only seems to happen on some bikes. Certainly I've never seen it and I sit at 8000 rpm fairly often on the highway, depending on what I'm doing. I also like the narrow clutch engagement because it makes for quicker and more precise shifting. There's no need to haul on the lever to disengage the engine. It only took me a couple of weeks to get quite comfortable with the engagement band, and I have no problems with being smooth whatsoever now (I ride with a pillion a lot as well).

Speaking of which, I have to disagree about touring. The FZ6 is a very capable tourer both one and two-up, commuter also. Although you say you get a numb bum, this seems to vary a lot between people. I can do 200 to 300 km before I start to get sore, but my wife gets stiff much sooner. This is partly because the position is a bit cramped for the pillion (but much more roomy than most bikes you'll find), but also partly just because she doesn't have nearly as much riding experience. Once you've ridden for a while you get used to sitting on the bike for long stretches and it doesn't hurt nearly as much. Anyway, with the preload set correctly the FZ6 performs really well with a pillion on the back. I followed a group of bikes back home from Te Awamutu yesterday, and although they weren't hauling ass, they weren't slouching either. I had no problems keeping up with them despite having my wife on the back. Similarly, in the twisties I have no issues dragging parts carrying a pillion, and there is plenty of power to spare unless you're trying to keep up with someone on a 900 cc Honda Hornet who is caning it and performing very dangerous passing manoeuvers. The grab bars are also nice and big, and the seat is quite wide (as opposed to, say, the SV650's postage stamp).

Speaking of the SV650, I think you'll find that vibrates a lot more than the FZ6. Certainly the ol' fizzer can be a little buzzy, but if you test it against other engines I suspect you'll find it quite smooth in comparison.

The tacho I agree can be a little hard to read sometimes, but I haven't had many problems with it myself. Still, the switch back to analog was a good move.

HTH.

[Sanx]

Oops. Wrong thread.

[slowpoke]

First up I have to admit I'm not particularly interested in this kinda bike. They sort of sit in no mans land as the bastard child of a narrow focused sports bike with all the good bits pulled off.
It's rare that the suspension is any good, and it fucks me off that a crap set of brakes cost the same to make as a good set, so why don't they give you the good gear? And if the thing is so underpowered and unsporting why is it so bloody heavy when it doesn't have to handle anything like the forces generated in a gazillion horsepower, stop on a postage stamp from lightspeed and throw it on it's side type sportsbike?
Yeah, I know everyone's different I don't know why people spend top dollar on new bikes that don't have new bike features. Unless you want the cutting edge (insert: tourer, cruiser, sportsbike, chook chaser etc in this space) why buy any new bike? Especially with a design brief like the FZ6N has: a naked middle weight that goes OK, stops OK, and handles OK, nothing too flash, just OK.
For my money I'd be looking at something like YZF600 Thundercat. After all, the later generations of R6's are derivatives of it, therefore it is in effect a detuned R6, with a less radical riding position, good commuting/touring ability, and shits all over later R6's for grunt under 10k rpm. Not to mention, if you look after it you could get all of your money back in 12months time instead of losing 2 grand as soon as you roll it off the show room floor.
Sorry, I don't mean to attack FZ6N's or their owners, but there are a swag of cheaper bikes that do exactly the same thing with the only failing being they aren't new.

[ZeroIndex]

While the FZ6n is not for me, I didn't feel that it was anywhere near as bad as Jim2's experience. Found it buzzy and fairly peaky yes, but no moreso than a GSR600. Thought the FZ had better suspension and mirrors than the GSR as well.

My opinion, just buy a hornet 900. Reliable, enough torque and much smoother than the FZ. Better day to day bike.

I have to agree with that... go the Hornet 900...

[Bnonn]

slowpoke: the point is that a lot of people cannot use, and indeed may be endangered by, the high performance of a full-on sportbike. They don't want the only standards available to be 15 years old. And they don't want to pay twice as much for twice as much performance that they can't use, and which would leave them so little margin for error that they could easily kill themselves.

It sounds like you really don't understand the point of a standard bike at all. I have no problem with people who want supersport bikes buying supersport bikes, but if they're going to rag on standards they just show that they don't really understand how anyone could have different needs and skills than they do.

[Hitcher]

I thought that Slowpoke made some interesting points about how Japanese bike manufacturers choose to spec up their "entry level" mid-range bikes. Manufacturers are price driven, and cut corners and costs with suspension and brakes in order to meet a market niche. There's a big difference in spec between a BMW F800S and a Yamaha FZ6S or a Suzuki GSF650S. And it shows in the $6,000 price difference.

However, the good news is that these limitations can generally be overcome with readily available and excellent aftermarket kit. And for somewhat less than the $6,000 extra required to buy a Beemer.

[James Deuce]

What Bnonn said. If we were honest with ourselves (Hah! Fat Chance!) Standards, Sport Tourers, and Adventure bikes are a much better option for NZ roads and riders. Apart from the Welly Hardcore I have no drama hanging with a sprotsbike and when I get off my bike after a couple of hours I don't walk about like an Orangutan with piles and a neck injury.

As far as the FZ6 goes, stick an R6 engine in it, R6 forks, and R6 Monobloc calipers and it would be nearly as good a mid-sized standard as my Zed.

[slowpoke]

slowpoke: the point is that a lot of people cannot use, and indeed may be endangered by, the high performance of a full-on sportbike. They don't want the only standards available to be 15 years old. And they don't want to pay twice as much for twice as much performance that they can't use, and which would leave them so little margin for error that they could easily kill themselves.

Ok, fair enough, apart from the 15 year old bit, but what's the point of paying twice as much for no extra performance? Realistically a second hand bike could be of a much higher spec in every regard (comfort, braking, suspension, touring ability, performance etc) than a new low spec model for the same money.


It sounds like you really don't understand the point of a standard bike at all. I have no problem with people who want supersport bikes buying supersport bikes, but if they're going to rag on standards they just show that they don't really understand how anyone could have different needs and skills than they do.

I comprehend the various needs of the biking fraternity quite well and understand that we all have to make compromises and choose something that suits our needs and riding styles....I just don't understand why you would choose a lesser bike in every regard for the sake of buying new.

A new FZ6N, or ER6N or GSR600 etc is about $13 000, give or take For less than $10 000 you could get:
http://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=100397589&key=885084
(Monster S4)
http://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=99669480&key=885084
(CB1300 2003)
http://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=91142828&key=885084
(XJR1300SP Ohlins suspension)

I know they are bigger bikes but none of them are scary beasts and all have far more features than the smaller bikes. They are just indicative of what you can get for that sort of dosh. I'm not attacking the smaller bikes at all, I just don't think they represent value for money when purchased brand new.

[moko]

The Brit press still don't like the F6N despite the recent tweaking and the main reason is that motor.The bike was bought out to replace the old Fazer 600 (see my avatar) which was massively popular,not least because of it's excellent mid-range,it was fitted with the Thundercat motor modded for exactly that.Back to back with the old bike,indeed most bikes in it's class the F6N is pretty gutless until it's screaming and travelling through town involves a lot of tap-dancing on the gear-lever that the older bike just didn't need.Yamaha only dropped the older bike,along with the Diversions,XTs and a few others because they failed new European Union emission regs,otherwise the F6N would no doubt have had the same motor(old Fazer was due an up-date and would probably have ended up like a T/Cat motored F6N),possibly fuel-injected by now,and been better for it.General opinion amongst the bike press here is that the 650 Bandit is a better all-round bike for everyday use and is a lot cheaper as well.
Given the original criteria I'd suggest an SV650 or a 650 Bandit,F6N is fine for fast lads who like to play racers but find an R6 too extreme,riding it to work every day it soon gets tedious and frustrating,the old Fazer was much-loved by the Brit bike press,F6N has become a bit of a whipping boy.

[slowpoke]

The Brit press still don't like the F6N despite the recent tweaking and the main reason is that motor.The bike was bought out to replace the old Fazer 600 (see my avatar) which was massively popular,not least because of it's excellent mid-range,it was fitted with the Thundercat motor modded for exactly that.Back to back with the old bike,indeed most bikes in it's class the F6N is pretty gutless until it's screaming and travelling through town involves a lot of tap-dancing on the gear-lever that the older bike just didn't need.Yamaha only dropped the older bike,along with the Diversions,XTs and a few others because they failed new European Union emission regs,otherwise the F6N would no doubt have had the same motor(old Fazer was due an up-date and would probably have ended up like a T/Cat motored F6N),possibly fuel-injected by now,and been better for it.General opinion amongst the bike press here is that the 650 Bandit is a better all-round bike for everyday use and is a lot cheaper as well.
Given the original criteria I'd suggest an SV650 or a 650 Bandit,F6N is fine for fast lads who like to play racers but find an R6 too extreme,riding it to work every day it soon gets tedious and frustrating,the old Fazer was much-loved by the Brit bike press,F6N has become a bit of a whipping boy.

That Thundercat engine was a lil' pearler I reckon. After getting RSI flapping my left foot on a test ridden CBR600RR I can remember hopping on a mates Thundercat with initial trepidation and being pleasantly suprised at the great "real world" performance. On anything other than a racetrack I would have taken the Thundercat over the CBR. I can only imagine the Fazer 600 would be more of the same with an even beefier low/mid range.

As a comparison:
1999 Thundercat 187kg, 100hp (@11500rpm) 65.7Nm torque (@9500rpm)
2007 FZ6N 187kg, 97hp (@12000rpm) 63.0Nm torque (@10000rpm)

[Sanx]

As long as Lion-o holds onto the Sword of Omens and defeat the mutants of Mumm-Ra, The Thundercat race (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thundercats) will live on.

Not so sure about the FZ6N, though.

[Bnonn]

Sorry guys, I just can't agree. I wouldn't want any of those bikes over the FZ6N. I don't find the mid-range to be lacking for what I want, and I never find myself shifting much throughout town. The people who complain about the midrange seem to want a V instead of an i4. When you ride an i4, you accept that you need to keep the revs high to keep in the powerband. That's one of the things I like about them. I don't care that the bike produces minimal power between 0 and 6k rpm; in fact, that's what I like about it. It makes city riding (where I keep the revs at about 5,000) smooth and comfortable. Those with different riding styles may disagree, and I certainly am no expert having ridden very few bikes, but the FZ6N does everything I want.

As for features—what do you mean? None of those bikes on Trademe have fuel guages that I can see, nor tripmeters, clocks, or an automatic reserve fuel tripmeter. None of them meet emissions standards, which is something I actually care about, although many people don't. None of them are as downright pretty as the FZ6N; and I personally like to have a bike which not only rides well, but looks good. None of them have immaculate maintenance histories recorded in a spreadsheet, either. I am willing to pay for all these things.

As regards other bikes of similar spec, I have not ridden an SV650, nor a Bandit 650. I've sat on them, and didn't like how they felt as much as I liked the FZ6. I didn't like how they looked as much as the FZ6 either. The SV would have been my second choice (I didn't consider the Bandit since I don't think the 650 was out then, and Bandits are a bit gutless compared to other similar-priced bikes), because it also has a big following with lots of aftermarket support, but the general consensus which I have read among those who have ridden both is that the SV is a great bike, with lots of real-world power, but still 10-15 hp short of the FZ6, and just isn't as versatile. It also won't carry a pillion comfortably, which is a big factor for me. The FZ6, on the other hand, needs shifting more—as I said, if you ride an i4, expect to work harder to keep it in the power band. I like that; I like having to keep interacting with the bike rather than just pushing it around. But other people may like the SV more, and yay for them. I'm not in any way claiming that the FZ6 is the be-all and end-all of bikes; nor that it is the best bike for everyone. I'm just giving my perspective as someone who rides one. It is a budget standard, and so it has some parts which are not high-performance; but it still has way more performance in it than the average rider has skill.

Let me sum it up using the list given on this thread (http://www.sportbikes.net/forums/showthread.php?t=342386&highlight=sv650):


1) cheaper insurance
2) nakedness
3) ergonomics
4) more versatile to everyday commute
5) looks
6) easier to modify
7) best online support group
I'd also recommend that anyone thinking of buying an FZ6, but wanting some comparison to other bikes, reads this thread (http://www.sportbikes.net/forums/showthread.php?t=346886), which compares the FZ to the SV and numerous others.

Edit: see also this thread comparing the SV650 and FZ6 (http://www.sportbikes.net/forums/showthread.php?t=350794&highlight=sv650).

[slowpoke]

Aaaaah the beauty of motorcycling....one person's perfect bike is usually quite different to the next person's. Congrat's on finding yours, Bnonn.
I have to admit it is quite a cool looking jigger.

[Bnonn]

Heh, thanks. On the other side of the coin, let me be the first to also acknowledge that criticisms regarding some of the FZ6's parts are quite valid. For a little extra money, it could have slightly better brakes (and they would only need stainless lines to be very, very good without being stupidly dangerous to a n00b—so an extra $150), and significantly better suspension. The FZ6's shocks aren't as lousy as the SV650's, but they are still not particularly good. Upside-down adjustable front-end with decent springs (they are too soft) and oil (it is too light), and something just a little better on the back, would really make a huge difference.

Unfortunately, I think this aspect of the bike's design is dictated by marketing, and not by what is necessarily sensible. Sad really. Stainless lines and new fork oil are the first upgrades I will be doing (springs are too pricey and I don't ride hard enough to need them).