1992 VFR400R NC30 vs 1996 RVF400 NC35
Friday morning tootled over to cyclespot to drop the vfr off to have the speedo fixed, id already expressed a casual interest in the rvf they had, and cheekily asked to take it out, although with my history they let me have it for a few hours.
Took it down the road coughing and spluttering, realised they had the fuel tap off, and then was suprised that there was no engine braking and it was idling at 3k... well the choke was on - which is unusual as my vfr choke doesnt hold a constant high rpm above idle... 10 buks of gas later, and after telling cyclespot 'I wont go far'....
Performance. Got on the motorway and opened her up a bit, there is quite a delay in the throttle response - due to it having 30mm flatside carbs rather than the nc30's 32mm cvs - so they work of vacuum and you have to wait for them to work... It didnt seem to have the same punch in the midrange either. Took it round the harbour, sits on the motorway nicely, and is as joyous to ride as an nc30. Heading back down the motorway to cyclespot decided to really give it some herbs coming off the on ramp, flicking through the gears at about 13k it got up to 180 before slowly going off the clock, kind off disappointing as my nc30 seems to get to 200+ in under 10 seconds. More scrutinous testing in this area is required. Cant comment on economy as of yet.
Gearing is suprisingly different, whearas an nc30 with stock gearing will hit 100kph in first, the rvf pretty much hits 100kph at red line in second - but with much shorter gearing you would expect much better pickup - this isnt the case. my nc30 dropped a tooth on the front and still has higher gearing than the rvf - but has way better pickup. But then like the nc30, the power range is so good that you dont need to flick through any gears and still have enough grunt.
Riding position and bodywork. The riding position is more cramped than the nc30, im 6' 2'' but can still be quite comfortable - when you have your feet in normal position - ie. toe tucked underneath levers then your knees are too far forward on the tank, whearas if you push your feet back with toes on the pegs then knees fit snugly in the part of the tank that knees are meant to go. I swear the handle bars are higher too, which means less weight on the wrists. Seat is pretty much identical, and pillion seat is noticeably narrower. Insruments and controls are all nicely visible and accessable - except the top of the tacho - from about 10k through to redline - you have to be at full tuck to see it under the screen. A double bubble screen will remedy this. When i got back on the vfr it felt very noticelably bigger.
Handling. There isnt a huge difference despite the rvf having a 17'' rear wheel rather than the nc30's 18''. The rvfs rear shock didnt bottom out like the nc30s as soon as i sat on it. Tyres were some bridgestone touring tyres, with hardly any lean angle, so didnt get to test that aspect. Id definately throw on a set of dunlop gpr100s or gpr70's. I read on wikipedia than whearas the nc30 will hold a line perfectly, the nc35 can change line mid corner - i decided to put it to the test, and it does it beautifully due to the usd front forks. Brakes felt really nice and solid too, the same as the vfr just they have had 30,000k's less wear on the disks..
Looks. this is the reason i bought it, a bike as good as an nc30, but modern looking, immaculate, beautiful and not 15 years old.. The rear end is nicely reshaped, and the main change is the front end - foxeye headlights look trick, with air intakes either side, and the zxr-esque air ducts going into the tank look cool too.
Worth twice as much as an nc30? simply no. Its not twice the bike. Engine performance the nc30 wins hands down, handling will no-doubt be the rvf once its got some good rubber, and the rvf looks sooo damn good I could eat it...
Originally Posted by NinjaNanna
Reply With Quote
............
Bookmarks