FZ6N - Opinions

[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/List...589&key=885084
(Monster S4)
http://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/List...480&key=885084
(CB1300 2003)
http://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/List...828&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 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:

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, which compares the FZ to the SV and numerous others.

Edit: see also this thread comparing the SV650 and FZ6.

[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).