What's the difference bewteen the 6R and the 6RR in practical terms? I've looked over the specs and brochures, but I wanted some feedback from some people that have ridden both. I'm wondering if the extra R is a little more than what I'm looking for (I'm comfortable on a honda F4i 600 now)?!? The sales guy didn't seem to know much other than the RR is 599cc and the R is 636cc. Thanks for the feedback, cheers.

 

Depends on the years. If you are thinking of '05, just get the R. The R has the slipper clutch like the RR and is really the only thing from the RR that is good to have on the street.

The '03/'04 RR had the slipper what the R didn't for those years. There are other differences too, but not worth paying more for unless you race.

 

The R has about ten more HP, but since this is your first bike you won't be able to tell the difference. The RR is more track oriented, like 2.2 said the differences are more prevalent in the 03-04 models. I believe suspension and brakes are a little bit better on the RR as well.

 

The 6RR had changes so that it could be more competitive in AMA racing. For example, it has an adjustable swingarm (or was that adjustable swingarm pivot...?). Mere mortals such as you and I would probably never touch that.

The 6R makes a much better street bike, and with the changes for 05, it's hard to justify the purchase of a 6RR when most of its goodies (slipper clutch for one) can be found on the 6R.

 

nobody mentioned ergos... 6rr has different rearsets i believe...... as stated above, track junkies and pro riders are the only ones who would see more benefit from the RR, for the street, 6r is more practical (2003-2004 636)

 

Sounds like for my usage the R would be far better. I think this is the only post in this section where everyone agrees?!!?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by SiRidiculous &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Sounds like for my usage the R would be far better. I think this is the only post in this section where everyone agrees?!!? </TD></TR></TABLE>

But in the end, they're still Kawasuckys.

You never mentioned if you were looking at the 03-04 6R/6RR or the newer ones. Are you planning on buying brand new?

 

yup....6r is a much more street friendly bike

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by marmaladeboy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

But in the end, they're still Kawasuckys.

You never mentioned if you were looking at the 03-04 6R/6RR or the newer ones. Are you planning on buying brand new?</TD></TR></TABLE>


Dont even start hatin' on Kawi. All you other riders are just jealous of our intense motors is all.

 

The ZX6R is a wise choice.

 

the RR is only a 600, and can compete in the 600 class, as the R is a 636 and is over the limit of the 600 class.

 

rr has adjustable swingarm also, don't know if anyone said that yet

 

6RR has a black frame, slipper clutch, 36 less cc's, different pistons, that's it I think.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ProjectF4 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">rr has adjustable swingarm also, don't know if anyone said that yet</TD></TR></TABLE>
Yup.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RedStarGsr &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">the RR is only a 600, and can compete in the 600 class, as the R is a 636 and is over the limit of the 600 class. </TD></TR></TABLE>
That applies to the AMA only. I believe up to 650 is legal in other racing organizations.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 2.2 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Dont even start hatin' on Kawi. All you other riders are just jealous of our intense motors is all.</TD></TR></TABLE>
The same intense motor that, with its extra 37ccs, can only barely beat some (not all) 600s in the quarter mile time?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by marmaladeboy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

The same intense motor that, with its extra 37ccs, can only barely beat some (not all) 600s in the quarter mile time?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Nope, just the same intense motor that came in third behind every mainstream manufactures bike from 600CC up to 1k for 2k4. It was behind only the GSXR-750 and ZX10R in lap times. That means that it was AHEAD of the the '04 R1, '04 CBR1000RR, '04 Gixxer 1k, and every 600 SS bike and VTwin superbike (minus the RC51 which was not tested) by about .5 - 1 second on the track. With something like 15 different riders.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by marmaladeboy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

The same intense motor that, with its extra 37ccs, can only barely beat some (not all) 600s in the quarter mile time?</TD></TR></TABLE>

What is your definition of barely? When you're talking about 1/4 times that are in the 10's, even a .05 difference is huge. We're not talking about cars here.

Secondly, you can't simply base speed on 1/4 times anyway. The powerband on the 636 is very broad and unlike the R6 which I used to own, this thing actually has low end torque. That comes in handy when you're comming hard out of a turn.

Yes comming from a kawi owner this probably doesn't mean much but I'm only speaking facts here.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 2.2 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Nope, just the same intense motor that came in third behind every mainstream manufactures bike from 600CC up to 1k for 2k4. It was behind only the GSXR-750 and ZX10R in lap times. That means that it was AHEAD of the the '04 R1, '04 CBR1000RR, '04 Gixxer 1k, and every 600 SS bike and VTwin superbike (minus the RC51 which was not tested) by about .5 - 1 second on the track. With something like 15 different riders. </TD></TR></TABLE>

What track?

 

I will see if I can dig up the article. I had the magazine, but may have misplaced it in my move. It was done by either Bike or Superbike. Very popular test if I recall, like an every year deal they do.

EDIT: I am pretty sure this was the test right here - http://www.sportrider.com/toc/146_0412_toc/

Still looking for one you can read online.

EDIT2: Here is a thread about it with laptimes -

http://www.sportbikes.com/wwwt...69210


Modified by 2.2 at 3:50 PM 5/17/2005

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 2.2 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Nope, just the same intense motor that came in third behind every mainstream manufactures bike from 600CC up to 1k for 2k4. It was behind only the GSXR-750 and ZX10R in lap times. That means that it was AHEAD of the the '04 R1, '04 CBR1000RR, '04 Gixxer 1k, and every 600 SS bike and VTwin superbike (minus the RC51 which was not tested) by about .5 - 1 second on the track. With something like 15 different riders. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Were the times listed the BEST TIMES posted, overall? Or are they all from one rider? I doubt that one rider posted the best times for all the bikes tested. I'd like to see what time each rider was able to get for each bike. That would be a better indicator of the bike's performance for each person. And haven't you heard? RC51s pwn.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Reckless636 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">What is your definition of barely? When you're talking about 1/4 times that are in the 10's, even a .05 difference is huge. We're not talking about cars here.

Secondly, you can't simply base speed on 1/4 times anyway. The powerband on the 636 is very broad and unlike the R6 which I used to own, this thing actually has low end torque. That comes in handy when you're comming hard out of a turn.

Yes comming from a kawi owner this probably doesn't mean much but I'm only speaking facts here. </TD></TR></TABLE>
I used quarter mile times as a basis because it's something that can be easily measured and most variables (such as different riders, conditons, etc) can be ruled out.

If you need torque for coming hard out of a turn, that means you didn't set up for the turn correctly. Low end torque is great for masking mistakes.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by marmaladeboy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I used quarter mile times as a basis because it's something that can be easily measured and most variables (such as different riders, conditons, etc) can be ruled out.

If you need torque for coming hard out of a turn, that means you didn't set up for the turn correctly. Low end torque is great for masking mistakes.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Right but quarter mile times are also based off of a rider taking it down the strip not some static number that is consistant every time you run.

And if the low end torque of the 636 motor can help "mask mistakes" as you say then I don't see anything wrong with that. Wouldn't you normally want a bike that helps you ride better since not everyone can set up the perfect turn?
Not sure how a persons riding ability even has anything to do with what were talking about either way

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by marmaladeboy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Were the times listed the BEST TIMES posted, overall? Or are they all from one rider? I doubt that one rider posted the best times for all the bikes tested. I'd like to see what time each rider was able to get for each bike. That would be a better indicator of the bike's performance for each person. And haven't you heard? RC51s pwn.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

If I recall, it has bee a while, they posted the average times for each bike, then they posted the best times for each bike, no matter what rider it came from. I think what you see there are the best times from each bike, not dependant on the rider. The averages showed very similar placings.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Reckless636 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Right but quarter mile times are also based off of a rider taking it down the strip not some static number that is consistant every time you run. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Quarter mile times are easier to keep consistent than track times. True, it is not the only measure of the bike's performance, but it is one that is widely known and most people can relate to it.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Reckless636 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">And if the low end torque of the 636 motor can help "mask mistakes" as you say then I don't see anything wrong with that. Wouldn't you normally want a bike that helps you ride better since not everyone can set up the perfect turn?
Not sure how a persons riding ability even has anything to do with what were talking about either way </TD></TR></TABLE>
Yes, masking mistakes is better than having the bike throw you off. But if the rider doesn't realize that they executed a turn incorrectly, then they won't progress in skill. They will become the typical n00b squid with a literbike, who turns it on in the straights but walks the bike when the road gets windy.

SiR, sorry for whoring your thread. I'll shut up now.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by marmaladeboy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Yes, masking mistakes is better than having the bike throw you off. But if the rider doesn't realize that they executed a turn incorrectly, then they won't progress in skill. They will become the typical n00b squid with a literbike, who turns it on in the straights but walks the bike when the road gets windy.

SiR, sorry for whoring your thread. I'll shut up now.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Some of us do like to take easy rides now and again you know. Even in the turns. It is nice to have some low end and midrange when you are just trying to ride a decent pace in the canyons or are stuck behind traffic.

None of us ride a race track to get home...as god damned sweet as that would be, mmmmmmm.