Saw this at the bike shop today, had a sit on it and honestly Honda has nailed the "upright sports bike" style in my opinion (looks/ergonomics). The bike looks great and is comfortable to sit on. Something I'd test ride when it comes to upgrading.
that color is seriously cool.. nice review guys. could you please do a comparison between ninja 650 and this one... cause they both are nice machines, please please review them...
Im 19 debating on even getting a motorcycle. i want the 2015 honda cbr650f. Im just gettign sick of the used car buisness, you get a car, it starts breaking down and its expensive as hell to buy all those new parts and install them. motorcycles, they look fantastic, great gas mileage, insurance (full coverage on motorcycle) will run me only 350 a year, vs 125 (liability) a month for a p.o.s used car ( it must be owned i cant afford full coverage and a car payment for a new or used car). basically financing a car period is out of the question. I can deal with 250 a month for a bike payment and 30 full coverage. but it is however more dangerous, and i understand that, its..sacrificing safety for more money, good looks, better gas milege, and it will last a long time (if its taken care of, and i dont get hit) It would be for school, work and back. a daily commute that will be on the highway 75% of the time. so..can i hear peoples opinions.
yep, 353 a month for this bike, i meant it was 300 a year full coverage on a 2002 honda rebel 250. so uh...yeah. this bike is out of the question unless i own it. if i owned it i would get liability, which would run me 54 a month with progressive....but i dont have 8500 cash.
TheLoneRune Sort of in the same boat as you, know where you are coming from. I have a reliable vehicle but its a truck and only gets 15 MPG, and have an hour and a half commute so tank is always empty.
Good to see Honda come out with a bike comparable to the Ninja 650. I'm looking for a bike and was leaning toward the Ninja 650 because Honda didn't have anything in that range.
I really hate these types of "video" reviews. All the camera time is split between staring at the reviewer's mouth or watching from the sidelines as the bike sweeps through a corner. In the end, the audio and visual elements of the video are wasted on just adding some fun pictures to a brief summary of a written article. Seriously, I feel like a lot of vloggers - yes, VLOGGERS - do a better job than the professional journalists on providing a feel for what it's like to ride the bike in question. An important part of that is having onboard footage from the riders perspective in a range of conditions (not just sideline footage with tons of shitty music to drown out the sound). They actually, you know, take advantage of the medium (i.e. video) instead of just adding it as a distraction between scripted discussions by the presenters. I love seeing a helmet POV of a 0-60 stoplight run - seeing the ground accelerate underneath you, the dash rise and fall as you shift, and hearing the sound of the engine race through it's rev range. I enjoy that waaaay more than a closeup of the speedometer in the middle of a corner with a heavy handed application of royalty free techno music. I mean, is it really THAT hard to see which gives the viewer a better feeling for what it's like to actually ride the bike? And all of the major journalists seem to be guilty of this. They have video reviews, but all the actual content is spoken and the video only exists as a useless montage to string together their talking points and adds nothing to the viewer experience. There is really no information in this video you couldn't get from a written article. It wastes all the possibilities sight and sound offer. In the end, these are "video reviews" in the same way 6 hours of a person reading a book on camera is a "movie."
I literally, by pure reflexes, took my mouse to the like button 3 times while reading your comment, because it is so on point and hits the nail on its head. I know it's been a year, but many "professional" journalists still seem to suffer from this problem, that in the end, they don't really care what the viewers want. They just care about the views and getting the basic job done - and nothing more than that. It barely ticks the parameters of what a review consists of. Barely. To be honest, I only enjoyed this vid slightly, because the bike is nice. That's it. I couldn't give two fucks about the forgettable people in it, talking about some forgettable crap that literally every other written/spoken review covers.
How tall are the presenters? At 6.3" I always have difficulty finding a 600ish bike that doesn't make me look like a giant. I wish reviewers would talk more about ergonomics rather than push it through a racetrack and that's it.
Honda gelded the 650 for the sakes of making it a2 compliant for the Eussr nanny state. The older 600 has more power straight out of the pen. I'll take the older bike over this modern tosh thankyou.
The ninja 650 is a 2 cylinder whearas the cbr is a 4 cylinder...sounds much better. the cbr also has a 180 rear tire where the ninja has a 160. cosmetically...i think the cbr is much more appealing to look at and has slightly lower handlebars.
Having a thinner rear tire does aid in quicker turn-in, it's not necessarily a downside. Nor is a parallel twin of comparable displacement. Not to mention the 1500 USD premium of the Honda. What are you looking for in a mid-displacement sporty bike?
Engineers in their 20s? Aren't those guys still inexperienced? Engineering is one of the toughest fields out there.Designing and working motorcycles you probably need the most experienced engineers.
Quite a pointless review. I wanted to see and hear the startup of the bike and getting going with it, like one would on a normal day riding out. None of that is in here.
+Blake Garvey I have a 2007 Kawasaki 650R, first generation. The 650R does buzz around 4,000 rpm--no getting around that. My 2007 650R is a bit quicker from 0-60 than the Honda CBR650F. Top end is probably a tie, around 145 mph. There's no way I would spend all that money for that CBR650F when mine's way better: cheaper to buy used, better on fuel, more torque as it's a twin etc.,
I thought that too. Then realised that both meters were cracked in exactly the same pattern... It's the reflection of the windshield, they're not cracked at all lol.
Guys, music over the engine noise? You should know better.
Saw this at the bike shop today, had a sit on it and honestly Honda has nailed the "upright sports bike" style in my opinion (looks/ergonomics). The bike looks great and is comfortable to sit on. Something I'd test ride when it comes to upgrading.
It'd be nice of you to include a clip with engine noise other than the 1.5 seconds when you stop after each test to talk about it.
that color is seriously cool.. nice review guys. could you please do a comparison between ninja 650 and this one... cause they both are nice machines, please please review them...
Im 19 debating on even getting a motorcycle. i want the 2015 honda cbr650f. Im just gettign sick of the used car buisness, you get a car, it starts breaking down and its expensive as hell to buy all those new parts and install them. motorcycles, they look fantastic, great gas mileage, insurance (full coverage on motorcycle) will run me only 350 a year, vs 125 (liability) a month for a p.o.s used car ( it must be owned i cant afford full coverage and a car payment for a new or used car). basically financing a car period is out of the question. I can deal with 250 a month for a bike payment and 30 full coverage. but it is however more dangerous, and i understand that, its..sacrificing safety for more money, good looks, better gas milege, and it will last a long time (if its taken care of, and i dont get hit) It would be for school, work and back. a daily commute that will be on the highway 75% of the time. so..can i hear peoples opinions.
If you're 19, no way you're getting full coverage insurance for $350 a year on a sportbike. Maybe $350 a month. You need to re-check those numbers
yep, 353 a month for this bike, i meant it was 300 a year full coverage on a 2002 honda rebel 250. so uh...yeah. this bike is out of the question unless i own it. if i owned it i would get liability, which would run me 54 a month with progressive....but i dont have 8500 cash.
TheLoneRune Sort of in the same boat as you, know where you are coming from. I have a reliable vehicle but its a truck and only gets 15 MPG, and have an hour and a half commute so tank is always empty.
Nice review guys :) what's the song used at 1:47?
Good to see Honda come out with a bike comparable to the Ninja 650. I'm looking for a bike and was leaning toward the Ninja 650 because Honda didn't have anything in that range.
Well now they do XD 4 cylinder vs 2 the 4 is way better sorry. XD
Engine pushed forward for otimal weight distribution just means its difficult to get its fron wheel up :/ Great bike though, I love mine
macklemore?
I really hate these types of "video" reviews. All the camera time is split between staring at the reviewer's mouth or watching from the sidelines as the bike sweeps through a corner. In the end, the audio and visual elements of the video are wasted on just adding some fun pictures to a brief summary of a written article.
Seriously, I feel like a lot of vloggers - yes, VLOGGERS - do a better job than the professional journalists on providing a feel for what it's like to ride the bike in question. An important part of that is having onboard footage from the riders perspective in a range of conditions (not just sideline footage with tons of shitty music to drown out the sound). They actually, you know, take advantage of the medium (i.e. video) instead of just adding it as a distraction between scripted discussions by the presenters.
I love seeing a helmet POV of a 0-60 stoplight run - seeing the ground accelerate underneath you, the dash rise and fall as you shift, and hearing the sound of the engine race through it's rev range. I enjoy that waaaay more than a closeup of the speedometer in the middle of a corner with a heavy handed application of royalty free techno music.
I mean, is it really THAT hard to see which gives the viewer a better feeling for what it's like to actually ride the bike? And all of the major journalists seem to be guilty of this. They have video reviews, but all the actual content is spoken and the video only exists as a useless montage to string together their talking points and adds nothing to the viewer experience.
There is really no information in this video you couldn't get from a written article. It wastes all the possibilities sight and sound offer. In the end, these are "video reviews" in the same way 6 hours of a person reading a book on camera is a "movie."
+Sir Mutton Chops You sir deserve a medal because this is the best comment I have ever read.
I literally, by pure reflexes, took my mouse to the like button 3 times while reading your comment, because it is so on point and hits the nail on its head. I know it's been a year, but many "professional" journalists still seem to suffer from this problem, that in the end, they don't really care what the viewers want. They just care about the views and getting the basic job done - and nothing more than that. It barely ticks the parameters of what a review consists of. Barely. To be honest, I only enjoyed this vid slightly, because the bike is nice. That's it. I couldn't give two fucks about the forgettable people in it, talking about some forgettable crap that literally every other written/spoken review covers.
How do you think the 2016 LAMs version of this bike would be?
How tall are the presenters? At 6.3" I always have difficulty finding a 600ish bike that doesn't make me look like a giant. I wish reviewers would talk more about ergonomics rather than push it through a racetrack and that's it.
THAT COLOR.... Want it in US
buy it in canada
its sword silver I have a cb650f in this color
conrad0102 no fucking why. Some stupid pussy in US always bring red honda bikes
Anyone know the song at 2:12?
Darudestorm
Thank you Richard.
Anytime mate!
Less music more listening to the ride
Can't there be one video where the sound of bike is not replaced by this fckin porn/mario soundtrack?
My dad has one
Honda gelded the 650 for the sakes of making it a2 compliant for the Eussr nanny state.
The older 600 has more power straight out of the pen. I'll take the older bike over this modern tosh thankyou.
How would ninja 650 fare against it?
The ninja 650 is a 2 cylinder whearas the cbr is a 4 cylinder...sounds much better. the cbr also has a 180 rear tire where the ninja has a 160. cosmetically...i think the cbr is much more appealing to look at and has slightly lower handlebars.
Having a thinner rear tire does aid in quicker turn-in, it's not necessarily a downside. Nor is a parallel twin of comparable displacement. Not to mention the 1500 USD premium of the Honda. What are you looking for in a mid-displacement sporty bike?
I don't understand who would buy that bike which is more expensive than a brand new ZX6R? (in Canada at least)
The zx6r is 12,500 plus tax this is 9000 get your numbers right...
kiddeath921
Hey kid....Let me repeat.....In Canada, you can get a brand new 2014 zx6r between 8000 and 9000$.....(abs or no abs) plus taxes.
mon nom
BULL !!!
mon nom
BULL !!!
That is the colour that should be available in the US instead of that crap blue.
Engineers in their 20s? Aren't those guys still inexperienced? Engineering is one of the toughest fields out there.Designing and working motorcycles you probably need the most experienced engineers.
Japanese engineers. Almost all Japanese companies hire young graduates and train them like this as a hands-on approach.
Bro Science how do you think experienced engineers come? They start when they are young.
Quite a pointless review. I wanted to see and hear the startup of the bike and getting going with it, like one would on a normal day riding out. None of that is in here.
i think the ninja 650 would be better than this heard that the motor on this thing is to vibraty.
+Blake Garvey I have a 2007 Kawasaki 650R, first generation. The 650R does
buzz around 4,000 rpm--no getting around that. My 2007 650R is a bit quicker from 0-60 than the Honda CBR650F. Top end is probably a tie, around 145 mph.
There's no way I would spend all that money for that CBR650F when mine's
way better: cheaper to buy used, better on fuel, more torque as it's a twin etc.,
Like ninja 250 mono in indonesia
cockpit looks ugly as hell. srsly needs an upgrade
ya it sucks looks cheap
i like it it gives you a star wars look in my opinion you need to see it in person i already did.
kiddeath921 I don't think you've ever seen Star Wars... that's just a regular cockpit.
thinkpol Hey i didn't say it looked like starwars ship it reminded me of one geez
kiddeath921 "It gives you a star wars look..." um....
LOVED THE BIKE BUT THE ODOMETER SUCKS LOOKS CHEAP
that's your opinion other people think it looks nice and i'm one of them.
Cracked Meter shield =(
how did that happened?
+aatechca haha, no idea. last time there is a recall for that
I thought that too. Then realised that both meters were cracked in exactly the same pattern... It's the reflection of the windshield, they're not cracked at all lol.
John pinet
this is just a commercial.
My 14 years old f4i much more better than this...
Is this an advertisement of two loverboys or a motorcycle review? You can't even see the 650f. What a waste of TH-cam space
wow... blow honda much>?
Speedo kills the bike tbh 👎
Can this bike be good for a fatty bald 54 year old 😅
Your music is Gay for cycles please eliminate