Yamaha R3 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 47 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited by Moderator)


Here we go,

At the Toronto Motorcycle Show I had my first encounter with the three bikes on my list, the KTM RC390, the Honda CBR300R and the Yamaha R3. I've joined all three forums to help hash out the pros and cons here. All three bikes certainly carry advantages over one another.

Starting at ergonomics, I'm a little guy at 5'8, 140 pounds soaking, so seating position is paramount to me.






RC is the raciest, CBR300 is the comfiest and R3 seems to be a compromise between the two. Its not just ergonomics that the R3 seems the go between both bikes. Price and power are also two factors where the Yamaha does an excellent job of balancing.

My problem with the R3 is that when touching feet to the ground, the R3 is higher up in the rear section (noted similarities between the R1 and R6), as I mentioned I am a smaller guy and really didn't find the stopped position to be comfortable one bit.

Overall I do like the R3, and it would be my top choice if not for the absolutely perfect fit I had with the RC390. Unfortunately the RC looks like it will be priced in the $6000 range. The rep also did mention that in the event of a drop the R3 will be much cheaper to repair then the KTM.

The Honda isn't bad, but I'm on a CBR125 now and the ergonomics feel more like a standard then a sport bike, I'm looking to get away from that.

Will be keeping tabs, a decision won't be made until the end of the season regardless...

If you're interested I'm also on the CBR and KTM sites as well
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
I own a CB300F which is even comfier than any of those bikes and lighter at 348 lbs. wet. Not everyone likes the naked look, the single cylinder, or the upright riding position though and it is the slowest of the lot, even though it will go 87 mph. The RC390 seat is too tall for me. I'm just under 5'7". There is a YouTube video that says the brakes on the RC aren't that great and the bike came out of gear, so that's perhaps a negative. I've owned Ninja 300s, so I have eliminated everything but the r3 for my next bike....provided the first rider reports are positive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts
Go R3. like you said its right in between the two. plus the KTM doesnt seem like it will have a palce for a passenger in the back. The CBR is just to cheap as far it goes for quality. R3 should be you choice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
Please explain a little more about how the R3 rear is higher up. Do you mean it is farther to the ground when you put your feet down, or that you are pushed forward in the seat which puts strain on your back?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts
Please explain a little more about how the R3 rear is higher up. Do you mean it is farther to the ground when you put your feet down, or that you are pushed forward in the seat which puts strain on your back?
I personally at on a R3 and it felt very comfortable. Yes it is a bigger size back than the ninja and cbr but im 5 11 and both my feet were flat on the ground. your behind is a little pushed forward mora than the ninja and 300 for sure but felt pretty cool once i put both feet on the brake and cluth. depends on your style too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
The seat ht. is supposed to be a very low 30.7 inches, same as the CB300f, so someone 5'5" should be able to flat foot the bike and people as short at 5'3" would be ok (safe) with the seat ht. I'm just under 5'7" actual barefoot ht. and I can flat foot my FZ07 at 31.7 inches, but just barely. I can't quite flat foot a Gixxer at 31.9 inches but it's still fine. Some of that has to do with bike width, seat design and suspension, and leg length. This bike should appeal to a lot of shorter riders. I notice in Nubian's photo the bike seemed to be up in the air a bit with the rear support, so that would cause the seat to slant forward and feel higher too. I hope the seat isn't slanted forward. That would cause back problems after a few miles plus put your panties in a bunch as you slide forward. I owned a Grom that did that. Worst seat ever, plus hard as a rock on top of being slanted.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
391 Posts
i actually think yamaha created the narrative that RC390 is unreliable to crash... which is funny because what bike is 'crashable' LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
I was interested in the RC390 at first, but with the race track orientation and tall seat at 32.3 inches, plus no local dealer, I won't be buying one. The only YouTube video I've seen of it is where a couple of people compared it to the Ninja 300 at the race track. I think they came away liking the looks of it, but not the engine or brakes so much, plus they talked about it slipping out of gear. It was a disappointing review for the RC390 and confirmation that the Ninja 300 is a fantastic bike, but I already knew that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Please explain a little more about how the R3 rear is higher up. Do you mean it is farther to the ground when you put your feet down, or that you are pushed forward in the seat which puts strain on your back?
the rear section feels higher up then the other two. Its not so much being farther to the ground as how I was reaching the ground, which may of been a function of the twin R3 vs the single CBR/KTM. I didn't find the strain in my back, but in my hips when feet up on the pegs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
Good info. About what you would expect. I would like to see the zero to sixty times too. The little Honda 300 might be as fast as the Ninja and R3, and the CB300F might even be the best of the bikes for city riding.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
For city riding, I prefer a Honda Rebel. Geared right gets you 80-90mpg, and seating position is very comfy.

In fact, for city riding below 45mph, a 150cc bike, like the Sym Wolf Classic is a very nice bike.
For interstate rides, the R3 got what it needs, barely. It's ~40cc more than the Honda 300 engines give it that advantage.
Where Honda's 300 and 250cc bikes need wide open throttle most of the time to keep up with interstate speeds, the R3 has that buffer.
Even Honda's CB500x and CB500F only do 110-115mph tops, but they get a lot better gas mileage!

I've tried some 250-300cc bikes on the interstates here, and believe the R3 is the smallest bike that won't break a sweat at interstate speeds (85mph), although I'm probably not too fond of the almost 10k rpm it's revving at (My GS500 does half the rpm at those speeds)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Good info. About what you would expect. I would like to see the zero to sixty times too. The little Honda 300 might be as fast as the Ninja and R3, and the CB300F might even be the best of the bikes for city riding.
You're right the F probably is the best for city riding, the upright position probably makes it more like super moto then sport bike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
There is one other bike in the mix...the Z300. Unfortunately it is not available this year in the US or Canada, but the reviews look good. Maybe next year. One review said the seat was not as comfy as the CB300F and the riding position was not quite as upright, but more upright than the Ninja 300. I really like the looks of the Z300. This entire class of bikes is fantastic. I'm too short for the RC390, but any of the others would work out very well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
I've sat on the CB500X, which has higher suspension than the CB500F, but didn't like the tank fairings, which bumped on my knee.
It's a bike for sub 6" people with a sub 34" inseam.
Taller people have the edges of the fuel tank bumping on the inside of the knee.


I am not sure, but thought from seeing the CB300F that it was about the same size as the CB500F.


The CB300X would be taller.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
While the CB500 is not heavy as bikes go, it is too heavy for me at 420 lbs (curb weight). All the other bikes mentioned are considerably lighter with the CB300F at only 348 lbs. (curb weight). Moving heavier bikes around my garage is the main issue. Talk about light bikes, I did own a Grom. Now that is a fantastic little bike and you can move it like a bicycle. Only problem is that top speed is about 64 mph and it slows down to sub 60 mph with a headwind or elevation. Great little bike for around town though and very easy to maintain including adjusting valves since it has the old style tappet valves and there is nothing to remove to get to them except the valve covers. 2 valves is all it has. Seat is hard as a rock though. I think it might be the best learner bike out there. Unforgiving, that's for sure. 225 lbs curb weight and 110 mpg. About $3600 out the door price here in Texas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
There is one other bike in the mix...the Z300. Unfortunately it is not available this year in the US or Canada, but the reviews look good. Maybe next year. One review said the seat was not as comfy as the CB300F and the riding position was not quite as upright, but more upright than the Ninja 300. I really like the looks of the Z300. This entire class of bikes is fantastic. I'm too short for the RC390, but any of the others would work out very well.
have you shopped the duke390 as well?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
I haven't, but only because there are no dealers anywhere close to me. Same engine as the RC390. It's a very good-looking bike though and if I had a local dealer, I would probably own one. I've always liked trellis frames.
 
1 - 20 of 47 Posts
Top