I have one of these but it is the last -R version ('1995' is the stated year of manufacture but chassis number tells which version). Upgraded suspension as the only difference I am aware of, and I have also had '1988' Tri-arm NC23-J and two CB-1s (detuned and naked).
With bikes of this age the recorded mileage is unreliable and there is bound to be a wide variation of condition and riding experience. It is probably for this reason that I would still disagree with the first point made in the review. The second just seems wrong.
1. The brakes should have plenty of power and feel, fully in keeping with the sporting character of the bike.
2. The reasons given for the double bubble screen 'upgrade' are unconvincing. The latest 900cc fireblade is actually quite a bit smaller and I have not seen it suggested that it might be too tight for anyone over 5'10". The riding position (for 5'10 1/2" in my case) of the various CBR400RRs is magic. In the natural stance your head is already in relatively calm air above the turbulence created by the screen and sitting up or crouching down are not required. I haven't tried it but I guess the double bubble would just tend to remove this advantage.
There is room to move around but you don't need to, the seat is very comfy and there is something about the crouch which takes the strain off your wrists - I guess your knees being flexed more than normal is what supports the trunk.
For comparison the un-faired CB-1 with more upright riding position becomes uncomfortable above 60 or 70, while CB400RRs would let you cruise at 90-100, if it were legal. Don't bother with changing the screen!
Posted: 03/08/2011 at 18:15
