Anyone with a kawi versys x300? | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Anyone with a kawi versys x300?

Here's the problem with the Versys-X 300 for me:

http://www.fuelly.com/motorcycle/kawasaki/versys-x_300

It's got great top-end performance that is obviously coming from a big cam. That means poor fuel mileage and poor low RPM performance as dynamic compression suffers for good high RPM horsepower. You're better off getting a 500cc bike with a smaller cam and better low-end torque. It's more efficient. Like the old saying goes, "there's no replacement for displacement". I prefer Honda's single in the CRF Rally that gives better low-end torque with less top-end. The benefits in fuel mileage are about 20% over the Versys 300. Suffice to say however, that the Versys-X is a very practically styled bike for an everyday commuter who wants weekend fun camping off dirt roads way up north. But the fuel mileage trade-off is not for me.

If you wring the rally's neck (redline 10,500) the lack of top end isn't an issue,but fuel mileage suffers.Riding wfo gives me about 75mpg.Riding it like a 65 year old gives me 95mpg easily.When i bought it ,i was really dissapointed with the lack of comfort.But putting the corbin on has made it as tourable as anything i have ever owned...almost.Not worried about riding it all day at 7,000 rpm,it's a Honda.
 
It's got great top-end performance that is obviously coming from a big cam. That means poor fuel mileage and poor low RPM performance as dynamic compression suffers for good high RPM horsepower. You're better off getting a 500cc bike with a smaller cam and better low-end torque. It's more efficient. Like the old saying goes, "there's no replacement for displacement". I prefer Honda's single in the CRF Rally that gives better low-end torque with less top-end. The benefits in fuel mileage are about 20% over the Versys 300. Suffice to say however, that the Versys-X is a very practically styled bike for an ev

excellent summary ...and since fuel mileage and tank range plus lighter weight were primary reasons I switched out of the CBf1000, I'm very content with my trade offs.
Off pavement was of no consideration but being able to put on a set of Mitas 07 and be comfortable on dirt roads and light dual track is a nice option.

There is a potential for me to bring the bike to Australia when I move here about 5 years out.

Over all I'm just glad we are seeing a range of lightweight, relatively low cost models with excellent feature sets.....sure is depressing the mid range of the used bike market.

Just came across this from several riders....that's quite acceptable and similar to the DL650

 
Last edited:
All the CB 500 family have slipper clutch as of 2016! Do not forget the CB500FA. Another good platform for vertically challenged riders.
 
It's too bad we don't have the 250 Vstrom to add to the discussion

2017-suzuki-dl250-v-strom-dl250al8_bje_diagonal-cmyk.jpg


https://www.cycleworld.com/2017-suzuki-dl250-v-strom-is-their-entry-level-adv-contender
 
Here's the problem with the Versys-X 300 for me:

http://www.fuelly.com/motorcycle/kawasaki/versys-x_300

It's got great top-end performance that is obviously coming from a big cam. That means poor fuel mileage and poor low RPM performance as dynamic compression suffers for good high RPM horsepower. ...
It's not the cam, it's the oversquare design made by a very short stroke 49mm. Oversquare engines rev make power over a wider band, however that band extends at the top so they are always running faster. Torque can suffer a bit, as can mileage if you're wringing gobs of HP from a motor, but these motors aren't race setups, they are designed to run all day at those speeds, they eek our a few extra ponies at the expense of some efficiency.

Mileage can be a consideration however these are all efficient rides, the difference between 3.8 (honda 500) and 4.1(kawi) equals $400 over 100,000km. Considering the initial cost difference of 1000-1500, you'd need to go a long way to overcome the price difference with fuel efficiency.

I don't think you can compare the Honda Rally with these 2 -- if you plan to hit the open road, the Rally is out. I can't see myself running the 401 WOT hunkered in a crouch to hit 120.
 
It's not the cam, it's the oversquare design made by a very short stroke 49mm. Oversquare engines rev make power over a wider band, however that band extends at the top so they are always running faster. Torque can suffer a bit, as can mileage if you're wringing gobs of HP from a motor, but these motors aren't race setups, they are designed to run all day at those speeds, they eek our a few extra ponies at the expense of some efficiency.

Mileage can be a consideration however these are all efficient rides, the difference between 3.8 (honda 500) and 4.1(kawi) equals $400 over 100,000km. Considering the initial cost difference of 1000-1500, you'd need to go a long way to overcome the price difference with fuel efficiency.

I don't think you can compare the Honda Rally with these 2 -- if you plan to hit the open road, the Rally is out. I can't see myself running the 401 WOT hunkered in a crouch to hit 120.

You are probably right about the rally.To be honest i haven't tried.I'll get out this week and see what extended 120 is like.Probably not very nice with the 21" up front.i think it will top out at about 130.But that's ok,not what i bought it for.
 
Considering the initial cost difference of 1000-1500, you'd need to go a long way to overcome the price difference with fuel efficiency.

Where are you getting that cost difference??? It's $400.
 
Where are you getting that cost difference??? It's $400.

Mac, I appreciate your contributions to the forum.

A small request: when quoting another post, could you please use the "reply with quote" button? This way the quote is attributed to the individual who wrote it and saves the rest of us time having to go back to find the original quote.

Thanks!

1r7v9w.jpg
 
It's not the cam, it's the oversquare design made by a very short stroke 49mm. Oversquare engines rev make power over a wider band, however that band extends at the top so they are always running faster. Torque can suffer a bit, as can mileage if you're wringing gobs of HP from a motor, but these motors aren't race setups, they are designed to run all day at those speeds, they eek our a few extra ponies at the expense of some efficiency.

Mileage can be a consideration however these are all efficient rides, the difference between 3.8 (honda 500) and 4.1(kawi) equals $400 over 100,000km. Considering the initial cost difference of 1000-1500, you'd need to go a long way to overcome the price difference with fuel efficiency.

I don't think you can compare the Honda Rally with these 2 -- if you plan to hit the open road, the Rally is out. I can't see myself running the 401 WOT hunkered in a crouch to hit 120.

Certainly I agree that a shorter stroking engine is going to use a bit more fuel, but the Versys 300 at 63x49 isn't oversquare enough to justify the horrible 50mpg figures. The tattle tale is the top speed - 170kmh - stock. Probably get another 15-20km with 0W-30, exhaust and intake. That's a little more than borexstroke ratio IMO. It's a classic Kawasaki. They're a performance brand. You could run the thing all day buzzing along at 120, but as I said, I would just go a little bigger, get the same MPG and have both the hill-climbing torque and top end. Purely for efficiency, I still like the Honda engine better.
 
Jayell I don't quote entire posts for a snip and it's a reply to the post immediately above and directed to that poster. If you have a request like that...PM is best.
 
Last edited:
Where are you getting that cost difference??? It's $400.
I used the best possible prices I could find 'all in' at the Vendor site, Kijiji, and Autotrader. I've purchased a few vehicles, I've never seen much budging on new vehicles when they are listed on Kijiji / Autotrader.

CB500F: 2018 - 7400+$400 for panniers+$1014HST = $8814
VersysX: 2018 - 6500+panners included +844HST=$7344

CB500F: 2018 - 6500+$400 for panniers+$897HST = $7797
VersysX: 2018 - 5850+panniers included +760HST=$6610

I added the cost of panniers because they are included with the Kawi. I figured $400 ought to get some resaonable soft bags or some cheap hard ones.
 
Certainly I agree that a shorter stroking engine is going to use a bit more fuel, but the Versys 300 at 63x49 isn't oversquare enough to justify the horrible 50mpg figures. The tattle tale is the top speed - 170kmh - stock. Probably get another 15-20km with 0W-30, exhaust and intake. That's a little more than borexstroke ratio IMO. It's a classic Kawasaki. They're a performance brand. You could run the thing all day buzzing along at 120, but as I said, I would just go a little bigger, get the same MPG and have both the hill-climbing torque and top end. Purely for efficiency, I still like the Honda engine better.
I think you're a little off with the 50MPG, these bikes average 65MPG. I rode a little Ninja for years, got up to 75mpg running at 80, dropped to 50 when running hard at 150.

As for hill climbing torque -- that would be nice to have along with 150KMH HP, unfortunately with theses little mills you can't get it all. I think I'd kill myself if a Smart car passed me on my way home from a hill climb.
 
I have a drz for shorter off road trips. I'd be using it for touring and cross country trips
 
I think you're a little off with the 50MPG, these bikes average 65MPG. I rode a little Ninja for years, got up to 75mpg running at 80, dropped to 50 when running hard at 150.

Nope. Everyone I have talked to is getting around 50mpg (US). Mag reviews are reporting that and if you look at the fuelly.com link I posted it's about the average for the bike. Thing sucks fuel for a little 300. You might get the odd math flunkie who thinks he's getting 65mpg, but the facts are well known in the real world. Fast for a 300 though. See if you can chase down the cam specs on it vs the Ninja. Probably the same. Fuel mileage is the same also:

http://www.fuelly.com/motorcycle/kawasaki/ninja_300
 
Last edited:
54.9 over 31,336 miles 9 bikes

http://www.fuelly.com/motorcycle/kawasaki/versys-x_300

Talking to an owner on StromTrooper he can optimise his mileage at 45 mph.

The Ninja at least is pretty slippery so might do a bit better.
I think you have the US MPG... Comparing apple to apples Imperial measure is 66 MPG (4.3l/100) vs 75mpg (3.8l/100km) for the CB500x.

Again, both of these sample sizes are quite small. Also consider the bike usage, I'm guessing (only guessing) the ratio of hwy:adv courses will be different as these bikes are not serving exactly the same market. The only way to compare fuel usage is head to head -- have 2 riders run a few tanks on the same circuits side by side.

Even so, at the Fuelly recorded .5l/100km difference, you would need to ride more than 200000km on the CB to overcome the initial cost difference at today's gas prices.
 
Ummm who the hell uses British gallons. - Range and cost fuel is only one aspect.

http://www.fuelly.com/motorcycle/honda/cb500x 70 for the 2017

2017 Honda CB500X MPG
Based on data from 3 vehicles, 37 fuel-ups and 7,269 miles of driving, the 2017 Honda CB500X gets a combined Avg MPG of 70.03 with a 3.27 MPG margin of error.

2017 Kawasaki Versys-X 300 MPG
Based on data from 9 vehicles, 179 fuel-ups and 31,336 miles of driving, the 2017 Kawasaki Versys-X 300 gets a combined Avg MPG of 54.83 with a 1.46 MPG margin of error.

http://www.fuelly.com/motorcycle/kawasaki/versys-x_300 55 for the Versys

There is only $700 difference ...you are not winning this argument :D

There is no way I'm touring at 8000 RPM for 106 kph..

Just bought a Madstat screen and bracket set for it. Just need the top case mount now. Hopefully get a couple tours to the US when I get back.
 
Yeah, the CB500x is definitely the winner here. You will make the cash back, plus you get so many more benefits like a much better torque band, less handlebar buzz, overall smoothness. Bike will be a bit heavier off road, but nothing that can't be handled with experience.
 
Ummm who the hell uses British gallons.
Canada, we have never used US gallons as a measure for consumer trade. Anyhow the measure doesn't matter, it's the differential in effieciency, that would be measured as a percentage. 3 bikes and 9 bikes don't make a statistical sample for comparison, wait till you have a sample of 50 to 100. In the Honda case, there is no noted change in the the engines or tune from year to year on the CB500x, so the 1.1 million mile sample that yeilds 62.3MPG (US) would be more representative than the 3 bikes you chose for the 70mpg sample -- they only logged a combined 7000 miles, many of those would be lighter break-in miles. [/quote]
There is only $700 difference ...you are not winning this argument :D
You'll have to prove the math shown above as incorrect - out the door the CB500 is $8800 (with budget panniers), VersysX $7300 - my math puts that at a difference of $1500 (probably more because you can't get hard bags and racks for $400). I think if you want to compare bikes, they need to have the same kit -- Versys comes with $$$$ worth of stuff that's bundled in the price -- you don't get these with the CB. If these were senseless options, I'd agree with you on the price... I'll bet you'll be buying one or all of these options for your new wheels and don't forget the taxman -- bigger sticker+options means more tax for the man!
 

Back
Top Bottom