2014 Kawasaki Ninja 300 ABS SE

Forum Sponsor
S1L3NC3R said:
Not quite, maybe do some research on kawi and the 2013 lineup.

The 2014 production for Kawi bikes was moved to Japan due to quality control issues (eg. faring gaps, ECU problems, rough set ups, just ****** work in general.) This includes the 636 and a few other bikes as well. I would also advise buying used as its a far better value, but if you can find a used 2014 go for that it will save you a headache replacing fasteners and all that junk later on just to make the bike fit like its supposed to (unless you can find one with a warranty). If they were willing to suck up the cost of moving production to another country to improve quality that really says something about the 2013's. Not saying they are all bad or the 2014's are perfect but there was a reason behind the move. Just something to think about!
Click to expand...


Perhaps I should have added "almost" before identical, but pretty much every thing you just said was covered by me and others earlier.
Boots said:
Not to mention the 2014 model is identicle to the 2013 minus the possible ecu swap from when the 2013s suddenly shut off. But most kawi dealerships deal with this for free anyways

Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Boots said:
Damn dude that sucks tell him to go on the kawi forums and show the kawi dealership that its a recurring problem.

Another issue that was not fixed with the 2013 models since the 14s was the rust on the exhaust due to the material of the exhaust which contains a lot of iron. Another issue which I do not know was fixed was the fairing gap on the 13s.

if he has any of these issues see if the dealership would do anything about it.

Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Look at a picture of a 2013 and 2014 side by side along with the specs and you'll see a similar bike in regards of aesthetics, maybe a different paint job/decal -- and a mirror image in regards of specs. As someone mentioned before in this thread, the bikes main common issues (fairing gaps, ECUS etc) can be fixed by the dealership before it leaves the door as DECIMIS stated. If that saves 400 bucks off the MSRP (assuming OP is buying new) then I wouldn't call that a hassle at all, I'd call it a bargain.


2013 Pic: http://www.asphaltandrubber.com/wp-...saki-ninja-300/2013-kawasaki-ninja-300-02.jpg
2014 Pic: http://www.mack1.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/2014-NINJA-300-WHITE-1.jpg

'13 specs:
[TABLE="class: table"]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD]Type [/TD]
[TD] 4-stroke Parallel Twin [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Displacement [/TD]
[TD] 296cc [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Bore and stroke [/TD]
[TD] 62.0 x 49.0 mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Compression ratio [/TD]
[TD] 10.6:1 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Valve system [/TD]
[TD] DOHC, 8 valves [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Fuel system [/TD]
[TD] Fuel Injection: 32mm x 2 (Keihin) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Ignition [/TD]
[TD] Digital [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Lubrication [/TD]
[TD] Forced Lubrication, wet sump [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Cooling [/TD]
[TD] Liquid-cooled [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Brakes

[TABLE="class: table"]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Front: type [/TD]
[TD] Single 290 mm petal disc [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Front: calipers [/TD]
[TD] Single balanced actuation dual-piston [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Rear: type [/TD]
[TD] Single 220mm petal disc [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Rear: calipers [/TD]
[TD] Dual-piston [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


Dimensions

[TABLE="class: table"]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Overall length [/TD]
[TD] 2,015mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Overall width [/TD]
[TD] 715mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Overall height [/TD]
[TD] 1,110mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Wheelbase [/TD]
[TD] 1,405mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Seat height [/TD]
[TD] 785mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Curb mass** [/TD]
[TD] 172kg [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Fuel capacity [/TD]
[TD] 17 litres [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Ground clearance [/TD]
[TD] 140mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


Drivetrain

[TABLE="class: table"]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Transmission [/TD]
[TD] 6-speed, return [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Final drive [/TD]
[TD] Seeled chain [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Primary reduction ratio [/TD]
[TD] 3.087 (71/23) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Gear ratio: 1st [/TD]
[TD] 2.714 (38/14) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Gear ratio: 2nd [/TD]
[TD] 1.789 (34/19) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Gear ratio: 3rd [/TD]
[TD] 1.409 (31/22) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Gear ratio: 4th [/TD]
[TD] 1.160 (29/25) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Gear ratio: 5th [/TD]
[TD] 1.000 (27/27) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Gear ratio: 6th [/TD]
[TD] .857 (24/28) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Final reduction ratio [/TD]
[TD] 3.000 (42/14) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Clutch [/TD]
[TD] Wet multi-disc, manual [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


Frame

[TABLE="class: table"]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Type [/TD]
[TD] Tube diamond,steel [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Wheel travel: front [/TD]
[TD] 120mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Wheel travel: rear [/TD]
[TD] 132mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Tire: front [/TD]
[TD] 110/70-17 M/C 54S [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Tire: rear [/TD]
[TD] 140/70-17 M/C 66S [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Caster (rake) [/TD]
[TD] 27° [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Trail [/TD]
[TD] 93mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Steering angle (left/right) [/TD]
[TD] 35° / 35° [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


Performance

[TABLE="class: table"]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Maximum Power[SUP]‡[/SUP] [/TD]
[TD] 29.0 kW {39PS} / 11,000 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Maximum Torque[SUP]‡[/SUP] [/TD]
[TD] 27.0 N·m {2.8 kgf·m} / 10,000 rpm [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


Suspension

[TABLE="class: table"]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Suspension, front [/TD]
[TD] 37mm telescopic fork [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Suspension, rear [/TD]
[TD] Bottom-Link Uni-Trak with gas charged shock and 5-way adjustable preload

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
14' specs:[TABLE="class: table"]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD]Type [/TD]
[TD] 4-stroke Parallel Twin [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Displacement [/TD]
[TD] 296cc [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Bore and stroke [/TD]
[TD] 62.0 x 49.0 mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Compression ratio [/TD]
[TD] 10.6:1 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Valve system [/TD]
[TD] DOHC, 8 valves [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Fuel system [/TD]
[TD] Fuel Injection: 32mm x 2 (Keihin) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Ignition [/TD]
[TD] Digital [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Lubrication [/TD]
[TD] Forced Lubrication, wet sump [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Cooling [/TD]
[TD] Liquid-cooled [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Brakes

[TABLE="class: table"]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Front: type [/TD]
[TD] Single 290 mm petal disc [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Front: calipers [/TD]
[TD] Single balanced actuation dual-piston [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Rear: type [/TD]
[TD] Single 220mm petal disc [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Rear: calipers [/TD]
[TD] Dual-piston [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


Dimensions

[TABLE="class: table"]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Overall length [/TD]
[TD] 2,015mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Overall width [/TD]
[TD] 715mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Overall height [/TD]
[TD] 1,110mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Wheelbase [/TD]
[TD] 1,405mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Seat height [/TD]
[TD] 785mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Curb mass** [/TD]
[TD] 172kg [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Fuel capacity [/TD]
[TD] 17 litres [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Ground clearance [/TD]
[TD] 140mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


Drivetrain

[TABLE="class: table"]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Transmission [/TD]
[TD] 6-speed, return [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Final drive [/TD]
[TD] Seeled chain [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Primary reduction ratio [/TD]
[TD] 3.087 (71/23) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Gear ratio: 1st [/TD]
[TD] 2.714 (38/14) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Gear ratio: 2nd [/TD]
[TD] 1.789 (34/19) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Gear ratio: 3rd [/TD]
[TD] 1.409 (31/22) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Gear ratio: 4th [/TD]
[TD] 1.160 (29/25) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Gear ratio: 5th [/TD]
[TD] 1.000 (27/27) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Gear ratio: 6th [/TD]
[TD] .857 (24/28) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Final reduction ratio [/TD]
[TD] 3.000 (42/14) [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Clutch [/TD]
[TD] Wet multi-disc, manual [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


Frame

[TABLE="class: table"]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Type [/TD]
[TD] Tube diamond,steel [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Wheel travel: front [/TD]
[TD] 120mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Wheel travel: rear [/TD]
[TD] 132mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Tire: front [/TD]
[TD] 110/70-17 M/C 54S [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Tire: rear [/TD]
[TD] 140/70-17 M/C 66S [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Caster (rake) [/TD]
[TD] 27° [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Trail [/TD]
[TD] 93mm [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Steering angle (left/right) [/TD]
[TD] 35° / 35° [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


Performance

[TABLE="class: table"]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Maximum Power[SUP]‡[/SUP] [/TD]
[TD] 29.0 kW {39PS} / 11,000 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Maximum Torque[SUP]‡[/SUP] [/TD]
[TD] 27.0 N·m {2.8 kgf·m} / 10,000 rpm [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


Suspension

[TABLE="class: table"]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD] Suspension, front [/TD]
[TD] 37mm telescopic fork [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD] Suspension, rear [/TD]
[TD] Bottom-Link Uni-Trak with gas charged shock and 5-way adjustable preload [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


OP is interested in "saving a few bucks if [he/she] can" therefore I merely proposed to go with the previous year model and perhaps buy used (either from someone who has fixed the issues of a 2013 or from a used bike dealership that is willing to fix the known recurring issues of the bike). I'm sure where the bikes are made may influence the product of the bike, but even then I still see poor designs (ie: using the same rust prone exhaust system that many have complained about on the 300 forums from 2013).

I'm not here to argue, just here to share what I would personally do to "save a few bucks".
 
Last edited:
^^ but even after all that, you're splitting hairs on whether its actually a better bike than the older 250.
 
CafeRay said:
^^ but even after all that, you're splitting hairs on whether its actually a better bike than the older 250.
Click to expand...
All depends, brother. I didn't want a 250 because I didn't want to deal with carbs. I wanted a 300 because it was fuel injected and I loved the style especially the cluster on the bike, but instead I pulled the trigger on a used Ninja 400 and I reap the rewards of: Dual disk brakes, 100 more CC's, a cheaper bike (bought my 400 for 4250, I see ninja 300s with more KM's than what I got mine at for 5000 onwards firm) and more power and torque to weight ratio.

I like to think 250s and 300s are completely different bikes, though some would disagree with me, I'm fine with that because I can see where they are coming from: some like carbs some dont, some like the 50 cc increase some think it's useless.
 
First off, thank you all for your replies. Boots, how do you find the Ninja 400? Would you say there's a big difference in power compared to the Ninja 300? Are there any significant changes other than the dual disk brakes and 100 more CC's?
 
LightningStrike said:
First off, thank you all for your replies. Boots, how do you find the Ninja 400? Would you say there's a big difference in power compared to the Ninja 300? Are there any significant changes other than the dual disk brakes and 100 more CC's?
Click to expand...

Hey dude. I like the 400 so far. Like I said its cheaper on price, and insurance aint to far off from a 300 anyway. I cant say ive ridden the 300. Only other bike ive ever ridden was the cbr 125s at the training course. But yeah man id look into them. Or even the cbr 500s if youre looking for something in that range.

Its not crazy power, its only a twin engine. I think you tend to notice major power differences typically in triples or 4 cylinder super sports. I use my bike for commuting so I dont even think ive revved it past 9k ti find out what its capable of, but its got some decent pulling power mid range.

Though I do love the 300s hell I even thjnk the 300 has a better 0 to 100 than the 400. Only reason I didnt get it is because since it is a relatively new bike they are quite expensive (for me) especially the used ones ive seen. Theyre nice bikes thoufh dude.


Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk
 
Hey dudes, I just got myself a 2014 Kawi Ninja 300 SE (Non-ABS) from Motorsport Pickering just off of HWY 7. I had called around, and they gave me by far the best price. The other Kawi dealers around the GTA and Southern Ontario were all giving me OTD prices about $300-800 more. Definitely call around if you are really interested, because you'll definitely save some money price shopping. A dealership out in Guelph was offering the 2013 ABS model for $400 more than what I paid for this 2014 (could be because of ABS).

But I do recommend checking out Motorsport Pickering, especially if you are in the East end of Toronto.

BTW... LOVING THE NINJA 300
 
Boots said:
Hey dude. I like the 400 so far. Like I said its cheaper on price, and insurance aint to far off from a 300 anyway. I cant say ive ridden the 300. Only other bike ive ever ridden was the cbr 125s at the training course. But yeah man id look into them. Or even the cbr 500s if youre looking for something in that range.

Its not crazy power, its only a twin engine. I think you tend to notice major power differences typically in triples or 4 cylinder super sports. I use my bike for commuting so I dont even think ive revved it past 9k ti find out what its capable of, but its got some decent pulling power mid range.

Though I do love the 300s hell I even thjnk the 300 has a better 0 to 100 than the 400. Only reason I didnt get it is because since it is a relatively new bike they are quite expensive (for me) especially the used ones ive seen. Theyre nice bikes thoufh dude.


Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I agree with you 95% that they are almost the same, just when you go to sell also (as most of us will) the 2013 vs 2014 resale might give you an edge, and getting the most amount back will factor into the saving a few bucks long term. 1 year newer, made in Japan, not as many recall issues, just less for the potential buyers to pick at and reduce offers, that's just my opinion though.

How is the 400 on the highway? I always feel bad on long trips keeping the 300 in the top of its rev range..might as well be racing it on a track at least you would be having fun using up all the high end revs this thing rips through.
 
DudeNaw.jpg
 
great little bike ..mine does not have the ecu issue...

..there are 3 recalls for bikes with abs units btw....
 
S1L3NC3R said:
I agree with you 95% that they are almost the same, just when you go to sell also (as most of us will) the 2013 vs 2014 resale might give you an edge, and getting the most amount back will factor into the saving a few bucks long term. 1 year newer, made in Japan, not as many recall issues, just less for the potential buyers to pick at and reduce offers, that's just my opinion though.

How is the 400 on the highway? I always feel bad on long trips keeping the 300 in the top of its rev range..might as well be racing it on a track at least you would be having fun using up all the high end revs this thing rips through.
Click to expand...

Only been on the highway once with it and I think I was at 100 with 7k or something (redlines at 11 or 12) but the weight (since it uses the same body as a N650) keeps it planted.
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom