Kawasaki ZX-10R Forum banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
From going through a lot of threads, watching genuine comparisons and what not, I get the feeling that the Gen 5 will never outperform a Gen 4 given the same aftermarket upgrades are thrown at both. I think quite a few riders could probably beat Superstock Gen 5s with Superstock Gen 4s. I hear stellar things about the new suspension, especially the BFFs but as a package it seems upgrading to the Gen 4 even if you are racing is not worth it one bit.

I've done a lot of research but feedback from riders who have ridden/raced both is appreciated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
718 Posts
More power and better suspension... that's why

But... why a Gen 4 when you can go Gen 3? Better yet, why a 10r when you can go 6r?
 

·
The Pace
Joined
·
7,161 Posts
From going through a lot of threads, watching genuine comparisons and what not, I get the feeling that the Gen 5 will never outperform a Gen 4 given the same aftermarket upgrades are thrown at both. I think quite a few riders could probably beat Superstock Gen 5s with Superstock Gen 4s. I hear stellar things about the new suspension, especially the BFFs but as a package it seems upgrading to the Gen 4 even if you are racing is not worth it one bit.

I've done a lot of research but feedback from riders who have ridden/raced both is appreciated.
g4 weight is far less and that is a deal maker for me. g4 suspension is excellent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
More power and better suspension... that's why

But... why a Gen 4 when you can go Gen 3? Better yet, why a 10r when you can go 6r?
Are you serious? The Gen 4 would decimate the Gen 3 in every aspect.
If you plan on racing in a 1000CC category then you might not want to use a 600cc bike, that's why.

g4 weight is far less and that is a deal maker for me. g4 suspension is excellent.
Exactly my points.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
I do just fine with sarcasm, but I do not care for pointless sarcasm, seems rather futile. Sarcasm that delivers a point; that is the epitome of sarcastic rhetoric.
You sound like a ball of fun... for the record when you preface a statement with "are you serious" it conveys the message that you do not in fact recognize the sarcasm.. Also neither does staying an obvious fact like a gen 4 is better than a gen 3 and racing a 600 in 1000 class isn't a recipe for success.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
Love the direction this thread is going in.
You're steering the ship on that one.

I have a g4 that I'd replace with a g5 if I could afford.

G5 has the next level electronics package
Better brakes stock
Better suspension stock (especially shock)

Could you bring the g4 up to this level? Except for electronics, sure, but the money you'd spend would be comparable to buying a used g5.

The g5 likely has a better chassis design as it has the feedback of Messrs Sykes and Rea poured into it's R&D.

And if you want to save weight then take off all the emissions crap. That should be standard policy when buying a modern bike and using it for racing.

So basically, newer so less wear and tear (unless you can find a low use g4), better electronics, significantly better suspension for performance riding and better brakes.

Plus better bang for buck than R1, and other contemporaries.

What's not to like?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
You're steering the ship on that one.

I have a g4 that I'd replace with a g5 if I could afford.

G5 has the next level electronics package
Better brakes stock
Better suspension stock (especially shock)

Could you bring the g4 up to this level? Except for electronics, sure, but the money you'd spend would be comparable to buying a used g5.

The g5 likely has a better chassis design as it has the feedback of Messrs Sykes and Rea poured into it's R&D.

And if you want to save weight then take off all the emissions crap. That should be standard policy when buying a modern bike and using it for racing.

So basically, newer so less wear and tear (unless you can find a low use g4), better electronics, significantly better suspension for performance riding and better brakes.

Plus better bang for buck than R1, and other contemporaries.

What's not to like?
Now that's an insightful response. I find the new gen 5 more aesthetically pleasing already so I'm not completely against it, but performance wise it seemed like it wasn't that much of an improvement. Regarding electronics, have you experimented with it enough to determine if it actually is superior? 'Improved' electronics or 'new' electronics aren't always a good thing as we saw with the new Fireblade.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
I was debating on a 2011 with 1900 miles or a new 2016 KRT non-abs. The lighter engine components, brakes, suspension and electronics sold me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Much lighter crank makes shifts less jerky.
All gears are evenly spaced in Gen5.
Gen4 has gears much more "close together" (2...6) and big gap between 1 and 2.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
I had a Gen4 and now Gen5 and the difference is unbelievable. Engine is stronger mid and high rpm. Transmission gearing is much better along with suspension and brakes. Gen5 is a couple pounds heavier but it rides like it's lighter. A couple of weeks ago I had my first trackday on the Gen5, wow much easier to ride hard and fast on the track. Gen5 is worth every penny and then some.:grin2::grin2: My biggest grip is the lap button is better on the Gen4.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
I have both, race the gen 4 and track day the gen 5 but will likely start racing the gen 5 next round at the end of July.

For the record, 2011 I've had since the dealer hold was lifted back in 2011. 2016, I've had since February 2016; so both bikes pretty much as soon as they were available.
Money spent on the gen 4 thus far: Lost count at $13,500
Money spent on the gen 5 thus far: ~$3000

The bikes characteristics are drastic enough that I warrant having both. Hence why every time I try and sell my 4th gen, I always pull back the ad after taking it out for a session or on the street if I have the street plastics on it. Then I ride the 5th gen and am totally impressed all over again and kind of go wow, this is how far we've come.

The gen 5 is better out the gate then a gen 4; no ifs and or buts. The Gen 4 takes quite a bit in the suspension, braking and power department to put it on par with the gen 5 out the crate. The gen 4 weighs slightly less, but after you pull the ABS, race battery, pull emissions crap, KLEEN system, etc they are essentially the same. Even in the power department, unless you've done headwork on the gen 4, you'll still be down about 10HP compared to the gen 5. Unless you've done custom con-rods, pistons and knife edged the crank on the gen 4 it will rev slower than the gen 5.

Electronics on the gen 5 blow the 4th gen away. The electronics on the 4th gen were good for their time what they were up against. But now that nearly everyone has gone to a dedicated IMU, there is no comparison for actual bike situational awareness being calculated live and in real time as opposed to reactionary, simple software algorithms based on mechanical feedback from the motor, trans, wheels and rider input. The tuning options we have with ETVs compared to cable based throttle is huge especially with logging systems where we can log the actual ETV position in relation to the throttle give the gen 5 a nod over the gen 4. Quickshifter is a moot point for most. But the ability to have the auto blip downshift on the 5th gen is a relatively huge advantage as that 5-10% of mental capability you afford to making your approach to a corner to blipping throttle and rev matching you can essentially reallocate elsewhere, perhaps to your braking points. It's one less thing to worry about. More TC modes is an advantage as well. Launch control, like the QS again is moot as most people will put the woolich racing launch control in on the gen 4 if they need it.

I love both my 11 and 16 model but in terms of all around performance (brakes, suspension, motor) the 16 wins. But again, where I have both bikes currently set, I do notice a large enough gap between the two to warrant both. Maybe that will change more once I dig deeper into the 5th gen and that gap will grow and it will really start to outshine the gen 4? Don't know. But when it comes down to it, the best analogy I can give describing the differences between the two bikes is this... you're trying to remove a Phillips head screw from a pair of glasses and you have two different screwdrivers available to you; a precision jewelers screw driver and a typical screw driver that is slightly over-sized but bites just enough on the head. Yeah, the slightly over-sized screw driver will get the screw out, but the precision/jewelers screw driver will do it faster, more efficiently with less energy spent by you and less fatigue absorbed by your wrist all along with less damage to the screw itself.
This right here is phenomenal feedback and is exactly what I was looking for, thanks a bunch for writing this up, appreciate it.

I had a Gen4 and now Gen5 and the difference is unbelievable. Engine is stronger mid and high rpm. Transmission gearing is much better along with suspension and brakes. Gen5 is a couple pounds heavier but it rides like it's lighter. A couple of weeks ago I had my first trackday on the Gen5, wow much easier to ride hard and fast on the track. Gen5 is worth every penny and then some.:grin2::grin2: My biggest grip is the lap button is better on the Gen4.
Thanks for the feedback.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
To use Guy Martin's terminology it's a box full of neutrals.
Can't argue with that. I find more neutrals between 3-4 and 4-5 than i do where it's supposed to be. Then again I can't compare the gen 4 box to the gen 5 as I've only ridden a gen 5 once.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top