As we said in our first report, another budget choice by Kawasaki is the tires. Although decent for stock rubber, this chassis and motor is so good, the bike begs for something better, such as Bridgestone’s S22 or Pirelli’s Diablo Rosso Corsa II.
Kawasaki upped the ante this year on electronic rider aids. Traction control accompanies the ABS brakes, and can be set at one of three levels depending on how intrusive the rider would like the system to be. Kawasaki also brought rider-selectable power modes (full power or low power) which are integrated into three settings, Sport, Road or Rain. Sport sharpens throttle response a bit, but Road also provides full power. A nice feature is that the riding mode can be changed while moving with a button near the left handgrip.
The brakes aren’t necessarily impressive on paper, but they work very well in the real world. The dual front discs are 300 mm in size, and the calipers are not radial-mounted. Those are four-piston calipers, however, and the brake feel and power was good, if not exceptional.
The styling updates for 2020 may not be all that important, but a new LED headlamp is. It provides good power, which means good, safe vision for the rider at night. All of the lights on the bike are LEDs this year, with the exception of the turn signals.
It is nice that Kawasaki includes a 4.3″ TFT color instrument display this year, as well. The screen is bright with good contrast. The background color can be switched from black to white, and screen brightness automatically switches based on available light. The information displayed is extensive, including, for example, gear position, fuel consumption (average and current), and smartphone call and mail notices … which brings us to smartphone connectivity.
The 2020 Z900 has Bluetooth built into the instrument panel that allows riders to connect their phone wirelessly. Kawasaki’s RIDEOLOGY THE APP lets you log route, distance and time travelled, and alerts you to calls or mail received on your mobile device. It even lets you change your bike settings from your phone … if you like that sort of thing.
What we like is riding the Z900. Forget the “budget” label, this is one hell of a sport bike. It always was, but the 2020 changes raise its level. With a better set of tires, and a twisty road with a capable pilot, the Z900 need make no excuses when riding with other bikes. It changes directions easily without ever feeling nervous, and piles on torque when you leave corners. It is simply a blast to ride.
The most logical competitor to the Z900 is Yamaha’s MT-09, which has been completely redesigned for 2021. We look forward to testing the new Yamaha, but it has its work cut out for it.
Still priced at $8,999, you can take a look at Kawasaki’s web site for further details on the Z900 and available accessories.
Pages: 1 2
Kawasaki & Suzuki offer great bikes at prices I can approach. Very happy with my current version GSX-S750. Engine delivers more than enough for me. My insurance costs are much more affordable versus the larger bike I was riding.
consists of the book itself
The newest Tracer is almost $15K
Yes, it jumped $2000 from the previous version. Can anyone tell us what Yamaha did to it to justify this increase?
You must mean the MT09, not the Tracer, which competes directly with the Z900. The MT has greatly enhanced display and electronics, including cruise control. The SP version of the MT also has upgraded shocks/forks.
“The 2021 Yamaha MT-09 SP will arrive at authorized Yamaha dealers beginning in January and will be available in the exclusive Raven/Liquid Metal color scheme for $10,999 MSRP.”
Would it kill Kawasaki to offer a single color like Red or Kawi green or blue?? Some of the colors offered are horrible. The 2021 with green wheels is bad.
Or, style it nice? The basic shape is fine, the fiddly insect details, not so much.
Wow, VLJ, I couldn’t tell if that was a snarky bash on the bashers or a over-the-top whole hearted praising of the Z900! Either way, nice writing!
Anyone who has ridden a steel-framed Kawi from the last 5 years or so (I own two of them) knows what he is talking about. Kawi has cracked the code for great performing inexpensive bikes in the sub-zx lineup.
I hope that VLJ can come out of his shell soon, and really express himself.
I don’t like multi-part reviews. I no longer remember what was in the first one. I’d think the second one might mention MPG, since you’ve had the bike for months now. Was that in the first article? As for the bike itself, I’m going to holdout until the tail section reaches shoulder height; looks too low to me. hahaha
Breadcrumbs to the other parts are so…the rest of the internet
Hey Dirck – this is a good point. I second the suggestion. Breadcrumbs backward and forward would be um heap helpful.
I like the two-part format. Initial impressions after a quick ride, then more detail after some time with the bike. And there is always reference and a link to part one.
It reminds me of my own experience as I have picked up a new bike over the years.
If the industry is going to continue with these ridiculous tail sections. They could at least make accessory luggage racks to replace the inevitable weird assemblage that serves as mud guard, license plate holder and blinker mount.
Of course the owners are supposed to “tidy” these tails. But do that and the rear tire will pump water and road grime all over the rider when it’s wet.
It really surprises me to see so much form over function on so many bikes. Even on traditionally utilitarian models. Why are these tail sections suddenly so important that all weather function needs to take a back seat to them?
Buyers of this style of bike aren’t looking to add milk crates or luggage racks. This is a comfortable sport bike, not a tourer, ADV, sport-tourer, or UJM.
I agree that there was no need for that extra kink in the rear subframe, jacking the passenger seat sky high. Were it up to me, they would have continued the subframe at the same angle, all the way through.
Have you ever felt the rear seat on a Z900? Wood is softer.
Who cares? It’s a vinyl-covered tampon. It’s only there for looks.
Seriously, who cares? No one buys a Z900 for passenger comfort, or overall utility.
Oh please. It’s a fairly large displacement street bike that costs less that a front line dirt bike. It has something that is about the shape and size of a luggage rack that has no utility at all.
The only reason it isn’t a sport tourer or UMJ is that all its practicality has been shot, stabbed, chocked, poisined, karate chopped, given a withering look, dragged out into the desert, and burned just to achieve some goofy anesthetic that requires an afterthought assemblage of parts to achieve. An assemblage that makes the asthetic look ridiculous to boot.
No amount of gushing about how wonderful the thing is is going to make the rear end look less ridiculous. It’s the motorcycle equivalent of all those kids walking around with their pants pulled halfway down about half a decade or so ago.
All of which is to say, you want this bike to get off your lawn.
Clearly, you are not the target demographic.
Mick – Excellent and concise observation.
Thank goodness I am not a target demographic.
Ugly but no doubt a crackin’ good deal. Everyone I have talked to that owns one, just loves them.
Putting aside its looks and the fact that it’s not a Honda, it’s the perfect sportbike for YOU. You would love its low seat height and seating position, which is every bit as comfortable as your CB1100 for your body type. For street riding, it has one of the best liter-sized I4s ever created. It is NOT peaky. It has a nearly dead-linear powerband, just the way you like it. Plenty of torque everywhere on the throttle, in any gear. The intake growl sounds cool as hell.
No, you won’t find yourself riding it around at 2,000 RPM, the way you do on your CB1100, but so what? It isn’t designed to be ridden at that RPM. You will adjust to the difference, immediately.
It’s not like the R1200R you rode in Europe. It doesn’t complain at very low RPM. The motor is just like your CB’s motor, only smoother in most places, and there is simply so much more surge everywhere on the tach.
Its diminutive size belies the fact that it’s a liter I4. Pushing it around the garage, you’ll think it’s a 600. The only thing that negates its 600-ness is the width of the tank. It is a bit wide between your knees, but as someone who puts as many miles on bikes as you do each year, you’ll quickly come to appreciate the wind protection afforded by that tall, wide tank. Because you sit down in the bike rather than on top of it, the combination of that large tank and the vestigial windscreen atop the instrument cluster affords you a surprising degree of wind protection, and it’s all smooth, clean air.
No ugly, noisy windshields necessary.
Also, its 4.5-gallon tank (almost the same as your CB) offers acceptable fuel range, especially at the leisurely pace you prefer to ride. Moreover, the suspension is smooth and plush enough that you will be willing and able to burn through that entire tank in a single sitting. Mix in some proper twisties, and you’ll wonder why you ever put so much negative emphasis on the Z’s physical appearance.
Truly, you soon won’t care. Not from the saddle, anyway, and that’s where you spend the vast majority of your moto time. You aren’t a coffee-shop poseur. What matters to you is that your bike works, and continues to work.
The only real negative I see with this bike for you is its lack of luggage accommodations. Short of going the Ventura Luggage route, there really isn’t much on the back end of the bike to help you tie down soft bags.
Oh, well. That’s why you have the FJR and CB1100.
I know you’re thinking of downsizing. Smaller, shorter, lighter. More manageable, overall. You still want Major Motor, though, and preferably in a smooth, torquey, liter-class I4. Japanese-built, affordable, with a solid dealer network, those are all big-time pluses in your book.
This is it. This is the one for you. Even more so than the Z900RS, in fact, since that bike is fake retro, which you loathe, plus it only offers eight more rwhp than your CB while having a much taller seat height.
For you, the Z900 is the better fit. Lighter, smaller, far more powerful, much lower seat height, and no twitchy/glitchy throttle. Much less expensive, too.
You lost me at “for YOU.” Low seat heights are for people lots shorter than me. Honestly this stampede to sell a few more bikes to the “got no reason to live” crowd has resulted in terrible ergonomics for most riders.
I know, and I get that, and that’s why I addressed those points specifically to mickey. I know how much he struggles with the tall seat heights of most sportbikes, and lately he’s been looking for something smaller and lighter.
He still loves his big I4s, though.
Look on the bright side. You have an entire niche full of ginormously tall, top-heavy ADVs all to yourself. I’m sure mickey would have loved to consider any number of ADVs down through the years, the Africa Twin in particular, but he says they’re simply too tall for him.
I’m right there with him. I can manage a 1250 GSA, but I wouldn’t want to have to deal with it every day.
Until manufacturers start making truly modular motorcycles with a WIDE range of ergonomic adjustment, as is the case with cars, very short and very tall riders are going to continue to gripe about the limited market.
It is what it is.
Tim C, there has certainly not been a “stampede” by the manufacturers to make bikes that will fit guys with short inseams. The bikes that are not cruisers (ie: sport bikes, standards, sport tourers or tourers) with seat heights of 30″-31″ can be counted on 1 hand, maybe a couple of fingers. Then again the bikes with 32″-33″ seat heights are so numerous as to be considered the norm. I’ll bet you can find more bikes with 34″ seat heights than you can find with 30″ seat heights.
So mfg’s make most bikes to fit the 5’9″ -5’11” dudes with 32-33″ inseams and those of us on either end of that scale get to complain that they don’t make bikes for us.
Same goes with suspension..how do you make suspensions for those that weight 150# and those that weigh 250# ..those that just ride, those that tour and those that think every ride has to be a road race up some canyon? Those that ride single and those that ride 2 up?
hence the aftermarket …..
You lost me at your “You lost me” crap…Whatever, tough guy.
Rider triangle is wrong. Body needs to be parallel to lower legs. The high tails on these slide the rider into the tank, just like the FZ09 and if you hug the tank low, like they want you to, it crushes the boyz. I would have bars even lower or the reach to the bars longer. I could not feel comfortable on either the stock nor the high seat. Technically it’s a hit.
Ergonomics, except for the issue of the sloped seat, look spot on to me for comfort.
This oft-repeated claim that the Z900’s seating position crushes the rider’s nuts is pure internet myth. I rode the thing on many a 500-mile day in blistering cold and blazing heat, over mountains, across deserts, all up and down the California coastline as well as in city and freeway stop-and-go-traffic, and neither the seat nor the seating position ever caused undue discomfort.
Sure, it’s not a Gold Wing or R1200RT. There isn’t a lot of leg room, but that’s only an issue if you have long legs. Riders who are 6’0″ and under, especially those with relatively short inseams, come to appreciate that low seat height. Also, the shorter the rider, the more upright the seating position will be. The main portion of the seat is almost dead flat, so it does NOT push you forward into the tank. If your legs are long enough to push you back into the slightly raised portion at the rear of the seat, then your crotch is nowhere near the tank.
Regardless, as long as you’re not well north of 6’0″, you’re fine.
Oh, and no, a rider’s body does not need to be parallel to the lower legs. That’s absurd. There are countless bikes that manage perfectly well without such a seating position. There is certainly nothing wrong with that seating position, obviously. It’s usually quite comfortable, as long as it’s fairly upright, but it is absolutely not mandatory.
Ride the thing for yourself. You’ll see. As long as you’re not comparing it to touring/ADV bikes, or cruisers, you’ll be fine. In fact, an hour or two into the ride you’ll be surprised by how little attention you paid to the seat, the seating position, and your overall comfort.
As naked standards go, especially sporty naked standards, the Z900 is plenty comfortable…for people who aren’t too tall.
If you want a refined, comfortable, and powerful sportbike, this is where the smart money is. I had a Z800 and it was a fantastic bike, the Z900 improves on it in every way. You don’t look at it when you’re on it.
This right here.
My daily is a Z800, and aside from a Bagster seat for the spousal unit’s comfort on 2-up rides, it’s just a plainly excellent bike. I’ve done 500 miles, easy, with no notice of crushing the fella’s, though breaks every 100 miles or so is always a good idea (besides, wife has to pee, eventually)
I really like the Z900. For looks, fit, and finish, my preferences run towards the Z900RS, but the Z900 wins the budget battle. There are lots of great bikes out there, and this is one of the best real-world bikes, IMHO.
Buy this (with trellis!) instead of the new Monster and keep the change or farkle away..bulletproof
If I were younger (a LOT younger 😉 ), this bike in the 2021 model year in black with red accents would be in my garage.
The price is very reasonable and the bike is more than competent for the real world in which we all ride. Hey Guzzi?! Take note of the front brakeS on this Kawasaki because from what I understand it is similarly priced to both of your 2021 V7s.
Yeah, I know it’s only got a 4.5 gallon tank but even taking that into account I could live in the real world with the Kawi. With ease. 🙂
Cue the “ifonly” crowd. I need to find that “Fountain of Yoot”. 🙂