.

Kawasaki ZX-9R Ninja

.  

Make Model

Kawasaki ZX-9R-C Ninja

Year

1999

Engine

Four stroke, transverse four cylinder, DOHC, 4 valves per cylinder.

Capacity

899 cc / 54.8 cu-in
Bore x Stroke 73 x 53.7 mm
Cooling System Liquid cooled
Compression Ratio 11.5:1

Induction

4x 40mm Keihin CVKD  carburetors

Ignition 

 Digital with Kawasaki Throttle Responsive Ignition Control (K-TRIC)
Starting Electric

Max Power

143 hp / 106.6 kW @ 11000 rpm 

Max Torque

101 Nm / 74.4 lb-ft @ 9000 rpm

Transmission

6 Speed
Final Drive Chain
Frame Aluminum twin-spar

Front Suspension

46mm Telescopic forks, preload, compression and rebound damping adjustable.

Rear Suspension

Uni-Trak piggy-back monoshock, reload, compression and rebound damping adjustable.

Front Brakes

2x 296mm discs 6 piston calipers

Rear Brakes

Single 220mm disc 1 piston caliper

Front Tyre

120/70 ZR17

Rear Tyre

180/55 ZR17
Seat Height 810 mm / 31.9 in
Dry Weight 183.0 kg / 403.4 lbs

Wet Weight

202 kg / 445.3 lbs

Fuel Capacity 

19 Litres / 5.0 US gal

Consumption Average

16.8 km/lit

Braking 60 - 0 / 100 - 0

12.8 m / 37.5 m

Standing ¼ Mile  

10.3 sec / 221.6 km/h

Top Speed

280.0 km/h / 174 mph

Road Test

Superbike Group Test 1998
.  
For 1998, Kawasaki completely redesigned the ZX-9R. The basic roadgoing bias of the bike, with the relaxed riding position and generous chassis dimensions remained, but the character of the bike was fundamentally changed.

Engine bore, stroke and redline remained unchanged; everything else was completely new. The clutch was changed from hydraulic to cable-operated. The generator was moved from behind the cylinder to the more conventional location at the left end of the crank. There was now no balance shaft. The valvetrain switched to direct valve actuation, and the cylinder head was plumbed for then-new plug-top ignition coils, replacing more conventional remote coils and high-tension leads. Notably, the new engine also featured a Hall-type cam position sensor on the exhaust camshaft. Cam position sensors are typically used in conjunction with electronic fuel injection. As the ZX900C featured induction by Keihin 40 mm CV carburettors, a cam position sensor wasn't necessary. Its inclusion could indicate that Kawasaki had designs to include fuel injection on the engine in the future, but this did not happen until the 2003 introduction of the Z1000, which uses a bored-out ex-ZX-9R engine with a side-draught cylinder head.

The frame lost the steel engine cradles, but also its bolt-on subframe and the rear ride height adjuster. The swingarm was a new unbraced, rectangular-section extruded design. The wheel sizes were the same, but the wheels were a new, lighter design. The brake calipers carried over, but the discs were smaller and lighter without stopping power being affected. New 46 mm right-way-up KYB forks replaced the heavier, though stiffer 43 mm USD's on the B model. The rear shock changed from a remote-reservoir to a lighter, more compact piggyback design. The wheelbase dropped 30 mm to 1410 mm.

Overall, with a factory-quoted dry weight of 183 kg, the C-model weighed less fully fuelled than the first B-model weighed dry.

Visually, the new bike retained the rounded, voluptuous, organic look of its predecessor, but became sleeker, with a slimmer tail unit and a smaller fairing. As a consequence of the smaller engine and shorter wheelbase, though, the fuel tank became wider and intruded more on the riding position than before.

At launch in late 1997, the ZX900C caused a sensation. The total redesign resulted in a bike which thoroughly outclassed the modest update of the FireBlade Honda introduced for that year. The two bikes were now evenly matched on weight, but the ZX-9R retained its power advantage and was universally acclaimed as the better sport bike; it was faster, it handled better and possessed a raw, involving feel for the rider. By contrast, the 1998 FireBlade was widely criticised for its uncommunicative handling. In addition, Kawasaki chose simple, single-colour paint schemes for the ZX-9R, offering the bike in the house colour of lime green, candy metallic blue and, in some markets, candy metallic black.

Unfortunately for Kawasaki, late 1997 also saw the introduction of the Yamaha R1. While flawed in several respects, this completely new sport bike design offered performance and styling which rightfully went on to capture the imagination of the motorcycling public.

Road Test

LOS ANGELES, January, 1998 -- Screw the real world. Forget about gas mileage, weather protection, operating expenses, "real world power delivery," and comfortable ergonomics. Screw the bureaucratic nannies who harp about public safety and demand horsepower limits, and cuff the next twit who whines 'we don't get the really cool bikes in America' in the back of the head. This is the US of A, and on our long, wide, civilized and government-subsidized roads, brute power rules the day. So, we recently prompted the major manufacturers of three- and four-cylinder motorcycles: "give us the quickest, lightest asphalt-annihilator around." Give us Yamaha's YZF-R1, Honda's CBR900RR, Kawasaki's ZX-9R, Suzuki's GSX-R750 and Triumph's T595.

Assembled before you are five of the gnarliest multis ever made, each of them a marriage of horsepower, handling, and weight. Our goal: To separate the men from the boys; to take the fastest and best-handling bike from each of these manufacturers, regardless of displacement, put them on the same track together and let them tear each other apart.

While it was really no big surprise that Yamaha's tour-de-force YZF-R1 was the winner in all objective categories -- it was the fastest at the drag strip, turned the quickest racetrack lap time, and kicked ass on the dyno -- and gathered first-place votes from four of our five testers, there were some surprises a little further down the food chain.

Honda's CBR900RR (Fireblade in some markets) returned for 1998 with what seemed like redesigns too minor to hang with this buffed out crowd. Ah, but all is not as it seems, and this year the 'RR matches up to the marketing hype that sold so many of the (ex-) wobbly machines in years past. Notably, a stiffer chassis, 5mm more trail (trail, not steering head angle, is what provides front-end "stability"), 10mm more fork span to enhance handling and torsional rigidity, improved suspension valving and selected weight savings added up to a quantum leap forward from the previous model. In fact, it was argued that with more power the RR might have won this test: That is, despite its 114 horsepower motor being a little under par in this group, the RR proved to be a such a flickable, stable mount with predictable power delivery, it afforded all riders instant confidence to go fast in the twisties. Bottom line: the 'RR is the easiest bike to jump on and go fast.

One of the surprises of this test is that most of these mongo dong-swingin' hyper-bikes are also great street bikes with tractable power and livable ergonomics. Not so with the GSX-R750. As resident Willow Springs Motorcycle Club king-pin big-fish Chuck Graves -- who won seven out of seven classes this past season at Willow -- pointed out, "the GSX-R750 sure likes to be ridden hard, but it's a miserable street bike." Point the GSX-R750 at a track or a set of curves that you've scouted for dirt and cop officers and hang on for one awesome ride: The Gixxer captured the only other first place vote in the test, from AMA Dirt Tracker Brett Landes: "The harder I rode, the better it handled. I was very impressed with its racetrack prowess."

Source Motorcycle.com