Cycle News - Archive Issues - 1990's

·RIDING ·IMPRESSION. 1996 Kawasaki ZX-7R (Left) Kawasaki entertained a large gathering of press for both on-track and off-track Impressions of the new ZX-7R. (Below) The new model Is visually similar to . past ZX7s, but the subtle changes have proven to be effective. position, at least half the ~ew through the glass is of the rider's shoulders, and considerable twisting is necessary to get a safe rear view. If the mirrors were mounted about three inches further out, as some adapter kits allow, the problem would be greatly reduced. But nO one buys a 750cc sportbike to worry about mirror position, so what was it like on the track, you ask? This Kawasaki proved an able handler, predictable and easy to control, even at the limit. Ground clearance was not a problem, although near-lap-record efforts could touch down the end of a footpeg and one professional racer had a near miss that caused the tip of the exhaust silencer to drag. One of the strongest features of the ZX-7R was the front end's behavior. Even with aggressive turn entry, the front stayed planted, and offered reasonable feedback. Trail braking proved easy and confidence inspiring, the front brakes strong, controllable, and fadefree. Planned or emergency midturn adjustments in speed didn't cause the bike to sit up or dive, a problem that sometimes occurred in past Ninjas. Under hard acceleration on the exit of some of Jerez's fast turns, the ZX-7R would drift predictably, providing safe slides at speeds in excess of 100 mph. In tighter turns, the back end sometimes hopped under hard throttle applications, but suspension adjustments eventually removed this behavior. The stock chassis settings worked fine for the street, but the quest for more performance and the chance to fiddle got the better of most testers over two days at Jerez. Considering the fact that the ZX-7R has a less sophisticated handling package than its racing relation ZX-7RR, it was nice to see that all of the areas of tuning actually produced noticeable changes in the bike's behavior. The final chassis setup, adjusted for the admittedly mostly smooth Jerez turns, was thus: On the front forks, the compression setting on the bottom of the fork leg was set to position fi ve of eight, while the rebound on top of the leg was in position seven of 13. ill terms of ride height, five marker lines on the fork leg were visible above the adjuster nut. At the back, the compression-damping adjustment on the shock-body reservoir was set at the 11th of 28 clicks. Rear •rebound damping, reached at the bot- tom of the shock, was at position four of a possible four. Rear-shock spring preload was also increased slightly, so the bike wouldn't transfer weight as abruptly in tight turns. The improved midrange response of the ZX-7R made some of the quick Jerez sweepers easy to attack. Rather than having to look for a gear partway through a tum, you could short shift at around 10,000 and let the midrange settle the bike through the tum. With this technique, you didn't !:lave to worry about making a shift while leaned right over. The U.S. test fleet for the Spanish launch included two candy-colored models and a sole traditional lime offering, and for some reason the green bike seemed a little quicker than the red ones. Could it be psychological? All three pulled hard, well past the 12,500 rpm red line, before hitting the rev limiter. In fact, one of the machines reached 14,200 rpm before electronic restraint prevailed. With such a broad spread of power available, overrevving wasn't in the least bit necessary. Shifting was generally smooth, although some effort was required to move the lever. Clutch action was positive and not in the least grabby, even while roaming around small towns, asking for directions. Out on the track, a couple of downshifting problems occurred, the bike hanging up in a false neutral while braking very hard and looking for second gear. More typically, the ZX-7R didn't need much in the way of a blip to easily engage a lower gear. One thing missing, however, was the ultra-high-rpm surge found in previous ZX-7 models. True, there was no noticeable edge to the powerband, the bike simply building speed and rpm in a linear fashion, similar to a V-four Honda. However, the downside of this seemed to be a little Ie s all-out rush at maximum rpm. Riding a restricted German bike, producing "only 100 official horsepower," may have revealed Kawasaki's current tuning strategy. The European model had even better midrange than the improved U.S. bikes, but wouldn't pull much past 11,000, leading us to think that the midrange was beefed up at the expense of higher rpm performance. If this strategy holds true aero s' the board, we would bet that the '96 ZX-7RR will be the "have your cake and eat it too" model, with all the top-end rush of the previ9Us bikes and more. Obviously concerned about the lightweight 1996 GSXR, Kawasaki made a point of explaining that their new 750 was built as a street bike. A release stated that "we must not forget that the ZX7R and RR are production machines that will be mostly used on public roads. That means that Kawasaki produces these models according to our standards for strength and durability." However, a later portion of the press brief opened with this one-sentence paragraph: "Racing, however, is a whole different story," and went on to outline the huge selection of kit parts available to the race-bike builder. 0 matter what public-relations material you believe, a thorough com parison of the tock versions of the GSXR and the new ZX-7s is eagerly anticipated. There is no doubt that the 1996 ZX7R shows a clear improvement over its successful inja predecessors in terms of real-world ability. Kawasaki has produced a bike that, while not radically different in appearance, is a step forward in handling as well as performance. It's clear that after the recent focus by the manufacturers on the 600cc c\ivision, the increasingly competitive 750cc class offers the best performance values for sportbike fans in 1996. {N While Cycle News believes the foregoing test reliable, it is the opinion of the reviewers only and should not be relied upon in determining the performance or safety of the vehicle. The reader should make his or her own investigation. 1996 KA AS KI LIlt PrIce EngIne Type DIIpIM' I II Bon x ComIiIIIIIIlIIIIIIo c.1luNIIoA $8& =.•:: : : : : : : : : TI'IIII7I II D FInII drMI JAZX-7R 1..iqIMI-cooIed 4-ctdle, DClHC. u..IlII fOll' 748cc 73 X 44.7 mm 11.5:1 (4) 3Ilmm KeiJinCV :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~: _ 8 :-...............•.................................. CIIIin ~::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~.~~ Sell hIIgIIt ~ cIIii_a ExIlwIIt SulI*IIiCIft 312 in.. 4.1 in. 4 i/It) 2 inID 1 . FronI .............•........ 43mm I4lSkIe-doWn cwttdge fen with aljlSt* ~ Pf8Ioa1, R Bnlkes· Front R rebouxt .wxI ccmpression ~ng, 4.8 in. tBY81 SiiVe shock, bollom UIi-Trak linkage, adjlSlallle sprinJ Pf8Ioad, reboln:l and canpression danpitg, 5.1 in. tBY81 Dual 320 mm semt-floa1ltg roto's, opposed six-piston hydralAic calipers SiiVe 197mm cise. opposed-piston caliper TIres Front 120170ZRl7TtJalless Rear 190150 ZR17 Tubeless Dry weight.........•................•....•......•........................ 447 pounds Colors Ume Green: Candy Persimmon Red

• Cover