Kawasaki Motorcycle Forums banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Which is the better bike? Which one is happier operating between 65 and 75 mph for sustained periods. I like the full faring on the Suzuki, but right off the bat I see that the Ninja is lighter with a slightly bigger engine, and is liquid cooled. Don't know if liquid cooling is all that important on a bike, but sounds good. Sorry, but all the answers you all are giving me, as great as they are, are creating more questions. I do feel that I am heading in the right direction though. Was never comfortable with the idea of starting on the Katana 600. I am going to post this same topic/question on the Suzuki forum as well just to see how different the responses are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,245 Posts
The ninja 500 is a bit faster, and the liquid cooling makes the bike much easier to drive around town (doesn't try to overheat). You can get full fairings for the ninja, but thats extra on top of the cost. On the highway I don't know if you'll really notice a difference between the two bikes. Other than the wind protection from the gs500f.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
the seller for me was sitting on them. I was much more comfortable with the fit on the ninja. Plus the fairing on the suzuki seems like such an afterthought to me. The lines just don't flow very well from the drivers seat imo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
154 Posts
I found this on internet from "jrparker99":

EXvsGS
I was just looking through Motorcycle Consumer News’ website and found a .pdf file of this article.

Go to their website: www.mcnews.com/
Go to ‘Model Evaluation’
The first article under ‘Product Comparison’ is the July 2004 Ninja 500 vs. GS500 (Just labeled Model Comparison, Part 1 and Part 2)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
456 Posts
taehapdo said:
Which is the better bike? . . . the Ninja is . . . liquid cooled.
Water-cooled engines control temperature much, much, better than air-cooled engines. A water-cooled engine can shut off the thermostat to let the engine warm up, then use the massive heat conduction properties of water to keep it within a very narrow operating temperature range. Air-cooled engines can't do that.

Air-cooled engines are simpler (less moving parts), but they have those big fins that take up more room.

My vote says water-cooling is way, way better, and it's a really good feature to have on a bike. Water-cooled engines tend to run better and last longer. Naturally, I said "tend to."

Besides, the Kawasaki is the one with the water-cooled engine, so it has to be better. It's a Kawasaki, isn't it? How could you even consider anything else?
Curt
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
605 Posts
yes, tend to is the very very important word there. I was a noob to riding bikes a few months ago, but never to there mechanics. If you are a motorcycle lover without a lot of money I say used air cooled engines are the way to go :) Less money for radiator, fan, thermostat, etc.

It was 100 degrees yesterday and I was stuck on the highway stop and go for a long bit and it didn't over heat on me. Granted my bike is 22 years old and has less than 20k on it, i'm sure my engine is in better condition than that of others

I know there is now a limit on the air-cooled unless you like cruisers :) but hey, ride what you like that's just my opinion
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top