Reg and Luke hit the track to test out Honda's CBR 650F, and are surprised by what it has to offer! Facebook: bikelifetvshow Instagram: bikelife_tvshow
Saw this at the bike shop today, had a sit on it and honestly Honda has nailed the "upright sports bike" style in my opinion (looks/ergonomics). The bike looks great and is comfortable to sit on. Something I'd test ride when it comes to upgrading.
Im 19 debating on even getting a motorcycle. i want the 2015 honda cbr650f. Im just gettign sick of the used car buisness, you get a car, it starts breaking down and its expensive as hell to buy all those new parts and install them. motorcycles, they look fantastic, great gas mileage, insurance (full coverage on motorcycle) will run me only 350 a year, vs 125 (liability) a month for a p.o.s used car ( it must be owned i cant afford full coverage and a car payment for a new or used car). basically financing a car period is out of the question. I can deal with 250 a month for a bike payment and 30 full coverage. but it is however more dangerous, and i understand that, its..sacrificing safety for more money, good looks, better gas milege, and it will last a long time (if its taken care of, and i dont get hit) It would be for school, work and back. a daily commute that will be on the highway 75% of the time. so..can i hear peoples opinions.
yep, 353 a month for this bike, i meant it was 300 a year full coverage on a 2002 honda rebel 250. so uh...yeah. this bike is out of the question unless i own it. if i owned it i would get liability, which would run me 54 a month with progressive....but i dont have 8500 cash.
TheLoneRune Sort of in the same boat as you, know where you are coming from. I have a reliable vehicle but its a truck and only gets 15 MPG, and have an hour and a half commute so tank is always empty.
I really hate these types of "video" reviews. All the camera time is split between staring at the reviewer's mouth or watching from the sidelines as the bike sweeps through a corner. In the end, the audio and visual elements of the video are wasted on just adding some fun pictures to a brief summary of a written article. Seriously, I feel like a lot of vloggers - yes, VLOGGERS - do a better job than the professional journalists on providing a feel for what it's like to ride the bike in question. An important part of that is having onboard footage from the riders perspective in a range of conditions (not just sideline footage with tons of shitty music to drown out the sound). They actually, you know, take advantage of the medium (i.e. video) instead of just adding it as a distraction between scripted discussions by the presenters. I love seeing a helmet POV of a 0-60 stoplight run - seeing the ground accelerate underneath you, the dash rise and fall as you shift, and hearing the sound of the engine race through it's rev range. I enjoy that waaaay more than a closeup of the speedometer in the middle of a corner with a heavy handed application of royalty free techno music. I mean, is it really THAT hard to see which gives the viewer a better feeling for what it's like to actually ride the bike? And all of the major journalists seem to be guilty of this. They have video reviews, but all the actual content is spoken and the video only exists as a useless montage to string together their talking points and adds nothing to the viewer experience. There is really no information in this video you couldn't get from a written article. It wastes all the possibilities sight and sound offer. In the end, these are "video reviews" in the same way 6 hours of a person reading a book on camera is a "movie."
I literally, by pure reflexes, took my mouse to the like button 3 times while reading your comment, because it is so on point and hits the nail on its head. I know it's been a year, but many "professional" journalists still seem to suffer from this problem, that in the end, they don't really care what the viewers want. They just care about the views and getting the basic job done - and nothing more than that. It barely ticks the parameters of what a review consists of. Barely. To be honest, I only enjoyed this vid slightly, because the bike is nice. That's it. I couldn't give two fucks about the forgettable people in it, talking about some forgettable crap that literally every other written/spoken review covers.
that color is seriously cool.. nice review guys. could you please do a comparison between ninja 650 and this one... cause they both are nice machines, please please review them...
Good to see Honda come out with a bike comparable to the Ninja 650. I'm looking for a bike and was leaning toward the Ninja 650 because Honda didn't have anything in that range.
How tall are the presenters? At 6.3" I always have difficulty finding a 600ish bike that doesn't make me look like a giant. I wish reviewers would talk more about ergonomics rather than push it through a racetrack and that's it.
Honda gelded the 650 for the sakes of making it a2 compliant for the Eussr nanny state. The older 600 has more power straight out of the pen. I'll take the older bike over this modern tosh thankyou.
Engineers in their 20s? Aren't those guys still inexperienced? Engineering is one of the toughest fields out there.Designing and working motorcycles you probably need the most experienced engineers.
The ninja 650 is a 2 cylinder whearas the cbr is a 4 cylinder...sounds much better. the cbr also has a 180 rear tire where the ninja has a 160. cosmetically...i think the cbr is much more appealing to look at and has slightly lower handlebars.
Having a thinner rear tire does aid in quicker turn-in, it's not necessarily a downside. Nor is a parallel twin of comparable displacement. Not to mention the 1500 USD premium of the Honda. What are you looking for in a mid-displacement sporty bike?
Quite a pointless review. I wanted to see and hear the startup of the bike and getting going with it, like one would on a normal day riding out. None of that is in here.
+Blake Garvey I have a 2007 Kawasaki 650R, first generation. The 650R does buzz around 4,000 rpm--no getting around that. My 2007 650R is a bit quicker from 0-60 than the Honda CBR650F. Top end is probably a tie, around 145 mph. There's no way I would spend all that money for that CBR650F when mine's way better: cheaper to buy used, better on fuel, more torque as it's a twin etc.,
I thought that too. Then realised that both meters were cracked in exactly the same pattern... It's the reflection of the windshield, they're not cracked at all lol.
