56 minutes ago, Rogue_Biker
We really shouldn't be comparing the VFR800 to a current generation sportbike. Has anyone seen any die-hard Ducatisti complain that the new Supersport is underpowered when compared to the 959 Panigale? One is a sportbike that emphasizes maximum power at the loftiest RPM they can get. The other is a streetbike meant for overall competence & balanced performance. If you want to compare apples to apples, then compare the VFR to the Supersport. Both have around 100 rwhp. The SS is faster by a hair. The question should be, will the VFR800 really fall miserably behind a SS? Does the VFR800 feel like a penalty box when you ride it? In other words, does it really suck to ride? Answers are all no! The VFR800 is fun to ride, handles great, looks great, high quality, reliable, etc. Is not having the extra 20 horsepower like that from a Kawasaki Z1000 holding you back? Even today's Suzuki GSX-S750 puts out 100 rwhp.
If you are looking for a middle class sport bike, look no further than the CBR600RR. Don't let the "600" fool you into thinking it's slow. It is FAST...faster than the VFR800 of ANY generation. Then there's the liter bikes if you must have the "1000" between your legs. If you want one then get one, there is no shame in it. It's quite possible that the VFR800's deficiencies are all in our heads? Because the current VFR800 and even the prior gens will rocket you to 100 mph pretty quickly and keep on going to the top end of 140 mph. It's plenty fast enough for most folks. It falls within the sweet spot of having just enough power to be entertaining and exciting without having to work too hard for it, yet not having so much power that you rarely if ever get to use it.
Yes and no, I suppose.
In the "yes" camp, I picked up the VFR because I needed a more commuter oriented bike, and my ZX-14R was -- despite 20+ years on sportbikes -- a bit too much power for the street (it's now, basically, relegated to drag strip only, with the occasional day here and there on the street). So, yeah, I personally wanted something with around 100 rwhp to ride on a daily basis, because I found 200 rwhp to be silly for a daily rider. I don't enjoy breaking the rear tire loose on public roads...just not my cup of tea. So, yes, you're right -- it's just enough horsepower for me and my needs. But I'm probably not your typical bike buyer these days.
In the "no" camp, I think we can't ignore that it's hard for many prospective buyers to justify spending more money for a bike with less horsepower. Let's say you're looking to trade in a first or second bike for something a bit sportier, but also something that you want to use to commute or for moderate touring. The siren song of the Ninja 1000 or a comparable is pretty hard to block out -- 30 more hp and similar comfort for less money. And a lot of folks -- right or wrong -- buy bikes not just because they're what they want, but because there's a **** waving component to it. I think we can't completely factor out the foregoing, because if people didn't want more than the VFR delivers, leftover new VFRs wouldn't be going in the $6k range, and Honda would still be importing them to the US. And just to be clear, I think but for that last bit, I'd be a heck of a lot more likely to say that the VFR is just fine how it is (it certainly is for me), but if people aren't buying them I guess they're just not what most people want, even if it is what we want.
And as far as 600cc supersports go? Those days are long past for me, my friend. I'll stick with the VFR for the road and the ZX for the track. :)