Seems the new Kawasaki Z900RS is definitely coming to Australia, and going to be unveiled not far from where I live on 15 November. It's for real as that comes from Kawasaki Australia's web page. https://kawasaki.com.au/general-kawasak ... bers-only/
Might go over and have a look at it. Probably a good chance I may even buy one, not on that night, I'm not that impulsive. Apparently the new 900 motor same as Z900 (really a sleeved down to 950cc Ninja 1000 engine is a real peach). Smooth linear power.
Most recent artists mock up of what the RS may look like. Don't know if they really know.
Was told today that the latest artists impression are pretty accurate of what the bike is actually going to look like.
After going to the dealers today and sitting on the standard Z900 its been ruled out so the possibility of a new RS has just gone up. The reason for taking the standard Z900 of the list is its just a little too far a reach to the bars, and the seat slopes forward jamming the family jewels into the tank. Realize both issues could be rectified, but with other things on the 'must do' list you have to draw the line somewhere.
And it has traction control, which I reckon is a major omission in the Z900. Sure its not necessary, neither is ABS, but in 2017 expected as a standard feature. ABS, I just about expect 6 axis IMU to be standard equipment these days. Already is on a Ninja 1000. What's this stuff add to the cost of a bike? Peanuts in the volumes the manufacturers would buy in.
One thing I am reading that concerns me, is the reported HP and torque for the engine. Couple articles are saying the engine has been detuned from the Z900. HP has been cut from 126 to 110 ..... and torque has been cut from 76ft/lbs to wait for it ...... 54ft/lbs. My stock 750 D1 makes 46 ft/lbs (if the engine was as new) at 7300 rpm. With the couple mods of 2 o/s pistons and worked head lets guess I should have get some small improvement, so say 48 ft/lbs.
So for something that I figure I won't get a lot of change out of A$15,000 ........ I get an additional 6 ft/lbs of performance.
Maybe have to think about this a bit more if these reported engine figures are correct.
P.S. another article reports torque as 72.6 ft/lbs That's just slightly less than the Z900 ..... I'm inclined to think the other articles must be incorrect and this number is right.
