Ninja250 vs CBR250

Kev_ps3

Which is better do you think? Im talking about the new ninja and the old cbr250. Im probably going to pick one of these up in the future. It will just be a bike to pass my test on and go out for spins on nice days. CBR is more powerful and looks fun to drive but its old and the styling is a bit dated imo. Ninja looks cool esp in black but more expensive and less powerful.
Give me yer opinions please

maameeo

ninja, just for looks (yea typical girl thing to say!) i love the all black ninja, sweeeeet, i want!

KamiKazi

Old CBR250 for me, proper howler of a bike to drive

Kev_ps3

KamiKazi wrote: »

Old CBR250 for me, proper howler of a bike to drive

is it true that all the insurance companies look for restricted certs these days tho?

maameeo

Kev_ps3 wrote: »

is it true that all the insurance companies look for restricted certs these days tho?

ive a fazer 600, with quinn, they never asked me and thats only in the past few months.

I've heard lots of people say they ask nowadays but i wasnt asked for one.

Idleater

maameeo wrote: »

ive a fazer 600, with quinn, they never asked me and thats only in the past few months.

I've heard lots of people say they ask nowadays but i wasnt asked for one.

They don't have to. You must have a restricted bike to comply with your licence. Your insurance is after the fact. Sure they can ask you if it's restricted, but unless it's factory restricted they aren't giving you a discount, so they aren't in a position to police the matter.

i.e. You shouldn't be applying for insurance for something that you are not legally allowed to drive. If you do that is something more severe than what the insurance companies deal with - i.e. a matter for the Gardaí.

maameeo

Idleater wrote: »

They don't have to. You must have a restricted bike to comply with your licence. Your insurance is after the fact. Sure they can ask you if it's restricted, but unless it's factory restricted they aren't giving you a discount, so they aren't in a position to police the matter.

i.e. You shouldn't be applying for insurance for something that you are not legally allowed to drive. If you do that is something more severe than what the insurance companies deal with - i.e. a matter for the Gardaí.

eeh what you talking bout, my bike is restricted and i carry the cert with me everywhere i go along with my insurance and license. im totally legal.

I was only telling him i wasn't asked for the restriction cert when i got my insurance.

Idleater

maameeo wrote: »

eeh what you talking bout, my bike is restricted and i carry the cert with me everywhere i go along with my insurance and license. im totally legal.

Sorry, I happened to quote your post but I was replying to the general query

Kev_ps3 wrote:

it true that all the insurance companies look for restricted certs these days tho?

I apologise for appearing to query the legality of your or any other person's insurance status, it was not the intention of my answer.

maameeo wrote: »

I was only telling him i wasn't asked for the restriction cert when i got my insurance.

This is what my answer refers to. That there should be no reliance on insurance companies to ask for a cert, nor should not asking for one be interpreted as being allowed to ride the bike for which the insurance quote was given. It is not up to insurance companies to enforce this law, they provide insurance on details that you give them, along with a declaration on your part that you are legally allowed to drive the vehicle in question.
Apologies again.

brian plank

i hate the 250 ninja but id imagine it'd be hard to find an unabused cbr. if you can then the cbr all day.

maameeo

Idleater wrote: »

Sorry, I happened to quote your post but I was replying to the general query
I apologise for appearing to query the legality of your or any other person's insurance status, it was not the intention of my answer.

This is what my answer refers to. That there should be no reliance on insurance companies to ask for a cert, nor should not asking for one be interpreted as being allowed to ride the bike for which the insurance quote was given. It is not up to insurance companies to enforce this law, they provide insurance on details that you give them, along with a declaration on your part that you are legally allowed to drive the vehicle in question.
Apologies again.

gentleman, you are forgiven

And i agree, bike should be restricted, but i also think there are a few reasons why people would want to know if insurance ask for it. I've heard of people buying a restricted bike but not have the cert or someone whos been driving most of there life and let there license go out of date and have to start all over again (yes i know they should be restricted but they might not feel the same way after so much years and experience behind them) There are different circumstances.

Alkers

Kev_ps3 wrote: »

Which is better do you think? Im talking about the new ninja and the old cbr250. Im probably going to pick one of these up in the future. It will just be a bike to pass my test on and go out for spins on nice days. CBR is more powerful and looks fun to drive but its old and the styling is a bit dated imo. Ninja looks cool esp in black but more expensive and less powerful.
Give me yer opinions please

Hornet 250 for me.
Slightly detuned cbr250 engine but doesn't look as dated.

Idleater

maameeo wrote: »

There are different circumstances.

There are most certainly different circumstances, but from the insurance company's point of view, they are only interested in quoting and rating you on information they ask you to honestly provide.
Things that have an influence on insurance rating include bike storage and use locations, rider age (and gender), as well as the bike itself.

For Restricted riders, if the bike is factory restricted they simply ring the importer/dealer with the frame number (as they did with my SV650) to confirm the details of the Vehicle Registration Cert. If the bike is not factory restricted, they can only presume that you are complying with your licence, they may ask for some certificate, but they don't have to as it is for you to ensure that your vehicle meets the criteria of your license. They calculate what the premium for you on the bike is ignoring the restriction (though they may discount you a bit if it is restricted at which point the certificate may be required).

A similar example: I must wear corrective lenses, but Aon don't ask me for a passport photo wearing glasses, they assume that I'm sensible enough to wear the glasses when I drive the car or ride the bike as per my licence restriction code.

FGR

Quinn insisted that I fax in a copy of the factory restriction certificate before they would allow me anywhere near my GSF650s. Even then they wouldn't accept it as it was just under 2 years old. Thankfully the dealer contacted Suzuki and had a new one issued the following morning.

Different strokes for different folks.

Wossack

Simona1986 wrote: »

Hornet 250 for me.
Slightly detuned cbr250 engine but doesn't look as dated.

yep, all the way

cheaper to insure- but I think prob harder to get in good shape for good money.. they were mental money when I was considering one a few years back

HellsAngel

maameeo wrote: »

ninja, just for looks (yea typical girl thing to say!) i love the all black ninja, sweeeeet, i want!

Also love the look of a ninja, their's something mean looking about it, as if to say get the hell outta my way !!! Still, hard beat Honda for reliability.

tiernanobrien

if you can find a clean, unabused cbr I'd be suprised. You're better off with the ninja... only a few horsies less but itll do til you get past your restriction. You may even be able to get a restricted sv650.
as people have mentioned the hornet 250. I've had one of those, a 05 sv650s and i missed the hornet so much i got a 99 600. still rate the 250 as the most fun of the 3!

Kev_ps3

yea the hornet looks good and I wont rule it out but I just prefer sportsbikes tbh