Honda CBR500R vs Hyosung GT650R EFI

The gloves are off in the entry-level market, and with the Learner Approved Motorcycle Scheme (LAMS) now in place across the nation, having replaced the old blanket 250cc limit with a combined 660cc and power-to-weight ratio limit, Aussies eager to get up on two wheels now have more models to choose from than ever before. While the LAMS market is still home to top-selling smaller-capacity machines like Kawasaki’s market-leading Ninja 300 and Honda’s CBR250R, taller and heavier learners in particular are often better suited to larger machines, and that’s where the models on test here – Hyosung’s long-established GT650R EFI LAMS and Honda’s brand-spanking-new CBR500R – come to the fore.

THE CONTENDERS
The GT650R from Korean manufacturer Hyosung is a firmly established favourite on the Aussie biking landscape. It’s been around in one form or another for 12 years, and in 2012 the combined sales of standard and LAMS-spec GT650Rs topped 464 units – more than any other sportsbike. To put that into perspective, it outsold Honda’s Fireblade, Suzuki’s GSX-R1000, Yamaha’s YZF-R1 and Ducati’s 1199 Panigale. That’s some well-credentialed company, even if the litre-class blasters are in a different league in terms of outright performance.

In the red corner, Honda’s new CBR500R is the latest salvo from the Japanese manufacturer as it attempts to reinvent itself to address a brave, post-GFC world. The CBR500R is one of three new models sharing the same frame and engine, and it follows in the tyre tracks of the CBR250R and CRF250L in being affordable, fuel-efficient entry-level machines manufactured at Honda’s cost-effective facility in Thailand.

Of course, these two aren’t without their rivals. Suzuki’s keenly priced GS500/F has been selling steadily for years, but it’s finally been discontinued in Australia and while stock is still plentiful on dealership floors, that stock will eventually go. It’s still selling strongly, however – Suzuki Australia says sales of the model are up 60 per cent this year compared to the same point last year. It also says that while no replacement 500 is in the wings, Suzuki is exploring other areas to satisfy the LAMS/commuter market. And then there are bikes like Kawasaki’s Ninja 650L and ER-6nl, Yamaha’s XJ6NL, and Suzuki’s SV650S LAMS and GSX650F LAMS – all great options but appreciably dearer than the GT and CBR. Finally, don’t forget CFMoto’s 650NK. It’s essentially a copy of Kawasaki’s ER-6n but its price is on a par with the GT and CBR.

To measure the Hyosung’s and Honda’s merits, Bikesales Network’s Mark ‘Mav’ Fattore and I pointed the pair at the Victorian seaside town of Apollo Bay, enjoying backroads from Melbourne to Geelong and then the delights of a largely deserted Great Ocean Road (it was a weekday) before heading back home over the winding roads of the Otway Ranges. Bikesales regular Murray ‘Muzza’ Sharp of Sharp Racing Accessories was along for the fun, doing his best to remain inconspicuous on the mighty Moto Guzzi California 1400 Custom (catch the full review here at Bikesales Network shortly).

INTO BATTLE
After the first bike swap at Bacchus Marsh, it was clear the two manufacturers take a fairly different view of the term ‘sports bike’. The GT has a true sports bike ride position – head down, bum up – with considerably less legroom, a plank-like seat, diminutive alloy footpegs and low clip-on handlebars. The moment you hop aboard you’re in an aggressive stance, ready to hunt down some corners and have some fun. While that’s all well and good when you’re having a blast on a winding road, or maybe even at a track day, the ride position does place some pressure on your wrists and neck, making the bike more tiring over longer, multi-hour stints.

The CBR, on the other hand, has a very mild ride position. With a nicely compliant seat, the stance is more upright, with only minimal wrist pressure and surprisingly generous legroom. The handlebars have integrated risers, placing their height a good measure above the GT’s clip-ons, while the footpegs are broad, rubbed-topped items.

For me, it boils down to this: if you’ve after a true sports bike the GT fits the bill, but for rider comfort, especially if you’re at the larger end of the rider spectrum, the CBR is the clear winner. The claimed seat height for both is a manageable 790mm. Of course an important aspect for learners is control, and a more upright stance is always going to more manageable for novices than a racer’s crouch, even if it’s not quite as ‘sexy’ for those intent on emulating their MotoGP idols.

Throw in their varying engine formats – a V-twin for the GT and a parallel-twin for the CBR – and both bikes have markedly different characters. The GT has a harsher edge to it, with a higher level of inherent vibration. It’s not enough to annoy, however, more that it adds to the machine’s sporty character, and while the vibes build with the revs you’re generally having too much fun to even notice them. The GT is the more dynamic, engaging ride of the two, and its seat-of-the-pants feel seems to reward pushing on toward the upper end of the rev range. That character is perhaps accentuated by the sporty stance – it goads you to push harder along a winding road.

In contrast the CBR feels more refined and remarkably smooth. The 180-degree crank and balance shaft combine to create an almost vibration-free ride, while the power delivery feels – to use a well-worn term – linear. ‘Docile’ is another word that springs to mind, and while some may mistake that for ‘bland’, for its intended market it’s perfect – and, to my mind, it’s still plenty of fun.

DOWN TO BUSINESS
With the memorial arch that marks the beginning of the Great Ocean Road behind us, the tight switchbacks and sweepers of this famed route swung into view, and it was time to push the pair into sports mode. While the model names and engine capacities may indicate a bit of a mismatch, the fact our GT was a restricted LAMS model meant that in terms of power output they were both pretty well matched. The GT is only available in LAMS trim at the moment, but Hyosung Australia is pondering the reintroduction of the full-biscuit bike. In any case, the GT has an extra 4.3hp over the CBR and great deal more torque, but then the CBR is considerably lighter, too – over 30-odd kilos lighter, in fact.

Hopping from one to the other at Lorne revealed they were very close in terms of outright performance, and in fact some roll-on tests later in the day, on a lonely country straight, revealed they were neck and neck. The CBR hits its redline well before the GT in lower gears (its indicated redline is 8500rpm, versus 10,500rpm for the GT), but the Honda just edged ahead of the GT until the revlimiter kicked in. Really, there’s bugger all in it. At 100km/h in top of their six-speed gearboxes the CBR was pulling 4750rpm while the GT was pulling are more relaxed 4250rpm, reflecting the capacity and possibly gear ratio differences. Top speeds? I should think both would be capable of the old ton (100mph, or 160km/h), with a bit in reserve.

Both bikes’ fuel injection is thoroughly sorted. It wasn’t that many years ago that carburetted learner bikes had dips and flat spots in their power delivery that could swallow a rider whole. Those days are gone – and the fuelling on each of these bikes was sufficiently worthy that I never had to think about it. They start up fine on a cold winter’s morning, too.

THE SPRING THING
The GT’s harder sportsbike focus is also played out in its suspension and brakes. It’s got the highest level of suspension adjustment with rebound and compression on the fork and preload on the monoshock, and while the fork settings are all super-easy to change, the access to the threaded collar on the monoshock isn’t great and will prove a little fiddlier. The GT’s ride is firm, also underlining its sporty intent, but it’s harsh over potholes and bumps (of which the Great Ocean Road has many) – we’re not talking top-shelf Öhlins gear here.

The CBR cops a non-adjustable fork and a nine-stage, preload-adjustable monoshock, with reasonable access to the latter. Its ride is a little softer and more compliant, but it too is harsh over any decent road irregularity. In summary, both bikes offer an entirely decent ride but they have been built to a price – don’t expect miracles. Both can also be punted hard along a twisting road to good effect; each has more than adequate ground clearance, allowing the pair to make the most of their quality rubber (Bridgestone Battlax BT56 for the GT, Dunlop Sportmax D222 for the Honda).

The respective braking packages are on the money. The sporty GT gets a twin-disc, four-piston front set-up while the CBR gets a single-disc, twin-piston deal. Unsurprisingly, the GT’s stoppers are more powerful than the CBR’s, but not by as much as you might expect – the Honda can still wash off speed with impressive haste. The Honda also has another couple of aces up its sleeve in this respect: you’ll only have to buy one set of pads and one rotor when they’re up for replacement, and the CBR is also available with ABS for an extra $500.

For beginner riders, ABS makes sense. I speak from experience here. Twenty years ago I crashed my first bike in Sydney’s Lane Cove National Park about three weeks after buying it, purely through panic breaking and locking up the front on a wet road. With ABS it simply wouldn’t have happened – and I could have avoided the resulting expense and the broken wrist.

The six-speed gearbox on each bike is fine – they get the job done with little fuss, but again don’t expect litre-class-sportsbike precision. Importantly, the clutch action is light for both and I had no problems finding neutral when I needed to.

For fuel economy the CBR wins by a narrow margin. It recorded 4.2lt/100km at a steady-ish pace and 4.8lt/100km when we’d been going for it. The GT recorded equivalents of 4.9lt/100km and 5.0lt/100km – the style of riding appeared to have less effect on its consumption. As such, both bikes have similar ranges, easily exceeding the 300km-per-tank mark.

ODDS AND ENDS
And then we come to the odds and ends – those little things that can make life easier or prove annoying in the long term. The CBR is the easier bike to push around and manoeuvre in the driveway thanks to its lighter weight but also its greater steering range – the GT has a more limited, sportsbike-like range. Honda quotes 24,000km service intervals for the CBR while Hyosung quotes 6000km services with a major at 24,000km. Still, if I had a CBR I’d be changing the oil every 6000km anyway – it’s cheap insurance (I’m a stickler like that).

The GT fuel filler is hinged while the CBR’s isn’t – so you just know at some stage the CBR’s cap is going to roll off the seat at the servo and get dinged and scratched. The upholstery on the GT’s seating looks daggy – it’s kind of ‘puffy’, like it’s been over-stuffed with foam, despite the fact it’s significantly firmer than the CBR’s seating. While I didn’t get to ride the GT at night, I can say the CBR has excellent headlights.

The GT’s horn is good but the CBR’s is superb – that’s really important on an entry-level bike. However, Honda is pushing on with its reversed layout, which sees the (admittedly sizeable) horn button placed above the indicator switch. As an owner you’d get used to it, but if you swap from bike to bike it’s annoying because you have to reprogram your brain every time you do so.

And finally we have the general quality of finish. While the GT’s finish is good, it’s simply surpassed by that of the CBR, although both prove how a bike doesn’t have to come from Japan or Europe to be well made.

IN SUMMARY
We had a ball on these two bikes. They both represent simple, basic formulas that have been executed well, and for a nice price. The ‘plus on-roads’ of the CBR’s $6990 price tag pegs it on a par with the GT’s $7990 rideaway figure, or you can (and should) pay $500 more for the ABS-equipped Honda. If you’re a ‘sports bikes or nothing’ type of guy/gal, the top-selling GT still has much to offer, including a more involving, sportier ride. But if you appreciate a little more comfort and practicality, Honda’s new CBR is a superb package that’s destined to sell its wheels off. And, as a learner bike, I think it has the edge over the GT. If you’re in the market for either of these two models, don’t buy one without taking a test ride of both.