Has anyone had the experience of riding a 300X and a ninja 300 back to back? I read that the 300x had been tuned for more linear power band with more torque low down than the Ninja. If so, the low end of the ninja must have been pitiful because the 300x doesn't have anything under 4K RPM. I'm not wanting more HP I just wondered seeing I also read that the ninja had 39 HP while in reality on dyno the 300x had 32.
Any inputs? I love my 300x the way it is...

Regarding the horsepower comparison, my dealership actually made me sign a specific (disclaimer?) form when I bought my Versys-X 300. It was for me to acknowledge that the Versys made 39 HP, (and a couple of other points about the bike that I don't remember.) He said that in the past, customers have come back with various new purchases, trying to make returns when they they found out that X bike only made X horsepower. So apparently the Versys and Ninja both had the same claimed horsepower, although I'm sure the Ninja's actual dyno results would have beeen similar to your info about the Versys-X 300.

 

Has anyone had the experience of riding a 300X and a ninja 300 back to back? I read that the 300x had been tuned for more linear power band with more torque low down than the Ninja. If so, the low end of the ninja must have been pitiful because the 300x doesn't have anything under 4K RPM. I'm not wanting more HP I just wondered seeing I also read that the ninja had 39 HP while in reality on dyno the 300x had 32.
Any inputs? I love my 300x the way it is...

I have looked extensively into the specifications and parts, valves etc, of both motors and found them identical but for their ECU's.
There are many reasons why the ECU's may be different, but not necessarily injector timing etc.

The only major difference I could find between both is the X300's 14/46 vs the Ninjas 14/43 final gearing, and the reason why so many consider gearing up.

 

Comparisons of gear ratios are only valid if driven tire circumference is comparable. The circumference of a 130/80-17 tire is approximately 78.9 inches. The circumference of a 140/70-17 tire is approximately 77.65 inches. So the Ninja is covering slightly less distance with each tire rotation. This isn't much of a difference and probably not noticeable to the average rider.
14/43=3.07
15/46=3.07
Easy to see why many riders opt for 15T.
Above comparisons are from AI which may have no relationship to reality.

 

My Versys 1000 doesn’t really start pulling until 4000 rpm too, even my old BMW oil-cooled boxer twin isn’t happy below 3000.

I’m sure riding position helps the Ninja ‘feel’ more sporty, especially with 17” front but guessing in most conditions your lap times wouldn’t be far behind.

 

same engine. everything else is different.

VX is geared down and tuned, the frame, suspention, and riding positions are all different. do you want a sportbike? or do you want something that can offroad/tour/commute?

i rode both when i was looking for a bike, i just dident like being so cramped on a sportbike. To my utterly novice hands both engines felt pretty much the same probably because they are.

 

The engine is the same I’ve had both engines in bits & now have an X-315cc & the Ninja engine will become a 315cc that I’m fitting to my ZZR250, which should take the rear wheel HP from 26-40+. The Kawasaki 300 engine produces 39hp at the crank, which is where manufacturers measure them, that is in an engine with NO gearbox, connected directly to a shaft Dyno. So when you add gearbox/clutch/chain/wheel/tyre & all the bearings that support that assembly, you introduce inertia & drag, so when measured on a wheel dyno you get a lower hp number.

The X300 has longer intake runners, which operate best on a lower frequency intake reflection pulse which increase cylinder filling at lower rpm, but are more restrictive at higher rpm. The Ninja300 uses shorter intake runners which work better at higher rpm. You can’t change the torque created much on any size normally aspirated engine as it’s a function of volumetric efficiency, unless you turbo it. You can change make more or less with compression ratio (CR) &/or valve timing changes. Hence my 315cc 12.5-1 CR version. Hoping for rwhp in the high 30’s or low 40’s once tuned.

A 296cc engine will never be a torque monster, but is good for 100mph & circa 7sec 0-60mph times, which is pretty good whilst getting 70mpg to boot.

Enjoy it

 

The X300 has longer intake runners, which operate best on a lower frequency intake reflection pulse which increase cylinder filling at lower rpm, but are more restrictive at higher rpm. The Ninja300 uses shorter intake runners which work better at higher rpm.

Actually, the X300 has one short and one long intake runner as one cylinder is tuned for torque and the other for horsepower. This allows Kawasaki to patch dips in the output curve and make the engine more streetable for the X300. The 3D printed airbox I'm running uses equal length runners but we fixed the 6k-7k dip with porting, high compression pistons, and dyno tuning. The meaty midrange punch this engine has now is its best feature, imho, as it's a 6-7hp boost right where I keep the tach most of the time in the twisties.

 

Correct, but as stock both intake runners are longer than Ninja 300 ones.