Allow me to answer... Though my answer would not be too technical to digest but will try to make it as simple as possible.

1. I am disappointed about the mileage claims of the CBR250R which is about 25-30 kmpl. At this figure, the bike is touted as highly fuel efficient!!
Recently, I read reviews of RE Classic 500 in some auto sites and found out that mileage of this fat bike has been found to be the same or slightly better at 27kmpl.
Now, I am jealous about the Classic that despite its 20kg excess mass, badly accused archaic engine technology can beat the CBR on mileage front and on power front too with 27bhp.
Could anyone explain what could make the bullet so envious to me please?
@Satyen: Good question! The RE does 27BHP with a bigger capacity engine. The cylinder of the engine is like a small barrel. It sucks in the fuel and air, is squeezed and burnt in a tiny area which people refer as 'compression' and this burning of the mixture generates the power. The exhaust also helps in sending back unburnt mixture back to the cylinder.
How much fuel it sucks in, how much compression it has, and how effeciently could it burn the fuel and ofcourse the size of the cylinder all play a vital role in deciding how much the bike can run.
The RE eats more, but doesn't process it well, despite its bigger stomach it generates as much power. The CBR eats effecient, doesn't waste a lot and generates as much power. Signifying that it uses the 'food' well.

Beyond the basics of eating enough and still being able to perform well, it goes one step beyond and ensure food isn't wasted.. So the engine is healthier and wouldn't need a stomach wash over a period of time like the REs mandate.



2. I have read in this thread few pages back that it is now standardized that 250CC bikes have to be single cylinders. Any idea whats the purpose of making them singles?
@satyen: this is what stupid posts do! Its not necessary!
In simple terms a single stomach is easier to manage than 4 smaller stomachs! So its easier to manage, easier to build and maintain and hence single cylinder. One could still make a 6 cylinder 250 too!
For a manufacturer in this segment for such small eating capabilities it rather have ONE tiffin rather than 4 small tiffins to carry the same food!

3. Lastly, a layman's question. Please do not kick me out of here for this. Why shoould a bike cost more than a car any day? A car looks to be taking in more of everything than a bike in the manufacturing process - more materials, more time, labour etc etc... So, why should Honda CBR250R or any other bike of this class should cost more than say a TATA Nano or a similar small car?
@Satyen- Beats me! Which is why I would want to wait for a Bajaj or TVS to respond to this product. It may not be as effecient, but it would be VFM enough!


Ps: I know I can't apply for a job as a physics professor with these examples, but I hope they helped!

Allow me to answer... Though my answer would not be too technical to digest but will try to make it as simple as possible.

1. I am disappointed about the mileage claims of the CBR250R which is about 25-30 kmpl. At this figure, the bike is touted as highly fuel efficient!!
Recently, I read reviews of RE Classic 500 in some auto sites and found out that mileage of this fat bike has been found to be the same or slightly better at 27kmpl.
Now, I am jealous about the Classic that despite its 20kg excess mass, badly accused archaic engine technology can beat the CBR on mileage front and on power front too with 27bhp.
Could anyone explain what could make the bullet so envious to me please?
@Satyen: Good question! The RE does 27BHP with a bigger capacity engine. The cylinder of the engine is like a small barrel. It sucks in the fuel and air, is squeezed and burnt in a tiny area which people refer as 'compression' and this burning of the mixture generates the power. The exhaust also helps in sending back unburnt mixture back to the cylinder.
How much fuel it sucks in, how much compression it has, and how effeciently could it burn the fuel and ofcourse the size of the cylinder all play a vital role in deciding how much the bike can run.
The RE eats more, but doesn't process it well, despite its bigger stomach it generates as much power. The CBR eats effecient, doesn't waste a lot and generates as much power. Signifying that it uses the 'food' well.

Beyond the basics of eating enough and still being able to perform well, it goes one step beyond and ensure food isn't wasted.. So the engine is healthier and wouldn't need a stomach wash over a period of time like the REs mandate.



2. I have read in this thread few pages back that it is now standardized that 250CC bikes have to be single cylinders. Any idea whats the purpose of making them singles?
@satyen: this is what stupid posts do! Its not necessary!
In simple terms a single stomach is easier to manage than 4 smaller stomachs! So its easier to manage, easier to build and maintain and hence single cylinder. One could still make a 6 cylinder 250 too!
For a manufacturer in this segment for such small eating capabilities it rather have ONE tiffin rather than 4 small tiffins to carry the same food!

3. Lastly, a layman's question. Please do not kick me out of here for this. Why shoould a bike cost more than a car any day? A car looks to be taking in more of everything than a bike in the manufacturing process - more materials, more time, labour etc etc... So, why should Honda CBR250R or any other bike of this class should cost more than say a TATA Nano or a similar small car?
@Satyen- Beats me! Which is why I would want to wait for a Bajaj or TVS to respond to this product. It may not be as effecient, but it would be VFM enough!


Ps: I know I can't apply for a job as a physics professor with these examples, but I hope they helped!

Awe common! Atleast be fair! This wasn't a mumbo jumbo sermon! This should help the ones here, and the ones who come back after 48 hours into not throwing jargons! Seems funny, but isn't intended to be like that (unless ofcourse you visualized it)

@satyen:- you could get into teaching man, nice explanation

Now when did stomach, digestion and tiffin end up in physics ... Ah, Who cares Healthy post finally!

One of the best replies I have ever seen. Funny but bang on target..

@Satyen: I enjoy reading your replies buddy. What is your motivation?

+1 bro! I'm loving it!

ROTF .. LMAO..

Jokes apart.. funny, but well explained.. and to the point..

u rock..

Honestly, didn't mean to demean it or anything... its just that I visualized the stomachs & tiffins

Jokes apart very well explained...

And ofcourse stomach and tiffins are easier to understand,

Is it true that the ABS on this bike is engaged only when the rear brake pedal is depressed v hard??? And ABS does not engage when you press only the front brake???

Allow me to answer... Though my answer would not be too technical to digest but will try to make it as simple as possible.

1. I am disappointed about the mileage claims of the CBR250R which is about 25-30 kmpl. At this figure, the bike is touted as highly fuel efficient!!
Recently, I read reviews of RE Classic 500 in some auto sites and found out that mileage of this fat bike has been found to be the same or slightly better at 27kmpl.
Now, I am jealous about the Classic that despite its 20kg excess mass, badly accused archaic engine technology can beat the CBR on mileage front and on power front too with 27bhp.
Could anyone explain what could make the bullet so envious to me please?
@Satyen: Good question! The RE does 27BHP with a bigger capacity engine. The cylinder of the engine is like a small barrel. It sucks in the fuel and air, is squeezed and burnt in a tiny area which people refer as 'compression' and this burning of the mixture generates the power. The exhaust also helps in sending back unburnt mixture back to the cylinder.
How much fuel it sucks in, how much compression it has, and how effeciently could it burn the fuel and ofcourse the size of the cylinder all play a vital role in deciding how much the bike can run.
The RE eats more, but doesn't process it well, despite its bigger stomach it generates as much power. The CBR eats effecient, doesn't waste a lot and generates as much power. Signifying that it uses the 'food' well.

Beyond the basics of eating enough and still being able to perform well, it goes one step beyond and ensure food isn't wasted.. So the engine is healthier and wouldn't need a stomach wash over a period of time like the REs mandate.



2. I have read in this thread few pages back that it is now standardized that 250CC bikes have to be single cylinders. Any idea whats the purpose of making them singles?
@satyen: this is what stupid posts do! Its not necessary!
In simple terms a single stomach is easier to manage than 4 smaller stomachs! So its easier to manage, easier to build and maintain and hence single cylinder. One could still make a 6 cylinder 250 too!
For a manufacturer in this segment for such small eating capabilities it rather have ONE tiffin rather than 4 small tiffins to carry the same food!

3. Lastly, a layman's question. Please do not kick me out of here for this. Why shoould a bike cost more than a car any day? A car looks to be taking in more of everything than a bike in the manufacturing process - more materials, more time, labour etc etc... So, why should Honda CBR250R or any other bike of this class should cost more than say a TATA Nano or a similar small car?
@Satyen- Beats me! Which is why I would want to wait for a Bajaj or TVS to respond to this product. It may not be as effecient, but it would be VFM enough!


Ps: I know I can't apply for a job as a physics professor with these examples, but I hope they helped!

Is it true that the ABS on this bike is engaged only when the rear brake pedal is depressed v hard??? And ABS does not engage when you press only the front brake???

Allow me to answer... Though my answer would not be too technical to digest but will try to make it as simple as possible.

1. I am disappointed about the mileage claims of the CBR250R which is about 25-30 kmpl. At this figure, the bike is touted as highly fuel efficient!!
Recently, I read reviews of RE Classic 500 in some auto sites and found out that mileage of this fat bike has been found to be the same or slightly better at 27kmpl.
Now, I am jealous about the Classic that despite its 20kg excess mass, badly accused archaic engine technology can beat the CBR on mileage front and on power front too with 27bhp.
Could anyone explain what could make the bullet so envious to me please?
@Satyen: Good question! The RE does 27BHP with a bigger capacity engine. The cylinder of the engine is like a small barrel. It sucks in the fuel and air, is squeezed and burnt in a tiny area which people refer as 'compression' and this burning of the mixture generates the power. The exhaust also helps in sending back unburnt mixture back to the cylinder.
How much fuel it sucks in, how much compression it has, and how effeciently could it burn the fuel and ofcourse the size of the cylinder all play a vital role in deciding how much the bike can run.
The RE eats more, but doesn't process it well, despite its bigger stomach it generates as much power. The CBR eats effecient, doesn't waste a lot and generates as much power. Signifying that it uses the 'food' well.

Beyond the basics of eating enough and still being able to perform well, it goes one step beyond and ensure food isn't wasted.. So the engine is healthier and wouldn't need a stomach wash over a period of time like the REs mandate.



2. I have read in this thread few pages back that it is now standardized that 250CC bikes have to be single cylinders. Any idea whats the purpose of making them singles?
@satyen: this is what stupid posts do! Its not necessary!
In simple terms a single stomach is easier to manage than 4 smaller stomachs! So its easier to manage, easier to build and maintain and hence single cylinder. One could still make a 6 cylinder 250 too!
For a manufacturer in this segment for such small eating capabilities it rather have ONE tiffin rather than 4 small tiffins to carry the same food!

3. Lastly, a layman's question. Please do not kick me out of here for this. Why shoould a bike cost more than a car any day? A car looks to be taking in more of everything than a bike in the manufacturing process - more materials, more time, labour etc etc... So, why should Honda CBR250R or any other bike of this class should cost more than say a TATA Nano or a similar small car?
@Satyen- Beats me! Which is why I would want to wait for a Bajaj or TVS to respond to this product. It may not be as effecient, but it would be VFM enough!


Ps: I know I can't apply for a job as a physics professor with these examples, but I hope they helped!

welcome to xbhp ... wt a concept u have ..till now i though R15 is good look and reasonable cost ... hmm... i think the scene will change once other players pitch in with there low cost 250's

as for H250 .. i'll check once its on the road .. and i think H250 will give some 30kmpl i hope

Hi Nagoo, thank for the warm welcome man! Sorry, I did not mean to term R15 ugly. These are the things I do not like about R15 design :
1. Too beaky front
2. The windscreen looks like a flower petal just inserted between the headlights. The Yamaha logo emboss on it looks cheap aftermarget finish.
3. The notorius ugly rear
4. The seat cowl is too 'thick' when viewed from side, could have been slimmer
5. The cockpit looks cluttered - justy compare with the neatly done H250..
There are more but I dont want to irritate you. These are my personal opinions after all. But cannot deny the performance though

none taken ...now lets stick to the topic H250R

Really nice explanation there bro

And i wanna ask a question regarding the mileage thingy. 250 returns around 30ish KMPL. Well a CBR1000rr returns like 10kmpl with that inline 4 right? and that is like 4 x 250cc "stomachs" generating around 13 horses more and revving all the way to 14k revs . So, technically isnt the 1000rr more fuel efficient than the single cylinder 250?

Regarding the fuel efficiency comparo between RE500 and CBR250. A lazy, stone age engine like RE EFI is not that fuel efficient. But still for the power and torque it packs, its good.

Hello guys... I am Shivaprasad who just got into XBHP from Bangalore. Firstly I am one of those who have booked their CBR250Rs on 1st Jan. So, I have a reason to pitch in this thread.
Strictly sticking to the topic of the thread, I like to post few questions seeking answers from the knowledgeable XBHPians.

1. I am disappointed about the mileage claims of the CBR250R which is about 25-30 kmpl. At this figure, the bike is touted as highly fuel efficient!!
Recently, I read reviews of RE Classic 500 in some auto sites and found out that mileage of this fat bike has been found to be the same or slightly better at 27kmpl.
Now, I am jealous about the Classic that despite its 20kg excess mass, badly accused archaic engine technology can beat the CBR on mileage front and on power front too with 27bhp.
Could anyone explain what could make the bullet so envious to me please?