revtothelimit - motorbike forum

It’s long been an ambition of mine, if not a concrete aim, to own one “landmark” bike from several decades. So, I’ve got a 750 Commando from the 70s, an RD350LC from the 80s, and happened upon this low mileage, very clean and very original Honda 900 Fireblade from 1994. The series was introduced in 1992 so it’s one of the original bikes and is in the desirable “Urban Tiger” colour scheme. If ever a bike deserved landmark status it’s a 90s Fireblade. Bought late last year, weather, lockdown and a series of hiccups stopped me riding it until this week. Finally, with MoT and tax in hand I’ve spent most of today on it and able to report what it feels like to ride a legend. Coming from an era where the fast bikes were “sports tourers” (but in reality, not very good at either thing), the Fireblade was revolutionary. Although it kept to the tried and tested Japanese in-line 4-cylinder engine format it was punchy with 120 bhp on tap, in a lightweight package with nimble steering and head-down riding position, setting it apart from the competition straight away. Go-faster touches abound, from the “lightening” style holes in the fairing to the dinner-plate sized brake discs to the 16” front tyre, copied from Grand Prix practice for faster steering. Having been a bit of a speed freak myself in the past it was a bike I decided I just had to own.

I’d always felt roadgoing sports bikes were a bit of a contradiction in terms after racing an ex-grand prix TZ350 Yamaha in the 1980s. It was about the size of a 125 learner bike but went like a scalded ferret and cornered like it was on rails. At 6ft1 it was a bit of a crowbar job to get myself on it but I managed, and got some useful results out of it. So, getting on a 900cc 4-cylinder bike I thought it would be like an armchair. It isn’t. Despite the bulk of the engine and the big fuel tank sitting atop it, Honda have done a great job making the bike feel small and agile. The only thing that feels “big” is the stretch to the low handlebars, though arguably that forces you into a racing crouch, complemented by high footrests for cornering ground clearance. But I have to stop the praise for a moment I’m afraid. It really is horribly uncomfortable. The bars are too far forward, leaving your crown jewels rammed against the back of the tank, your weight on your wrists leaves you crying for mercy at every junction, and the footrests are too far forward to take any weight on them. Perhaps a smaller rider would find the seating position acceptable but then they’d need a taxi to get them to the handlebars. Having accumulated a bit of girth over the years probably didn’t help me, but try as I might I just couldn’t get comfortable on the Blade.

Despite mixed first impressions the Fireblade is seriously impressive out on the road. Smooth and refined, it’s happy to trickle round town at 2-3,000 rpm but wind it up to the 10,000 redline and ye gods does it shift. It’s hard to find a bit of road where you can open up a big bike these days and I certainly didn’t try it for top speed, but a quick blat on a clear bit of dual carriageway provides total sensory overload. Back on the A roads, it’s confident and assured, not over-endowed with midrange power but happy to nip past dawdling caravans. Despite the large prominent rev counter right in front of the rider, frequent gear changing is a must as the gears are close ratio, much like a racing gearbox, and you’re up and down all the time, in short slick typically Honda shifts.

Road tests at the time criticised the 16” front wheel for making the bike too twitchy on steering, but I can’t fault it. It changes direction effortlessly but remains straight and stable in the bends with no steering damper needed. Plenty of power on tap and two-finger braking make this a bike you can swing through bends like it was made to do it, which of course it was.

Owning the Fireblade is a bit like meeting the woman of your dreams, then finding she’s a Tory voter. There’s so much going for it – a genuinely awesome piece of riding machinery, beautifully engineered and beautiful to look at, but the riding position is just awful. To me, this spoils something that was supposed to be perfect. My other “classics” aren’t perfect but I’m emotionally invested in them in a way that I’m not in the Blade. Is it a keeper? I genuinely don’t know. I’ll keep it this year for sure and I’m hopefully doing a big trip (on another bike) next year so maybe not selling then either. It could be an “investment” but that’s not really me. I like to ride my bikes not just look at them, and it’s money and garage space tied up that I’d rather not tie up. An occasional “sunny day” bike for quick blasts then, beyond that we’ll see. I wonder if there’s space in the dining room.

Great bikes ...got some good memories of the 96 model I had... Fast , fun , good handling , comfortable if not a little fat around the waist

I've never got the fuss over the urban tiger colour scheme though

I owned a 98 (The Fat Touring Blade) for 18 years.

They look fat, but they make modern bikes look heavy.

I weighed mine at a Cadwell trackday with 1/3 of a tank of fuel on a set of proper car corner scales and it was 186kg, a mates ZX7 was 206!

The 16inch front isn't a problem handling wise, but it does become a problem finding good/cheap tyre deals (the only reason I fitted a 17 incher).

I think it looks ace, and in fantastic nick for a bike nigh on 30 years old.

Cousin Jack wrote: Fri May 07, 2021 8:20 pm I think it looks ace, and in fantastic nick for a bike nigh on 30 years old.

It's no 12k mile 92 GSX-R1100N tho' :p

Random fact for the day but if I say the words "The most wonderful thing about Tigger" my lovely wife absolutely has to do the whole rest of the Tigger ryme.

She can't let it go unfinished. Its a proper disorder. Ive just done it now, it still works.

Shore is purdy.

The Blade was undeniably a game changer and still a great road bike.

I thought about keeping my 04 ZX10R,but the harsh truth is,it's very difficult to ride it in any kind of relaxed manner,it's a focussed machine. The Blade is the same,lovely to own,but hard to justify.

Nice looking bike, good write up.

Welcome back

I loved my 96 Blade it was my dream bike at the time. I found it fairly comfy but I was only 21 well except when I rode it to the South of France when it crippled me. Only issue I had with the 16 inch front was to me the front end was always vague with not much feedback. It never stopped me doing anything but always felt I rode with faith rather than feel with the front. Especially compared to my mates ZX7 and ZX9's.

Mine had a dynojet kit, can and K&N filter and after set up on Harris's dyno made 118.9bhp so they weren't very powerful but bloody fast. Mine made 150mph real easy. Interestingly when I rode Weeksy's XSR the other day I kept thinking that it didn't make much less power but felt a fair bit slower.

I've often toyed with the idea of buying another for nostalgia sakes but I think it wouldn't work for me for the same reasons that I sold it in the first place. Just too bloody fast.

Mine was this colour which I initially didn't like that much but now prefer to most of the others.

Mine was a 98, it was awesome. It was my first trackday bike, it was my first race bike.... It was the first bike i destroyed.

It then got rebuilt and ended up in the TT coming 29th place. The guy still has the trophy.... It was raced in Honda Britain colours....

weeksy200 by Steve Weeks, on Flickr

This thread made me start looking a old FireBlades!
Only rode one once - one of the early round headlight red , white and blue ones - first sports bike I ever rode.

There are not uncomfortable if you have owned a 998 ducati ...

I'd love a 'blade, if I were to buy a sportsbike it'd probably be a 954 blade. My dad had one just like this when I first learned to ride and it was the first big bike I rode - he let me have a go on it not long after my 33bhp restriction lapsed. It was quite a step up from my neutered 400cc bike! To me they're the iconic litre (OK, they're not a litre) Superbike - the first of their kind.



He rode it nearly every day for 2 years rain and shine, it still looked brand new when he flogged it.

Realistically though I don't get on with sportsbikes, mostly due to the riding position, so I'm never gonna buy one unless I win the Euromillions and I have a massive collection of bikes.

A 1998 R1 kicks them in the bollocks and stamps on their face.

Le_Fromage_Grande wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 1:25 pm A 1998 R1 kicks them in the bollocks and stamps on their face.

Not sure about that... they're very different in shape, styling, riding position etc... but both are equally impressive. I think the Blade is more the easier option with the R1 being the batshit crazy option.

Le_Fromage_Grande wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 1:25 pm A 1998 R1 kicks them in the bollocks and stamps on their face.

Aye when Yamaha turned up 6 years late they were pretty good.

Mr. Dazzle wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 1:33 pm

Le_Fromage_Grande wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 1:25 pm A 1998 R1 kicks them in the bollocks and stamps on their face.

Aye when Yamaha turned up 6 years late they were pretty good.

But you could say the same about Honda in 1980, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987 and 1989, when they got they're arses kicked by Kawasaki, Suzuki and Yamaha, but it's how motorcycles were in the 80s and 90s, competition between the Japanese manufacturers was pretty fierce, though I can't remember Honda building a mainstream bike in the 80s that was significantly faster and better handling than anything else, maybe the CBR600.

The 2000 Fireblade was noticeably slower than the 1998 R1 btw.

My point was that the 'blade was the first of the genre - the first of the modern small, light "litre" bikes. It's like the BMW GS. Later models from other manufacturers may be better, but they were the first.

The 1999 blade is the last of the carbed ones. The 2000 929 and then 2002 954 were when they introduced fuel injection and big power hikes - mosty to take on the R1.

Mines a 95 .Its for high days and Holidays - My bandit used to feel like a chopper when going back to it.
I bought it unseen for not much money and it needed a couple,of panels that weren't cheap.
I love the drive when you wind it on.
Riding position does get better but when heading out of London it does take some patience- I'm in love with the looks and I've put it through the ULEZ test so I'll keep it for the time being .

Mr. Dazzle wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 2:08 pm My point was that the 'blade was the first of the genre - the first of the modern small, light "litre" bikes. It's like the BMW GS. Later models from other manufacturers may be better, but they were the first.

The 1999 blade is the last of the carbed ones. The 2000 929 and then 2002 954 were when they introduced fuel injection and big power hikes - mosty to take on the R1.

Bloke at work has always had Blades. He still says the 954 was the best one?

Taipan wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 9:55 pm

Mr. Dazzle wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 2:08 pm My point was that the 'blade was the first of the genre - the first of the modern small, light "litre" bikes. It's like the BMW GS. Later models from other manufacturers may be better, but they were the first.

The 1999 blade is the last of the carbed ones. The 2000 929 and then 2002 954 were when they introduced fuel injection and big power hikes - mosty to take on the R1.

Bloke at work has always had Blades. He still says the 954 was the best one?

I can't remember - recently read the 929 was ?
Post 96 are meant to be milder but I wouldn't know.