I have been writing several reviews of all the Honda CBR600 models lately ...

I hope you guys enjoy them and find them useful, this is my fourth one for
the CBR600F4i of 20001 to 2006 :-)


This is a review of the CBR600F and CBR600FS (Sport model) from 2001 to 2006.
(known as the F4i in America although here and Europe it is the CBR600F or FS.



The CBR600FS is on the left here while the CBR600F is on the right.



History (600F 600FS)




^^^
The more sporty appearance of the Sport versus the versatility of the F version with it’s better pillion seat and centre stand.
All things said and done the paint of the Sport would have sold it to me :-)

Now, despite alloy’s incredible abundance it took Honda until 1999 to abandon the steel frames fitted to all
previous CBRs and make it on a par with the other 600s of the day, GSX-R600, ZX-6R and R6.

Then again if it ain’t broke why fix it and even today a late model steel frame CBR F3 can show a clean pair of heels
to many more modern bikes ridden well ... alright stop right there Jules, this is the F4i review now!!
I have this terrible habit of going off on tangents if you let me. Enough already!!


Right then, alloy frames, these shaved approximately 15Kg off the weight of the CBRs compared with the previous mentioned steelies.
The first alloy framed model CBR600F of 1999 was still fitted with carburettors and in 2001 the bike finally got fuel injection.


Ironically you would expect the fuel injection to be more economical than the previous carb fed bikes but most testers claimed
the new injected bike was thirsty.

I can’t comment here except to say testers mercilessly thrash test bikes and often MPG figures bear no relation to what to what you and I
can achieve by a somewhat more laid back style of riding on real roads. So maybe it is thirstier but I bet ridden with a little restraint it is
more than acceptable.

What I can say is my old carbed F3 achieved about 53mpg ( I use imperial gallons) ridden by me in all sorts of riding conditions and my new RR does about the same.

Perhaps if you are getting the 34mpg some testers whined about then rethink your riding style on the road.
Also please feel free to post up your F4i mpg figures in this thread and let’s see if she really is a thirsty gal!!


The difference between the 600F and 600FS was, well ... not too much actually.
The FS had the main stand removed for greater ground clearance, cosmetically it also it got a snazzy red/black paint job
with a black frame and swing arm which I totally love, a stepped seat and had smaller indicators and tail light to help with
a more slimmed down and sporty look.


On the mechanical side there was a different camshaft profile for higher lift valves and it had uprated valves springs.
A lighter flywheel. An eight (one extra) plate clutch and a larger final drive for greater acceleration completed the Sport.
All of this was done so the bike lended itself better for race tuning.

The FS was dropped in 2003 when the much sharper and more focused 600RR arrived.
The 600F (F4i) continued until 2006 giving riders a clear choice between Sport and more Touring.




What is it like naked?



Well, not too bad at all really. The strong looking aluminium beam frame was quite good looking and
the bike has a very tidy appearance under the skin.

The old steel framed bikes could look pretty ugly with their clothes off especially if the steel had been allowed to corrode.
Liberal applications of waxoyl held that in check for me though.

All said and done, they, like most other bikes they look a million times better fully clothed though,
people don’t but bikes mostly do, mind you some people don’t either, right ..lol








What is it like to ride?



Well, pretty damn good actually. The 600F and the 600FS were very difficult to tell apart riding them on the road,
so most people simply opted for the plain F version because of the main stand inclusion and the fact it was just as
fast as the Sport in any real life situation plus had the more comfortable seat for two up touring. Oh, and it was
about £300 cheaper too!!

I managed to ride an F (sport) on a few decent runs out with friends and my first impressions were these, note I said “first”
... it was not appreciably quicker than my F3, it probably was quicker but not by that much and, couple that with sanitised fuel injection,
muted exhaust note for Euro emissions and the loss of the gruff and growly intake roar from ram air fed carbs then you felt there
was just not that much between the bikes.

However, all that changed though, when I pointed the FS down a twisty road, the bike’s handling felt much more responsive than
that of any steel framed CBRI had ridden previously. Indeed the handling seemed far better than it should do for a 15Kg difference
in weight so there must have been a lot of chassis improvements too.

The whole bike despite feeling big with it’s bulbous fairings had an altogether very nimble feel in the twisties, light, flickable but very sure footed.





Now, once rolling down these twisties at a briskly pace with the revs up a bit and coming out of a bend,
nailing it would have the bike leap out of the corners with an instantly responsive engine as it lunged hard
for the next bend.

Whereas I never found the ultimate acceleration feel that much greater than my own F3 I found the throttle response
itself to be much, much better. That in itself made for faster and more enjoyable riding because the bike simply reacted
better to the throttle and this would have been the fuel injection playing it’s part.




Performance and Specifications.

The below figures compare the 2001/2 F and FS with the other 600s of the day.









The CBR600F/FS also sported quite a nice cockpit layout. I think I almost prefer it over my own RR’s cockpit,
I am not sure why, perhaps the RR’s is too paired down looking.

I need to think about it yet.




^^^
Alright, I thought about it. It is the idiot lights I like above the LCD display.
I am a sucker for pretty lights ..lol








Power Injection.

This is the big difference between this bike and previous incarnations of the CBR600.
The 599cc in-line four cylinder engine now benefitted from Honda’s renowned PGM-FI fuel injection system.

(Programmed Fuel Injection ... our UK bikes proudly wore the PGM-FI sticker on both sides of the bike)






Hold on to your hats a techy bit coming up now!! It required a computerised control system that was 130% faster than it’s predecessor,
regulating the two 38mm dual-throat injector bodies and the ignition system to maximise power at higher revs and optimise response to
throttle commands at any engine speed. This I definitely detected at midrange and higher revs over the older F3 model.




^^^
To keep this voracious beast breathing somewhat freely, the CBR’s airbox was increased from five litres to eight litres to provide a continuous
supply of rich, cool air. Resonator chambers had also been specially enlarged to maintain constant airbox pressure and provide instant throttle
response across the range. As I said before all of this must have worked because the one thing I noticed above it’s nimble handling over the F3
was the throttle response, even very small twists of the throttle had the bike responding immediately.





^^^
These were our UK colour schemes for the 2001 introduction model year. I was a big fan of the red/black Sport model but
I also loved the yellow F version too. The black looked great too, oh hell, just give me them all, you can’t go wrong with a
CBR600F/FS in any colour :-) Voodoo has a really tasty blue one I have got my eye on too ;-)



Problems:

As I said in my F1/F2/F3 reviews all models of the CBR600 have been pretty much bomb proof but like anything there were a few problems
here and there but nothing too drastic.

The engine/gearbox is strong, the CBR engine if looked after is capable of well over 100,000 miles.

Many despatch riders in London clocked up much more than this with some CBR600s showing 150,000 miles plus, and still going strong.
Regular oil/filter changes are your friend.

That, and not continually thrashing the bike to within an inch of it’s life.
Indeed one of our forum members has over 160,000 miles clocked and the engine was still going strong before a wee spill stopped play.
Good luck with that Jared :-)


Some people have cam chain woes I think around the 30-40K mark or less if unlucky. Although it is an easy fix either by fitting new or
removing and cleaning the old one.

Honda gearboxes on early models are known to be a bit clunky, they are just like that and it’s not a fault.




Tuning?

Alright, I am going to give my very subjective view on this. I am not and never have been a fan of tuning or modifications.
I think the manufacturer nine times out of ten gets things just right and just nice.

Unless you are preparing your CBR for a race track I say, don’t bother!!

Full systems, end cans and power commanders usually add nothing more than 3-5 Bhp in total.

To me you are so much better off making the most of what you got. Upgrade the rider, not the bike.
Get proper training and learn how to really ride a Supersport bike.

If you are going to spend a fortune to seriously modify the bike and make it really faster, eg. blue printing and extensive cylinder head work,
well, my opinion is it would be easier and better to just buy a bigger bike.

I know this is all my opinion but it does seem daft to me to spend hours of time and big money making something faster when you can
buy something faster and better easier and cheaper. I would simply rather spend the time looking after my bike, making sure it is properly
serviced, kept clean and polished and most of all actually being “out there” riding it.

Sorry for being so subjective here but it’s something I feel strongly about :-)

Now if you want to spend money on top tyres and better brakes, improve the suspension or personalise your CBR a bit then I get all that ...
but, leave the engine alone if you are just a road rider.




Best Buys.

To me this is so simple. Buy the best and latest you can afford, is the general rule. The 600F or F4i ran from 2001 to 2006.
So, if I were buying I would be looking for a mint or near mint 2006 model with as low a miles as possible.
If I found a mint low mileage 2003/4 model then that would do nicely too . Yes, they can clock up starship miles
but why would you not want to be the person to clock them up rather than the previous owner?

However, I am known for being a fussy knickers. If you don’t mind a few battle scars and some higher miles that the bike is
well and truly up for, then by all means go for it, you will hopefully save a bit or preferably a lot of money with the older, higher mileage bike.
Again like all of these things don’t buy a complete project, not unless you prefer getting angry in your garage over riding and still never having
a bike that looks that nice.

Avoid abused ones or too much work. Really, it is just not worth the hassle and there is still such an abundance of these bikes that at all ages
you should be able to find a really nice one for reasonable money.

One word about the original CBR600FS Sport model. It is relatively rare so probably not worth looking for and missing all those lovely
low miles 600F models slipping you by. That said if one happened to come up, mint and low miles I would be very tempted because of it
being slightly apart from the crowd and well, mostly the colour scheme ..lol
Bike buying and owning to me is a very emotive thing too. So, if like me the FS floats your boat. Go find one!! :-)




Conclusion.

In my opinion the CBR600F/FS is still a great bike today and I feel it should have been kept going alongside the RR for a while yet.
And, quite simply, it is a lot better than previous CBR models . Here, in the UK, the F and Sport were the best selling sportsbikes of 2001/2002.
They were simply brilliant in 2001 and even today all these years later, if you can find a good one that has been well serviced and looked after,
it is still a great bike to ride and have fun on.

Also do not forget Honda’s legendary build quality. The way the switches feel nicer to use, the click when we fold up pillion footrest, the depth
and shine of the paint and the fact we know the plating on the parts is just that bit thicker and longer lasting than most of the opposition.
All of that combined with a near bullet proof motor capable of interstellar miles and a comfortable bike for two up touring or going racing at the weekends.
What are you waiting for??

A well looked after CBR600F for the right price could be just the ticket to get into some fun fast and ultra reliable biking cheaply without being saddled
with high finance and big bike costs in these somewhat hard times.


Conclusion (2)

Buy one. Be happy!!







Review written by
Juliet Jameson.

Pictures, Data and performance figures scanned from my own original CBR600F brochures :-)
I collect them :-)


(This review can and will be added to with more facts and information)

Coming soon ... super reviews of older carbed F4,
And the almighty 2008 onwards 600RR (with video reviews)

Be patient though, these reviews take me simply an age to write and edit and get looking right.

 

Good write up

 

great write up

 

nice review.
quick question...under speciications...it says max power output 110PS.....whats PS?

 

WOW that was near perfect, i think this should be a sticky, who agrees?

 

agree

 

after this write-up, we shouldn't have any more newbies asking what the difference between the two model years are haha

+1 to sticky

 

Wonderfully written. Thanks jules

 

If I want to be real easy on it I've gotten 50mpg but 45 is more normal. 30's require high rpm canyon runs.
Now the question: You state that the sport model had different cams, springs and flywheel. Do you know if the US models used these parts?

 

PS

This unit (German: Pferdestärke = horse strength) is no longer a statutory unit, but is still commonly used in Europe, South America and Japan, especially by the automotive and motorcycle industry. It was adopted throughout continental Europe with designations equivalent to the English horsepower, but mathematically different from the British unit. It is defined by the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB)[7] in Braunschweig as exactly:
1 PS = 75 kilopond-meters per second(75 kp·m/s)×(9.80665 N/kp) = 735.49875 N·m/s ≈ 735.5 N·m/s ≈ 735.5 W ≈ 0.7355 kW ≈ 0.98632 hp (SAE) The PS was adopted by the Deutsches Institut für Normung (DIN) and then by the automotive industry throughout most of Europe, under varying names. In 1992, the PS was rendered obsolete by EEC directives, when it was replaced by the kilowatt as the official power measuring unit. It is still in use for commercial and advertising purposes, as many customers are not familiar with the use of kilowatts for engines.