2000 HONDA CBR 929RR FIREBLADE
The 90s were great, but for the sake of our timeline-centric test, let’s take the advice of Jarvis Cocker and all meet up in the year 2000. That’s right, whilst we were all worried about whether or not the ‘Millennium Bug’ was going to mean we all had to buy new microwaves, Honda had been busy developing an all-new FireBlade. In all fairness, though, they had to do something, after Yamaha’s introduction of the all-conquering YZF-R1 two years earlier.
There had been tweaks and improvements here and there for the Blade during the 90s, but the Millennium Blade had upgrades and full re-designs in almost every area. The chassis was made lighter and engine and fuel tank shuffled around to aid mass centralisation. It was kitted out with a pair of super-fashionable upside-down forks and the 16-inch front wheel was dropped in favour of a 17-incher. But it was the new 929cc engine and fuel injection system that would set the 2000 FireBlade apart from its predecessors.
The Blade had taken a decent leap forward into the 21st century and although far from space-aged, you could really tell the difference just from sitting on it. The dash incorporated a digital speedo as well as a small temperature gauge and clock, which despite being a bit dim was easy to read. There wasn’t a plethora of information on
there like there tends to be on modern bike’s clocks, which, if you ask me, smartens the job up a bit. I’ll admit a gear position indicator on the dash would have been nice, though.
The motor fired up at the first touch of the button, burbled smoothly into life and the engine revved cleanly from the get-go, unlike the ’92 Blade, which took a minute or two of warming up before it would rev happily. Unfortunately, the engine note was all too hushed by an end can which would have looked more at home poking out of the engine room of a 19th century steam yacht.
Trundling along on the 929 was really rather nice. It was comfortable and spacious, but felt a lot nearer to what a sportsbike should feel like, compared to the original model. Don’t get me wrong, it was still really soft, but the geometry and ergonomics of the 2000 bike felt a lot less alien to a sportsbike junky like me.
What did feel a little peculiar was the initial pick-up of the engine – it was aggressive and a little bit too snatchy for my liking. Once the engine was driving, the power was nice and smooth, even when really stretching the cables and at the big boys’ end of the rev range, but that transition from closed throttle to an ever so slightly open throttle was really hard to get
right. I can forgive the 929 for this though, as back then fuel injection was a pretty new affair and compared to modern equipment, the 2000 Blade’s FI system was fairly rudimentary, to say the least.
On a positive note, I really liked the mirrors. They were nice and long so you could see round your elbows without having to contort your body too much. That said, long mirrors don’t make it any easier to squeeze your bike into a small garage or strap into a van (especially if they are the type that don’t fold down easily).
As I upped the ante on the 929, I started having very occasional, but very concerning head-shaking tank slappers. Bumps in the road or crests hit at speed, even when fully upright, would sometimes send the bars into a real left-right-left-right hissy fit that nearly sent me hedge-wards a couple of times. Once I’d figured out when and where it would do it, I managed to get a bit of a grip of it, but there were a couple of occasions where the old Doberman’s nose nearly popped out.
The 2000 ‘929’ FireBlade was a real turning point, but it didn’t set the world on fire like the original had done eight years previously and although it had its good points, and we all enjoyed riding it on our test, it just seemed to lack a certain je ne sais quoi.