I have both today. My wife and I dated on a 1976 KZ900 34 years ago, so I bought and restored one for our 30th anniversary and no, she did not find that amusing........
I find that I really like the ride better on the Kaw. You sit "in it" as opposed to "on it". Something about the way Kawasaki has the high mounted gauges, fuel tank, and bars gives the feeling you're in the bike. On the Honda, I feel I am sitting on it and looking down at the seat, the tank - hard for me to describe, but very different.
The Kaw has the best brakes I have ever used on a vintage bike. Even with a single disc, the bike out brakes any other vintage bike I have ever ridden. It will out-torque and roll-on from 4,000 (60 to 80) the Honda - even built to 836. They don't have near the leaks and seal/gasket issues over time since they have roller bearing cranks and oil pressure is 7 lbs/inch vs 60 lbs/inch needed on our plain bearing Hondas.
My Kaw has what I'll call blueprinted ports - (done to remove some horrible casting flash and make them conform to design specs) but my 836 will take it from 7,000 to 10,500 - there is more peak power in the built Honda. If the Kaw had the same mods - the Honda would not stand a chance. A well built Kaw can make 125~140 horsepower. I've ridden one years back with an over-bore, big cam, porting, pods, and an open 4/1 Kerker that would flat rip!
I like Kaw's shifting better, Honda's clutch is the world's best, Honda's braking is horrible, Honda is smoother, wow factor at shows and rides is much better on the Kaw, the Kaw's engine can be completely taken apart in the frame without one of my kits, the Kaw is a wet sump and no oil tank.
Just my observations. Regards, Gordon