|
Covert Ops Wizard posted:Get outta here! Ninja 250 weighs about 100 pounds less than a street triple - 330 pounds to the S3's 430 or so. They're also the only other ones available cheap (sub 2k). Otherwise, sumos are a great option, but still heavy-ish compared to the featherweight vintage small displacement bikes. The real questions are: What do you consider light weight, what do you consider cheap, and how much work are you willing to put into it? Is cornering performance a factor that interests you? The ability to hop curbs and ride like a hooligan?
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2012 23:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 17:49 |
|
|
Z3n posted:Ninja 250 weighs about 100 pounds less than a street triple - 330 pounds to the S3's 430 or so. They're also the only other ones available cheap (sub 2k). Otherwise, sumos are a great option, but still heavy-ish compared to the featherweight vintage small displacement bikes. Huh, I always though they weighed the same. Felt like it anyway. I guess I'm thinking a small displacement sumo or a small displacement older standard with a kickstart, something with character. Around or under 2000. II'd be willing to put some work into it, seeing as I now have a place to work on it indoors.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2012 23:54
|
|
|
Covert Ops Wizard posted:older standard with a kickstart SRX600?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2012 00:00
|
|
|
Covert Ops Wizard posted:Huh, I always though they weighed the same. Felt like it anyway. It's amazing what the leverage of a handlebar does to make the weight of a bike seem to disappear. Small displacement sumos are unfortunately pretty rare. You might be able to find something exotic like one of the older Derbi sumos that were small displacement 2 strokes, that'd be a blast and available in roughly that price range, but finding one might be difficult. Besides that, yeah - older vintage bikes are an option. I'd probably fire up CL and just look at everything under 2k, and see what pops out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2012 00:19
|
|
|
Z3n posted:Ninja 250 weighs about 100 pounds less than a street triple - 330 pounds to the S3's 430 or so. They're also the only other ones available cheap (sub 2k). Otherwise, sumos are a great option, but still heavy-ish compared to the featherweight vintage small displacement bikes. Holy poo poo does the Street really weight that much? Everyone goes on about how light it is, but that's more than my Shiver (which feels like a big old lump).
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2012 00:24
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Holy poo poo does the Street really weight that much? Everyone goes on about how light it is, but that's more than my Shiver (which feels like a big old lump). Shiver is 489 wet according to this: https://www.mcnews.com/mcn/model_eval/2011FebShiver.pdf But weight is funny because there are all kinds of other factors that go into how much a bike feels like it weighs. You can have something that's got really steep, aggressive geometry and as such is very "flickable" and feels very light. You can have an upright seating position and bars that are wide and well positioned to give you immense leverage, and that can make a bike feel light. Proper mass centralization can make a bike feel very easy to move around. The real test for weight, in my experience, is the quick left/right chicane. But even in that situation, you're oftentimes splitting hairs over weight (a 50 pound difference in weight between something like the shiver and the street triple) is only probably about 7% difference when you account for rider weight and luggage, and that difference can easily be neutralized with a more comfortable seating position, more aggressive rake or trail, or a different tire profile. Going from Dunlop D209s on my old, 500 pound 600 back in the day to the first Pilot Powers made the bike feel like it had lost 100+ pounds, but that was just the triangulation of the tire making it easier to turn in. That may have even sped up the side to side transitions in effect, thanks to the more responsive turning action, but despite it "feeling" lighter, it definitely wasn't. And, FWIW, dry weight is basically a made up number. Depending on company, they may strip ALL consumables and fluids, so no brake pads, no battery, no coolant, no gas, no brake fluid, etc. I figure the most honest number is full tank of gas, ready to ride, because it's a short ride when you have no battery and no brakes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2012 01:00
|
|
|
Weight is totally made up in the case of certain companies. Remember the ZX-7R, whose oil, gas and coolant weighed 15kg more than the competition's?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2012 09:20
|
|
|
I think they're all a bit more honest these days thanks to BMW. I remember when the S1000RR came out and people called bullshit on their figures until they started weighing in at 200kg wet and putting down 185whp on dynos. All of a sudden the Japanese bikes are a few kgs heavier and the next models are on crash diets.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2012 01:26
|
|
|
Z3n posted:Shiver is 489 wet according to this: The Shiver feels *really* top-heavy at low speed, compared to my old Mille R (which weighed a little less outright but of course was much more centralised) but at speed actually feels much lighter and easier to turn because of the much wider and higher bars and the lack of a steering damper. I'm guessing the Shiver's CoG is considerably higher than the Mille (they made a big thing about how low and forward the engine on the Mille was, to the detriment of the front/rear weight distribution in the opinion of people much more talented than me), and I suspect that that's what actually gives you the biggest impression of the weight of the bike when you first get on it. I get what you mean about tyres - it's something I really noticed when going from Dunlop Qualifier OEM tyres on the Shiver to Michelin PR3s, it completely changed the character of the bike (ironically by making it much slower to turn in, it feels so absolutely rock-solid mid corner where before it was quite twitchy over bumps). The thing is that the Street is a smaller bike, with a smaller-capacity engine (albeit one with a better peak power figure) and without the signature Aprilia completely over-engineered swingarm and frame, so I assumed that that would translate to a pretty serious weight disparity, not that they were within a decent set of riding kit of each other weight-wise no matter how you measure it. Also you think no battery and no brakes results in a short ride? You've not owned many Italian (or British) bikes, have you? We call that character.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2012 18:49
|
|
|
Thought I'd jump back in since you guys were so helpful  I rode Silvah's FZ8 and really liked it, but it felt like a bit too much bike for me. I'm thinking I'm just rusty having not ridden a bike in a few years, but I've got a lot of muscle memory to rebuild, and doing it on an 800cc bike seems like asking for trouble. (It's still a great deal, though. Thanks Silvah.) The upside is I've been able to find a couple Versyses and SV650ses on Craigslist and am going to check them out later this week. I sat on a Versys at a dealership and I was surprised at how "right" it felt; very locked in ergonomically. Anything I should look for that's specific to the Versys ('09) or SV650s ('07). I've been googling and haven't found anything that sticks out mechanically on either, but thought you guys may have some more advanced knowledge.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 02:38
|
|
|
No major concerns with either of those bikes, theyre pretty solid as is. Find one in decent shape and keep aware on the maintenance intervals in case someone is trying to sell a bike right before a big service.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 03:33
|
|
|
I'm about to take my MSF course in the coming week, i have a question regarding a starter bike. I have my eye on a kawasaki vulcan 500, would it be a good starter bike? I know that i should start on a 250, but from what i understand the vulcan 500 should be tame enough for a beginner. If i am wrong on this please say so, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2013 17:38
|
|
|
Powerstone posted:I'm about to take my MSF course in the coming week, i have a question regarding a starter bike. I have my eye on a kawasaki vulcan 500, would it be a good starter bike? I know that i should start on a 250, but from what i understand the vulcan 500 should be tame enough for a beginner. If i am wrong on this please say so, thanks! Yeah that's fine for a starter bike.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2013 17:51
|
|
|
Powerstone posted:I'm about to take my MSF course in the coming week, i have a question regarding a starter bike. I have my eye on a kawasaki vulcan 500, would it be a good starter bike? I know that i should start on a 250, but from what i understand the vulcan 500 should be tame enough for a beginner. If i am wrong on this please say so, thanks! You don't need to start on a 250 and yes a Vulcan 500 should be great to learn on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
Cruisers don't really have the same thumbrules as sportybikes when it comes to displacement. Generally any v-twin cruiser under about 750cc will be gentle enough for a beginning rider. The smaller ones do tend to be lighter, which is awful nice when you're picking it up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2013 21:39
|
|
|
Leaving in a couple hours to look at a 2006 ZX14 with about 5k miles, looks to be in great condition, for $5000. Has a full TI Force exhaust it looks like, and new battery/tires. Here's a pic: http://images.craigslist.org/3Kb3G53J25I55La5H6d164a8763074bd215b6.jpg I'm really super excited because this seems like a really good deal. What do you guys think?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2013 19:31
|
|
|
It's primarily a drag bike, which means absolutely awesome in a straight line, but it's hard on tires, it's hard to wheelie, and it's less than ideal in corners. Last I checked the ZX14's are considered the fastest 1/4 mile bike out there in stock config. Enjoy the hell out it if that's what you're after, but if you like mpgs, wheelies, and twisties you should probably be looking elsewhere. :edit: Did a quick google and found this: http://www.dragbike.com/dbnews/templates/fast1320_z2.aspx?articleid=2649&zoneid=2 Mostly stock (probably means just chipped, strapped, and maybe some pipes) with 140lb rider produced this ticket.  If you get it - enjoy having a bike for $5k that obliterates the new 2013 $125k CRT Viper. Halo_4am fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Jan 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2013 19:47
|
|
|
It's also good if you must have a sportbike but want to throw bags on it and do some distance. You have to really like that crouch to want that instead of an FJR/Concours type SST though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
It's not really ideal for distance. It will get about 35mpg and 100-120 miles to reserve. At least that's what seems to be about par: http://www.fuelly.com/motorcycle/kawasaki/zx-14 That's exactly what I signed up for with my V-Max, because to me there's no greater thrill than 0-60 in <3 seconds. I've owned it since August and kicking the bike in the rear end off the line still makes my heart race and my hands shake a little. Corners and miles are nice but not as much fun to me as on-ramps, and living in flat straight road Illinois I get a lot more time on those than I do windy roads. That said, the ZX-14 has fuel injection and suspension that's not from the early 90's and should be a better all-around bike than a Gen-1 Max by virtually every measure, and at 5k you'd be spending about 1k less than I dropped on my 06 with 2000 miles on it. If I liked the sport bike look I would be all over that thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2013 20:23
|
|
|
Guys sport tour on ZX14s all the time. Go for it if it floats your boat. It doesn't have the longest legs, but neither does the Concours, especially if you dip into the secondaries all the time!  Also, LOL at comparing a somewhat recent ZX14 to a VMax.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2013 20:59
|
|
|
The only comparison I made is that they're both straight line purposed with similar mpg and range, and the buyer of either should have that as their primary reason for getting one. There are better options for a similar price point if not. Otherwise:Halo_4am posted:That said, the ZX-14 has fuel injection and suspension that's not from the early 90's and should be a better all-around bike than a Gen-1 Max by virtually every measure, and at 5k you'd be spending about 1k less than I dropped on my 06 with 2000 miles on it. If I liked the sport bike look I would be all over that thing. In other words, the only reason to get a Max over a ZX-14 is personal style preference. The ZX-14 is the better bike in every way. The Gen-2 Max is more comparable, but good luck finding one of those for anything close to 5k unless it's pressed into a cube. I pretty much only brought it up to give a personal anecdote to show it's a fantastic bike and price if that's why he's buying it. Halo_4am fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Jan 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2013 21:07
|
|
|
Halo_4am posted:It's not really ideal for distance. It will get about 35mpg and 100-120 miles to reserve. Not ideal but hardly a dealbreaker. I tour on my Uly that gets 35mpg and a 120mi range to reserve. At 100 miles I'm ready to hop off for a minute, so gassing up at that interval isn't a huge deal. I figure there are gas stations in enough places that if you run out of fuel between them, you planned wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2013 21:12
|
|
|
Oh don't get me wrong, I love the Vmax and I would love to have one. However, the only thing they have in common is they're powerful (although the old V-max not so much nowdays) and have 2 wheels. Also, quote:That's exactly what I signed up for with my V-Max, because to me there's no greater thrill than 0-60 in <3 seconds sub 3 secs in a stock 1st gen V-max? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2013 21:37
|
|
|
That, fuel efficiency/range, and price point is all I said they have in common as well... and I brought it up to say that's just fine if you're in it for the power. I personally made the choice of poo poo range for performance and don't regret it a bit, and that the ZX14 is a better bike for cheaper than the one I made that compromise for as recent as this August. Sub 3 seconds was meant to the ZX-14, sorry re-reading that I can see I didn't make that clear at all. The max will do low to mid 3's, and maybe with perfect weather and a ton of mods it could break it, but mine sure as hell doesn't. Especially with my 220lb rear end on it. Halo_4am fucked around with this message at 21:47 on Jan 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2013 21:42
|
|
|
Well I bought it. Pics to come later. Can't wait for it to dry off outside so I can melt my face off.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2013 21:49
|
|
|
Nice! Looking forward to the pics and jealous you live in an area you'll get to fully enjoy it for the next couple of months.Halo_4am posted:Enjoy having a bike for $5k that obliterates the new 2013 $125k CRT Viper.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2013 21:52
|
|
|
The search continues. I rode an '07 SV650s and negotiated the owner down to a price I'm comfortable with, but I really wasn't digging the clip-ons. I'm nearing six feet in boots and I felt like I was laying on the tank a lot to get much control, which isn't what I'm looking for in a commuter bike. I looked around and discovered that converting it to handlebars isn't super in depth - mostly getting longer cables and replacing the top of the fork assembly with a regular SV650 setup. It's about $250 worth of work. I haven't been able to find much on the differences between the two bikes other than the clip-ons, though. If that's the only difference I think I'd be better off looking for a regular 650 and getting it for less. Is there more to the difference? Wikipedia has been lacking and most of the forums I've found don't seem to call out the differences between the two models.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2013 22:35
|
|
|
The rearsets are lower on the naked model. Different triple tree that has the bar mount holes in it. You'll also probably need to pull the fairing or trim it to fit the handlebar. I'd just look for a naked model, they're less desirable to most and tend to be cheaper as a result, although a bit rarer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2013 22:50
|
|
|
Awesome, thank you. I've always preferred nakeds visually anyway!
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2013 00:57
|
|
|
Guy at work is looking for $4,800 for a 2002 Yamaha R1 with just over 11K miles. It has an Akaprovic aftermarket exhaust as well as the fuel commander/mapper thing. It'll also need a new front tire. He's asking for about $500 over KBB. Is the after market stuff worth it? It also has chrome wheels and frame sliders as well. Crayvex fucked around with this message at 20:03 on Jan 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
When I shop for a vehicle, I give aftermarket items 0 value 99.9% of the time, unless it was something super special. It might be a bonus to make it more attractive, but no real $$ value. In this case, especially needing new rubber, I'd say it's not worth it assuming KBB is basically market price for your area.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2013 20:05
|
|
|
If the exhaust is a full system and not slip-on then he probably paid north of $600 for it. Wheels are expensive as hell, especially if he went with a big tire and had to do any swingarm or extension work. Get the details on the wheels and look up the specific exhaust and you'll probably find well over $500 worth of value there. The trick is if it's worth anything at all to you, or if you'd be just fine with a stock setup that you could find for less money. The new tire is going to instantly cost you $200+ so keep that in mind as a trade for aftermarket stuff you may not actually care about.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2013 20:05
|
|
|
The wheels do look really nice and it looks like Power Commanders go for $200-600. I think I'll pull the trigger. I feel silly replacing my 2002 R6 with a 2002 R1 but at the very least it is fuel injected and it looks mint.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2013 20:43
|
|
|
slidebite posted:When I shop for a vehicle, I give aftermarket items 0 value 99.9% of the time,
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2013 22:05
|
|
|
And conversely when I put things on my bike, I don't see it as any sort of investment beyond "for me, for riding".
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2013 22:26
|
|
|
 $45,000 INVESTED SACRIFICE FOR $40,000!!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 04:03
|
|
|
Halo_4am posted:If the exhaust is a full system and not slip-on then he probably paid north of $600 for it. Wheels are expensive as hell, especially if he went with a big tire and had to do any swingarm or extension work. Get the details on the wheels and look up the specific exhaust and you'll probably find well over $500 worth of value there. The trick is if it's worth anything at all to you, or if you'd be just fine with a stock setup that you could find for less money. Exhausts on sportbikes are a dime a dozen. Akrapovic is nicer than most but since every 11-year old literbike is going to have a slipon by now it's not a big effect on the value. Performance mods on an 11-year old bike also shouldn't add much, if anything, because if you want to spend more for more performance you get far more bang for the buck (heh) just buying a newer bike. Chrome wheels may look fancy, they might be the stock wheels chromed, and they might be super-heavy junk. I would not touch a sportbike that had had the swingarm stretched / modded for a bigger tire with a ten-foot pole. I'm kind of trying to learn how much KBB means on 10+ year old bikes myself but if it's anything like it is with cars, you have a to-the-dealer price that's a steal, a from-the-dealer price that's a complete ripoff, and the real price is somewhere in the middle but leaning towards the lower. Bikes don't have anywhere near the used market volume that cars do and a much larger percentage are sold privately vice through a dealer so I have no idea where the numbers come from anyway. My recommendation is to go to eBay and find completed listings vaguely like yours and see what they went for. slidebite posted:
My local craigslist is full of this. No, I don't care how bad you got ripped off on this kit chopper. No, I don't want to know how you put your airbrushing guy's kid through private school via these hella sweet skulls and eagles.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 05:36
|
|
|
I would consider paying more than blue book for mods that I care about, like a quickshifter, traction control and ohlins suspension. Cosmetic crap and slip ons are worthless.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2013 05:53
|
|
|
The CB1100A is available in Canada this year. Despite the fact that it's $13k (gently caress you Honda, it's $10k in the US) - I really want one. It's either that, or spend some money on my 1991 CB750. I'm torn.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2013 14:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 17:49 |
|
|
I've been wanting a new bike for a while now. I started riding a few years ago on a VTR 250 Interceptor, moved up to a CB700SC, and now feel confident enough for a non beater. Usually I'll go through spurts of riding every day for a few months, then letting the bike sit for a month of two. Letting the bikes sit causes a ton of problems. Petcock rusted/failed, pulse generator failed, highbeam switch rusted/failed, battery cable rusted/failed, starter solenoid failed, throttle cable snapped, it goes on and on. The feeling that I could be stranded at any time totally kills the enjoyment I get from riding. The kind of riding I do now is 75% commuting on city (San Francisco) streets, 20% freeway riding including lanesplitting through traffic and 5% fun riding on twisty roads. Although I suppose if I had a bike that was more fun to ride I would ride it more for fun. At first I was set on something new. I just recently moved so I now have a garage to house a bike, I've got the money for it, and I'm willing to pay extra for the peace of mind. Above all I want something that will just work without constant fiddling. After doing some research the three bikes I'm most interested in are the KTM 690 Duke, Triumph Street Triple, and Moto Guzzi Griso. The KTM isn't out yet, earliest I could test ride one would be March I assume. I've never ridden a supermoto style bike, but I'm 6'2" with a 34" inseam so the thought of a tall, skinny, light motorcycle appeals to me. I've read that the maintenance schedules on these are pretty short though. The only other negative I've heard is that they aren't good for freeway riding. I don't plan on doing any touring so I don't think this would be such a big deal. I can't imagine that an hour on the freeway (which is the max I see myself ever doing) would be that bad. Does anyone have any thoughts on whether or not this would be a good choice for me? The Triumph seems like the most practical choice. Almost universal praise. I saw one in person and it looked a bit on the small side, but I'm pretty flexible so I don't think it would be such a big deal. One issue with this bike is that it seems to be very popular, to the point that dealers around me won't give test rides because they don't have any trouble selling off their inventory. I doubt I'll end up going to the track, but the price difference between the standard and R versions is so small that I'd probably go R because why not. The Moto Guzzi seems like the least practical option, but it is my favorite looking by far. I really liked the shaft drive on my CB700SC, lack of chain maintenance is really nice. Reviews for this say it is "quirky" but reliable. Strangely it is the most expensive new, but the least expensive used. The dealer near me won't give test rides for this one either, bummer. I originally thought I would wait for the Duke to come out, take a test ride, and make my decision then. In the mean time I've been checking craigslist, ebay, and local forums to pass the time. This just popped up yesterday, is it something I should consider? I'm willing to pay a bit more, but a clean looking motorcycle for less than half price new makes me reconsider. http://bayarearidersforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=421346 alk4life fucked around with this message at 04:35 on Jan 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 03:28
|
|
