Just pick up a suzuki 500 from early 2000s and call it a day, powerful, light enough, easy to ride.
I loved riding motorcycles as a kid, my other brother had a few dirt bikes (one was an Yamaha "enduro" which was both a dirt and street bike). I've always wanted to get one for the street, but also been too risk adverse to get one. But I am a "living on the edge" kind of guy, I have to let that hang out. I would love to get one, even if I only ride it around the neighborhood and to get groceries close by and stuff like that, no freeway.
Anyone have one or know about them? What is a good starter bike? Brand and size engine. I'm thinking 250 is too small. Maybe a 400? 650? I know anything over 650 is too big for a starter bike, too much power.
Open to all suggestions and discussion!
Thanks!!!
Normal street bikes are just called "standard" motorcycles.Thanks a ton guys. Interesting, I guess I hadn't realized there were different classes of pure street bike, in my mind there was always dirt, street and "enduro" or hybrids that could do both.
So is there a word for "street" bikes that are not "superstreet"? Will they just say "street" or something else possibly?
Kawa Ninjas, check.
SV-650 - not liking the look of that, does not have the stuff added on that makes it look sleek (windshield and what not) - looks like a dirt bike on the street almost.
Yamaha FZ6R - good looking bike, but are we sure this is not a super-street? When I type it into google the first link has a super street reference.
CBR 500 - check!
Thanks!!
Normal street bikes are just called "standard" motorcycles.
Lol, I feel attacked for you calling the SV650 a "dirt bike on the street". Just kidding. It's looks are very hit or miss. Either you like it or you don't. Given your preference for something with wind protection and looks sleek, I think the Ninja 650 is probably up your alley. The Honda CBR500 is a good choice, and if you're willing to pay a little more, the Honda CBR650R is good too. Triumph just launched a sport-touring-esque bike that is based on their Trident that is called the Tiger Sport. I think it looks good, but it ain't cheap.
If you have time, check out this video from RevZilla:
Get yourself a Ninja 650, put a Givi windshield on it and you're done. Keep in mind "any" modern bike can get you in big trouble. Take the MSF safety course.This is probably a dumb consideration, but what about gas mileage? I was watching this POS video:
About a Gixer 600. She says it gets like 26 mpg?!?! That is insanely bad for a motorcycle I think. The vast majority of cars get better than that these days, despite being thousands of pounds heavier and being able to carry many people onboard, as well as having way more horsepower - WTF?
Is that just some freaky shitty MPG bike or are most sport motercycles that bad? I really want one with good MPG so that taking it to the store to get some bacon bits that my significant other forgot to pick up can be not just fun but frugal as well....
Is that just some freaky shitty MPG bike or are most sport motercycles that bad? I really want one with good MPG so that taking it to the store to get some bacon bits that my significant other forgot to pick up can be not just fun but frugal as well....
If I were in your shoes, I'd jump straight to a 650cc. I don't have that much riding experience, and definitely not with other bikes, so I personally don't know how they compare against each other. With that said, from what I've seen through various reviews between the following bikes, here's some highlights:Thanks for all that Saylick! I watched that entire video up to the dirt bike part, which I do not care about. I DEFINATELY want a sport bike. Logically, I should want one of those cruisers or sports cruisers, as I'm never going to track it or race it or anything, but I LOVE the look of the sport bikes with the farings and what not.
I have to check out the CBR500 and 650R. In your view, do they stack up nicely against their Yamaha/Kawaker/Suzuki competition? I've been watching tons of videos on the ~400cc street bikes and Honda is barely in the mix there, maybe that changes at the 500 or 650 cc level.
Thanks!!!!
Re: SV650 forks, I remember in the mid 2000s many people were replacing the SV front end with GSX-R 600 front ends. It got to the point when someone asked for fork seals for an SV, we had to ask if they had stock forks or GSX-R forks.If I were in your shoes, I'd jump straight to a 650cc. I don't have that much riding experience, and definitely not with other bikes, so I personally don't know how they compare against each other. With that said, from what I've seen through various reviews between the following bikes, here's some highlights:
Yamaha MT07:
- Very light, plenty of power for a parallel twin, has a good exhaust note due to cross-plane crankshaft. Can hooligan around due to power to weight ratio.
- It's not faired, so no wind protection. It's also a physically smaller bike, by about 10% compared to it's competition. Bigger folks might find it cramped as a result.
Yamaha R7:
- Basically a faired version of the MT07 but with better suspension and more aggressive ergonomics.
- Can come with a quick shifter as an added option.
Kawasaki Ninja 650:
- Out of the bunch, it's one of the few with fairings and wind protection. Comes with a slipper clutch, which it's competition does not.
- Slipper clutch makes for a lighter clutch pull and smoothes out mismatched revs, so downshifts will be less jerky if you don't rev match.
- The Ninja makes the least power than it's brethren by a few horsepower, and the parallel twin is mediocre in terms of exhaust note.
Suzuki SV650:
- Has a V-twin engine, as compared to the commonly used parallel twin of it's competitors, so it has a better exhaust note.
- Engine is practically bulletproof because it's been largely unchanged since the early 2000s when the first SV650 was released.
- Stock front suspension is garbage and is too soft. Most middle weight bikes in this segment have budget suspensions to begin with, but the SV650's front forks are notorious for being crap. Recommend installing aftermarket springs/emulators/whatever to improve the front suspension.
- Size-wize, the SV650 is one of the larger bikes in the segment. If I remember correctly, it has a longer wheelbase than it's competitors, which means it should be more stable but less flickable overall.
- Not faired, aesthetics are hit or miss. Some like the retro look of the bike, with it's single headlight. Some people don't.
Honda CBR650R:
- It's the only 4 cylinder engine bike in the aforementioned bunch. All other mentioned bikes have 2 cylinders. This engine type revs higher and makes its power higher up in the rev range. It consequently makes more top end power than the bunch, but to fully utilize it, you have to rev the engine more.
- Honda reliability. Nuff said.
- It's a heavier bike, likely due to the larger engine, but it's got refinement in spades.
- Fairings and wind protection.
- Costs more than the bunch.
Yep, that's a common "upgrade" for the SV650. I didn't want to deal with a front end swap, nor do I track my bike, so I went with stiffer springs and emulators instead. It gets the job done.Re: SV650 forks, I remember in the mid 2000s many people were replacing the SV front end with GSX-R 600 front ends. It got to the point when someone asked for fork seals for an SV, we had to ask if they had stock forks or GSX-R forks.
If I were in your shoes, I'd jump straight to a 650cc. I don't have that much riding experience, and definitely not with other bikes, so I personally don't know how they compare against each other. With that said, from what I've seen through various reviews between the following bikes, here's some highlights:
Yamaha MT07:
- Very light, plenty of power for a parallel twin, has a good exhaust note due to cross-plane crankshaft. Can hooligan around due to power to weight ratio.
- It's not faired, so no wind protection. It's also a physically smaller bike, by about 10% compared to it's competition. Bigger folks might find it cramped as a result.
Yamaha R7:
- Basically a faired version of the MT07 but with better suspension and more aggressive ergonomics.
- Can come with a quick shifter as an added option.
Kawasaki Ninja 650:
- Out of the bunch, it's one of the few with fairings and wind protection. Comes with a slipper clutch, which it's competition does not.
- Slipper clutch makes for a lighter clutch pull and smoothes out mismatched revs, so downshifts will be less jerky if you don't rev match.
- The Ninja makes the least power than it's brethren by a few horsepower, and the parallel twin is mediocre in terms of exhaust note.
Suzuki SV650:
- Has a V-twin engine, as compared to the commonly used parallel twin of it's competitors, so it has a better exhaust note.
- Engine is practically bulletproof because it's been largely unchanged since the early 2000s when the first SV650 was released.
- Stock front suspension is garbage and is too soft. Most middle weight bikes in this segment have budget suspensions to begin with, but the SV650's front forks are notorious for being crap. Recommend installing aftermarket springs/emulators/whatever to improve the front suspension.
- Size-wize, the SV650 is one of the larger bikes in the segment. If I remember correctly, it has a longer wheelbase than it's competitors, which means it should be more stable but less flickable overall.
- Not faired, aesthetics are hit or miss. Some like the retro look of the bike, with it's single headlight. Some people don't.
Honda CBR650R:
- It's the only 4 cylinder engine bike in the aforementioned bunch. All other mentioned bikes have 2 cylinders. This engine type revs higher and makes its power higher up in the rev range. It consequently makes more top end power than the bunch, but to fully utilize it, you have to rev the engine more.
- Honda reliability. Nuff said.
- It's a heavier bike, likely due to the larger engine, but it's got refinement in spades.
- Fairings and wind protection.
- Costs more than the bunch.
Not bullshit, and re-read what I wrote. I didn't say that the handling is crap. I said that the bike has a longer wheelbase and thus won't feel as flickable as some of its peers.This is total bullshit. The SV650 handles very well and is a great canyon carver. The suspension is budget but it works fine for what it is and a softly sprung bike will work well for a beginner. The SV650 is a great bike, I loved mine. You used to be able to get them with a half fairing, they called it the S model. You can also get a touring version with the same motor/chassis called the v-strom 650.
The SV650’s mellowed yet relatable charm is more apparent on the road. It’s not the lightest-handling bike in the group, but it’s the most stable, predictable, and planted on a twisting canyon road and feels totally refined.
the bike has a longer wheelbase and thus won't feel as flickable as some of its peers
Not bullshit, and re-read what I wrote. I didn't say that the handling is crap. I said that the bike has a longer wheelbase and thus won't feel as flickable as some of its peers.
I just looked up the wheelbases:
MT07 = 55.1 inches
Ninja 650 = 55.5 inches
SV650 = 56.9 inches
CBR650R = 57.0 inches
If you don't want to take my word for it, here's what Cycle World said:
The front forks are going to be soft, especially for the OPs weight of 250 lbs. It will be noticable when the front end dives too much from even moderate braking. Also, give them a few years and the stock front fork oil is going to give out, leading to a lack of damping when the wheel goes over potholes or bumps. Yes, softer suspension is better for novice riders but this is a case of the suspension being too soft. Like I said earlier, I'm much lighter than the OP, but with my SV's stiffer forks, the bike feels way better. I'd hate to imagine them being 20% softer than they are, which is what they would be if they were stock.
Maybe it will, maybe it won't. I'm inclined to think that at 250 lbs rider weight, the stock springs will be too soft. Also, an emulator won't stiffen the front. Stiffer springs will. Emulators give you better compression damping by giving you a progressive damping curve. If all you do is get emulators but still have soft springs, the front end will still feel soft if you don't hit any big bumps. However, if you do hit a big bump, the front end won't bottom out as fast and/or as harsh compared to the stock damping rods.The things that you are complaining about will not matter to a novice rider at all. A simple drop in emulator kit would stiffen up the front if he finds it too soft.
Maybe it will, maybe it won't. I'm inclined to think that at 250 lbs rider weight, the stock springs will be too soft. Also, an emulator won't stiffen the front. Stiffer springs will. Emulators give you better compression damping by giving you a progressive damping curve. If all you do is get emulators but still have soft springs, the front end will still feel soft if you don't hit any big bumps. However, if you do hit a big bump, the front end won't bottom out as fast and/or as harsh compared to the stock damping rods.
what you're looking at is more massage chair than motorbike. They are *so* comfortable, there's a real risk of falling asleep when driving.Pretty bike but my a$$ is getting numb just looking at that seat "padding"!
what you're looking at is more massage chair than motorbike. They are *so* comfortable, there's a real risk of falling asleep when driving.
As for the padding, well, im sure aftermarket seats exist.
I started on a Honda 50 for local transport, rather terrifying crossing the SF Bay Bridge, and got a used BSA 650, and after that a new Triumph Bonneville.
If I were to buy today, and I would love to but can't really justify spending that much on a toy, I would get a 650 Royal Enfield. I like classic style and it's about half the price of a Bonneville.