The Right Sized Bike

[ZooTech]

Actually, my other bike is a 1999 Dodge Ram 1500 4x4 pickup. I need it for the work I do. I don't drive it just because it's big and mean and powerful.

And I didn't buy my 1600 because it's "big and mean and powerful". I bought it so I could get out of the way of people driving 1999 Dodge Ram 1500 4x4's while talking on their cell phone. I bought it so I could pass quickly and safely. I bought it so I could eventually ride out to Oregon in comfort. I bought it because this is America and I can.

I think many of you are insecure about the size of your manhood and think you are proving something by trying to drive something that is bigger than what anyone else has.

What are you, five?

This has nothing to do with my not being able to handle a machine that is four times larger than any human could possibly have a use for.

I have plenty of uses for my 1600. I just got back from a ride with Scan during which I used the friggin' hell out of it!

Insulting me personally also won't compensate for your lack of sexual potency, if that is your problem.

And whining about people who own larger bikes than yours won't make you feel any better or us any worse.

if it makes you feel like big tough biker men, then by all means, have a ball.

I am.

[ZooTech]

I thought so myself. Especially after riding from Columbus to Chicago on my NightHawk and running in fourth on my 6-speed tranny to overcome a 30mph headwind.

I'll now bastardize this pencil size thread to take us on another tangent: Zoo, your Nighthawk was ill. I had the 650 ('83), and while it was gutless down low it was never THAT bad. There must'ave been something wrong with it. My $.02 The handling was the real weak link on mine...

Well, here's the thing...it only had 80HP and 45ft/lbs of torque, but only about half that was available below 8,000rpm. That left roughly a 1500rpm window where the powerband resided (redline was 9500 or thereabout). With my 210lbs on board, along with several days and nights worth of clothing and hygeine products (as well as various tools and whatnot), a 30mph headwind seriously taxed an engine that was already loaded down pretty good. If I ran up to 8k or better the bike would take off like a rocket, but I wasn't about to drive the width of Indiana with the engine screaming. After that trip, I started looking at bikes with more torque than horsepower.

[Sev]

Wow Zoo, that's kind of odd, I mean my 599 has basically the same specs as yours, and well I have not yet loaded it with 2 people + das worth of gear, I have put 2 people (who together outweigh you) and a days worth of gear for 2 (potential rain) and done 140kmh + with no problems.

I wonder if that's just a function of the age of the bike.

[earwig]

Maybe your opinion of "no problem" is different than his

Wow Zoo, that's kind of odd, I mean my 599 has basically the same specs as yours, and well I have not yet loaded it with 2 people + das worth of gear, I have put 2 people (who together outweigh you) and a days worth of gear for 2 (potential rain) and done 140kmh + with no problems.

I wonder if that's just a function of the age of the bike.

[Sev]

Yeah, flicking my wrist in 5th would catapult me from 100 to 140 then to 160 without me even realising it. Sounds horrible doesn't it.

Maybe that's just the difference 100cc's makes? Or a couple extra years of development.

[BuzZz]

The difference between your bike and a Nighthawk is a function of many things. Mostly technology, but the entire state of tune of both engines is totally different. Basic design, cam grind, comp. ratios, fuel system design and tune, exhaust design.... all that gives any engine it's characteristics(read: personality)...

You can't really tell how an engine 'feels' by looking at numbers, unless you have a boatload of numbers for that engine, and know what they mean. And then taking the rest of the chassis data into consideration, and factoring all that together..... it's easier to just ride everything you can beg, borrow or steal. More fun too.

But you have to study each bike carefully so you can catalog what you feel with what you see, divide that by what you know, cross-reference it with other equipment you rode in the past, multiply all that by what you've forgotten, and file it away someplace in your head that still functions reasonably well so you can retrieve it later. Then you can make broad, sweeping general statements like me....

[jmillheiser]

I have bucked a 30mph headwind on my CX500 and it was still able to maintain 75mph in 5th gear (I dont have a 6th gear), the sweetspot of my powerband is from 6000-9000 and it pulls about 7000 at 75mph

Claimed Horsepower: 50 hp (37.3 kW) @ 9000 rpm
Maximum Torque: 43 Nm (31.7 ft. lbs) @ 7000 rpm

as you can see my CX has less power and torque than the nighthawk SC.

For comparison, I test rode a harley sportster 1200 today. I was loping along in 4th gear just above idle and it was easily doing 55 and would pull hard with a small twist of the throttle. There is something to be said about mountains of low end torque. This bike only has about 70hp which is only 20 more than my honda but it feels like a rocketship compared to my little 500.

the main advantage of the larger engines is their power is available at a lower rpm than the smaller engines

[Sev]

Does this mean I get to ride your bike?

You know... for experimental purposes.

[BuzZz]

If you think you can stand seeing me riding your bike next to you, no problem.....

[Sev]

Maybe... in front of...

Beside makes me nervous. Especially after you telling me that you mess with your friends bikes at highway speed.