Page 4 of 4

Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2008 5:29 pm
by RhadamYgg
Brackstone wrote:
RhadamYgg wrote:
1) The ability to run auxiliary electric equipment - heated gloves and heated vest
2) Bigger tires - to handle big bumps at highway speeds without driving the pegs up in to my feet and the seat in to my "O Ring".
3) Less shifting would be nice
4) FI - so hopefully I don't have to warm the bike up to get going.

RhadamYgg
My biggest thing was the Fuel Injection, the rest of the stuff I have not noticed much of a difference. I'm crazy though so I don't ever run heated equipment even on my naked :D
One of my "scares" on the bike was definitely due to the suspension not being up to the task. Of course, I was pushing the bike at 90 on route 80 on the way in to PA, but still. Nicer sized tires and a slightly better suspension would have made the scare in to a nothing.

FI.... Oh, I need it, at least as long as it takes the warm up out of warm up. I spend too much damned time warming the bike up and screwing with the choke.

Yeah, I was a spoiled only child when I was a kid...

RhadamYgg

Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2008 5:47 pm
by JC Viper
RhadamYgg wrote:
Brackstone wrote:
RhadamYgg wrote:
1) The ability to run auxiliary electric equipment - heated gloves and heated vest
2) Bigger tires - to handle big bumps at highway speeds without driving the pegs up in to my feet and the seat in to my "O Ring".
3) Less shifting would be nice
4) FI - so hopefully I don't have to warm the bike up to get going.

RhadamYgg
My biggest thing was the Fuel Injection, the rest of the stuff I have not noticed much of a difference. I'm crazy though so I don't ever run heated equipment even on my naked :D

It looks like Suzuki is trying out FI on smaller bikes. The TU250 is FI with a newbie engine size.
One of my "scares" on the bike was definitely due to the suspension not being up to the task. Of course, I was pushing the bike at 90 on route 80 on the way in to PA, but still. Nicer sized tires and a slightly better suspension would have made the scare in to a nothing.

FI.... Oh, I need it, at least as long as it takes the warm up out of warm up. I spend too much damned time warming the bike up and screwing with the choke.

Yeah, I was a spoiled only child when I was a kid...

RhadamYgg
Ok, the Opera browser screwed up my post so here it goes on Safari on the MacBook (FF is storing old web pages so I won't load that yet and Chrome is a buggy piece of garbage).

It seems that Suzuki is trying out FI on its smaller bikes. The TU250 is a newbie bike with FI, just waiting for the reviews to come in though. Hopefully the mini Gixxers and Ninjas will get FI (styling is ok on the Ninja 500).

Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:15 pm
by Tennif Shoe
i have learned that fi is my friend

Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2008 10:57 am
by HeavyMetal
I'm happy with my RK, don't plan on going up OR down

Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2008 2:07 pm
by storysunfolding
HeavyMetal wrote:I'm happy with my RK, don't plan on going up OR down
Nice! By taking lean out of the equation you've become the pinacle of harley riders! :P

Re: Advice: Don't ever want to move down in CC (Engine Size)

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2008 10:43 am
by Lion_Lady
Brackstone wrote:But the Manager of the place I was talking with said something interesting to me "Don't ever go down in CC, you won't like it."

[and THEN]... no surprise here...

He suggested I check out the new monster (1200cc)
It would appear that this salesman has figured out how to get customers to spend more money. I hate it when a salesperson makes such assumptions about my likes/dislikes without knowing anything about me.

Personally, I'm not about to say never to anything. And since my only ride at this time is a 500+ lb beast with plenty of power to get me in trouble. I'd LOVE to have a second bike as an 'around town bike.' My 1150 is a tall, topheavy (5.4 gallon steel gas tank), horse, and there are times when not having to think about road surface and such would be really nice.

Decide what will work for YOU. Make a list (yup. write it down) of what you don't like about your current ride, and what you do like or would want in your next motorcycle). Don't let the salesman with $ signs in his eyes influence your decision.

P

Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2008 8:39 pm
by Brackstone
storysunfolding wrote:
HeavyMetal wrote:I'm happy with my RK, don't plan on going up OR down
Nice! By taking lean out of the equation you've become the pinacle of harley riders! :P
It took me about a minute, but then I got it. Well done :)

Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 2:26 am
by totalmotorcycle
For myself, I upgraded from a 1982 Yamaha Seca 650 to a 2007 Suzuki V-Strom 650.

25 years of motorcycle evolution added to my main ride is quite a difference in itself. I now had fuel-injection, radial tires, mono shock suspension, much better brakes, 2 spark plugs per head and even both oil and liquid cooling!

The 07 could do eveything better than the 82' and not only at faster speeds but also safer. That's straight across CC's, although the hp was a little different (Inline-4 vs. V-twin) but simular, just the V-Twin had more lower pull and lower RPM's.

Technology such as tires, suspension and fuel injection was the most impressive thing, the power remained basicly the same.

I've also had 2 400cc's parallel-twin bikes, 1 500cc V4, 1 550cc Inline-4 and they are all fun, unique and different in each way.

Light is fun. Pushing a small engine is fun. Shifting like mad is fun. Torque is fun. Nimble is fun.

I think it's a trade-off, short hual = lower cc engines (usually) because the buzz gets to you, the shifting gets to you and the lack of comfort (frame size) can get to you. But, lower cc engines = lots more fun around the city or day rides. Bigger cc engines = more of everything (power, weight, comfort, smoothness) but they are generally not as fun within the city.

So, you can get an all-round bike, something around 500-800cc that is generally good at both, but it's a compromise right? So you can get a standard (my favorite), but again, it's good at everything, but not the best.

I miss the 1982 Honda CB400T (400cc) the most of all my bikes. Versus today's bike it wasn't great on the highways, it was slow on hills, it had a small gas tank, poor suspension and handling and you had to shift it like mad and give her hell to pass at highways speeds. But it always kept your attention, was light and fun, and most importantly, uniquely loveable. I wouldn't have a 400cc (or under 400cc) as my only bike anymore, but as a second, heck ya.

But that's motorcycles, they are fun, each different and unique and why you really never keep the same bike(s) forever as the experience of riding is the most fun of all. :D


Mike

CC size

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 12:20 pm
by XB08
What cc size dose not meen all that much. It is what's done with the engine. Power to weight, My Buell has 103 hp and weights only 400 lbsand is 1203cc, V-max has 197hp weight about 570lbs and is 1700+ cc. but the power to weight is very close.