Is 1200cc too much for a first time rider?

[jgypsy]

i totally agree with the 1200 being to big.my bf got me one and then had to turn around and get me a 250 pagsta.the harley was just too top heavy for me.the clutch to tight and its a 1996.i realize the 250 will soon be too small but i have gained so much confidience on it that it was well worth the 2400 bucks.i dont know if ill ever be able to ride the harley.im not afraid to admit it.if you really care about your woman do not put her on a 1200 for a first bike.this web site is the best ive found for info on newbie riders.listen to them.

[Scott58]

This would be why I don't come here much anymore...

Sadly I have to agree.

[dean owens]

This would be why I don't come here much anymore...

because you're tired of this debate? because of people saying that beginners need to start off on smaller bikes? or because of those pushing for beginners to start on larger bikes?

[Scott58]

More because it take years to develop skills. From enduro bikes to trials bikes, to sport bikes, whatever. People with a few seasons of riding giving advice to people with lesser skills or no skills at all isn't really a recipe for accomplishment or safe riding. "everyone will drop their bike". Are you kidding me? I could go on, but i assume you get my point. Start out large and fail large. Impatience and the need to show off some bad ride you don't have the ability to handle is high risk and no amount of talking is going to change that. You may be able to get a GoldWing from point A to point B with no interruptions, but the second something out of the ordinary happens you have exceeded your skill level and that's the key. Avoid situations that exceed your skill level. Start small, learn body english, learn the power curve of your bike. learn it's braking force, reduce your distractions. Do anything else and the risk is yours. Anytime i hear about a new rider getting injured or killed I am not surprised.

[Gummiente]

>>Oh, and folks 45+ are the fastest growing single category of motorcycle fatalities in the USA.

And in Canada, too. Most insurance companies here offer a discount if a 40-plus "returning rider" takes the CSC motorcycle safety course.

[HYPERR]

>>Oh, and folks 45+ are the fastest growing single category of motorcycle fatalities in the USA.

And in Canada, too. Most insurance companies here offer a discount if a 40-plus "returning rider" takes the CSC motorcycle safety course.

This is true but one caveat is that this stat by itself is somewhat misleading. I read the study regarding this and the riders that are crashing in the 45+ age bracket are mostly male first time riders on huge cruisers. Basically a mid life crisis male who gets a motorcycle for the first time with no training and goes out and buys the biggest and the baddest cruiser out on the market; and promptly crashes it due to lack of experience and skill.

On the flipside, I would think a guy/gal that is 45 and has been riding since he/she was a kid, and has tens(or even hundreds) of thousands of miles under their belt would be the safest rider on the road. That age is an ideal combination of experience without too much diminished skill/reflex/strength/eyesight/hearing/mind, etc.

[Gummiente]

This is true but one caveat is that this stat by itself is somewhat misleading. I read the study regarding this and the riders that are crashing in the 45+ age bracket are mostly male first time riders on huge cruisers.

Doesn't make a difference to the insurance companies whether it is a 40+ first time rider or a 40+ rider who has just returned to the scene after a 30 year absence. I have a clean record and was even a CSC Instructor for a few years, but my 27 consecutive years of riding doesn't make much of a difference in my premiums anymore because I'm in the 40+ group and as such am tarred with the same brush.

[HYPERR]

This is true but one caveat is that this stat by itself is somewhat misleading. I read the study regarding this and the riders that are crashing in the 45+ age bracket are mostly male first time riders on huge cruisers.

Doesn't make a difference to the insurance companies whether it is a 40+ first time rider or a 40+ rider who has just returned to the scene after a 30 year absence. I have a clean record and was even a CSC Instructor for a few years, but my 27 consecutive years of riding doesn't make much of a difference in my premiums anymore because I'm in the 40+ group and as such am tarred with the same brush.

That's exactly my point. The insurance company has always used flawed stats. They are lumping together a 45 year old man with 27 years of riding experience with a 45 year old man with zero riding experience/skill on a megacruiser that he can barely hold up at a stoplight. They are classifying together the safest rider with the most dangerous rider.

[redwing]

First -- why didn't she post the question?
Second -- why did she learn on a bike weighing perhaps 300 pounds when she is looking at a bike weighing 750 pounds?
I have a bike that has lots of torque and has the potential of putting me on my back or in the hospital and worse. I drive safe and realize the bike is way more than I can handel. However after I have riden a few thousand miles and have progressed in skill I'll have a bike I want. Also I'll have experience riding the bike I actually want. Respect your skills and respect your bike. Be safe on what ever bike you get and develope your skills. A bike is not anything like a car.

[Ryethil]

I'm having similar problems right now and I consider myself experienced.

My first real street bike was a '68 Triumph Tourist Trophy of some 500cc. Because it was so forgiving, it made my learning curve shorter and more fun.

However, is it a Harley vs the world thing or is it size or what? I agree with the person that asked why didn't she post this question so we would know how SHE feels.

I've started women out on Sportsters. This is because they proved to me that they were dedicated enough to muscle through the first part of their learning experience. However, they were relatively BIG women and could handle the bike's wieght even though they hadn't learned the basics yet. Most small people (men can be short too) I try to keep around 500 -650 (maybe) and no sportbikes. I don't even think the SV650 is a good choice.

However, I agree that the more horsepower/torque you have the more you can power your way out of a mistake. But this also means that it can be scary to a true Noobie. So I guess I'm agreeing for the most part with the majority here. However, this can lead to disappoint come 6 months down the line as the "little" bike just doesn't cut anymore. There is "NO" real winner in this question. It's all a matter of adaptability and dedication on the part of the new rider.

As for the over 40 crowd, I pick them up more than I should. It's usually a Noobie with a 1500+ rice cruiser. They just can't seem to think past creating a new youth phase in their lives. I say japanese bike because they seem somehow less imposing to this crowd. Harleys are usualy a bit more of a hurdle to climb for a new biker and they stay away from them. At least at first. I think it is a mistake they started with such a large bike (I think the V-star 950 is as big as they should go) and then they try to be heros.