Thrillseeker wrote: I test rode the new 900 Saturday morning with Joker, Steve, his friend Ryan, and 4 Kawasaki folks. I pretty much concur with Susan's review, it was very smooth, stable and responsive. (I didn't mind the tank seam or stock seat, though. The traffic was so thick that we barely had a chance to get into 5th gear, but it lasted about 90 minutes and I was able to get a good feel for it. My only complaint was that the pipes seemed to get unusually hot, but someone said that might be because it only had ~250 miles on the clock. I rode the LT which includes saddlebags and a windshield, the bags were nice but the windshield was HUGE. I think I would get the standard model and accessorize it myself. It really does have a 'big bike' look & feel and I'm sure it would be comfortable on the long hauls. If they had been available when I was ready to buy last November, the 900 would've been a serious contender.
I'll leave the technical details to Joker, I saw him taking notes during the presentation. <G>
Here are a few pics:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?V26832ACC
Joker wrote: The "Not Quite So Big" Bike
OR
How Kawasaki Put the VN2000 on a Diet
The Intro
My first exposure was at the dealer show in September. They rolled it out
and from a distance I thought it was a VN2000 in a different color. The
closer it got, the more I questioned my original perception until I finally
realized it wasn't a 2000 at all, it was something new. The announcer
cleared it up when he introduced the bike by name and displacement, the new
Vulcan 900 Classic. The crowd reception was immediate and loud, they liked
what they saw. So did I.
By the time I saw it inside the display area, sat on it, wiggled it around,
kicked the tires and sat on it some more, I had decided I needed to ride it.
I was intrigued by the look and feel, the price and promises. It was, we
were told, the hottest thing in a mid-sized cruiser to hit the market in
years. We had the spec sheets to define the numbers, but the numbers faded
behind the look of the bike, it really was a mid sized bike with the big
bike look. Fast forward to Bike Week, where we were given a little history
behind the development and then actually rode it enough to get some
impressions.
The 900 is the replacement for the 800 Classic, a solid seller since its
introduction and basically a bullet-proof performer. 800 owners are fanatic
about their rides and with good reason, so the decision to eliminate it from
the lineup warranted an explanation and we got it. It was strictly a
marketing decision. There was a hole in the overall cruiser lineup across
the various import manufacturers and a 900 at the right price would fill it.
The question that remained was how to style it.
Considering the positive response to the general styling of the VN2000, and
also considering that the most often negative cited were the weight and
headlight, it was logical to take styling features from the 2000 and
eliminate the negatives. Build a mid-sized bike with a big bike look,
without the weight.
Features
Some of the features include:
A 5.3 gallon fuel tank, the same capacity as the 2000. It looks big, but not
out of character. Additionally, the tank employs what's called "constantly
varying radii"..that means no flats, every surface curves. Once you realize
it, it hits you as the obvious, very nice look.
The fuel tank cap comes off, it's not attached like the others.
The rear fender is the same width as the 2000. Again, not out of proportion,
but definitely a big look to it.
The rear tire is a 180-70 15...big tire.
Front is a 130-90 16.
This bike has a fuel gage, none of the competition offers one.
The bike is a full 4 inches longer than the 800 Classic, but the seat height
is 0.7 inches lower. It does have a longer and lower look.
Predictably, the bike is also 40 pounds heavier than the 800.
A few tech details for the motorhead types....
The engine has 9.5 - 1 compression and the same bore as the 800. It's
basically an 800 stroker.
The generator puts out 70 watts of extra power.
The flywheel mass has been increased to give both a more torquey feel on the
bottom, and also accentuate the power pulses to continue that bigger bike
feel.
The engine utilizes what's called a "no nut" connecting rod.
It's a single pin crank motor.
Fuel injection with 2-34 mm throttle bodies.
Steering geometry deserves a mention: 32 degrees of rake, just like the 800,
but trail has been increased from 4.8 to 6.5 inches. Offering more stability
and a more solid feel.
The standard comes in solids: silver, red or blue and goes for $7299
The Light Tourer comes in two two-tones: Black/Silver, or Black/Red and
sells for $8499. An aded feature of the LT is the 24 month warranty as
compared to the 12 month on the standard.
The Ride
Turn on the key and hit the "Go" button and it fires up to a fast idle right
away. Within seconds it drops to a relaxed cadence with a surprisingly nice
exhaust note. No, it's not straight pipes and it's not going to set off the
neighborhood car alarms, but it's more than I expected. Blip the throttle a
few times and it's not bad for a 900 cc bike with stock pipes. Most will
change them anyway, but the look and sound will let you get away with
keeping them if you want.
I took a standard at first since I prefer no windshield and I always get a
better feel for performance without one..probably in my head, but that's
just me. Climb aboard and the ergos for me were generally acceptable.
Seating position comfortable, floorboards allowed some variability in leg
angle, grips in a good spot and mirrors I could actually use to see behind
me. Warm up a minute and ready to roll.
Clutch is a cable and light to the touch. Click it into first gear, slide
out into traffic heading north from South Daytona Beach and you immediately
notice the low end torque, it's in surprising abundance. Catch second gear
and there it is again. My normal ride is a 2000 and although I'm not going
to compare them, I am going to say that coming off that bike onto this one,
I didn't expect much in performance and I was thoroughly surprised. The bike
runs larger than 900 cc's, much larger. Not so much in hard acceleration,
not so much in any one category, it just rides like a bigger bike. It rolls
out from a stop with the pulsing feel of a bigger bike, not the buzzy
vibration so common in smaller displacement machines.
After running in slow traffic for a while, we broke out into a quicker pace,
experiencing the feel at highway speeds on A1A along the ocean north of
Ormond Beach. Again, the recurring theme, more solid than I expected. Not
twitchy, not overreacting to crosswinds off the Atlantic, it held a line
pretty well and evoked confidence. The transmission is smooth, well spaced
and has the positive neutral finder. Since the manufacturers continue to
overlook tachometers on cruisers, I don't have a feel for rpm's at speed,
but I can tell you it's not excessive. I never felt the need for a higher
gear and I'm guessing that fifth is overdriven.
We turned inland to run the "loop" road and this is about the twistiest road
in or around Daytona, which is not to say it's Deal's Gap, but it does offer
a little insight into the handling characteristics of your ride. This one
does well enough, better than most. If you work at it you can scrape the
boards, but it does take a little work. Through this section I also
challenged the brakes and they were up to each one. Dual disks on front,
single disk on the rear and no fade, no grabbing, decent braking for a
cruiser.
Around this point we also swapped bikes, I got an LT. I noticed right away
that the windshield was at least six inches too high for me, I was looking
through the middle. I realize not everyone likes to look over the top like
me, but I think you'd have to be Shaquille to look over it, that thing's
tall. It's also wide. The bags were nice, but a little short looking, a
common element in factory bags. Given the $1200 difference and the added
features being the windshield, bags and warranty, I think I'd go for the
standard and do the rest myself.
I guess the bottom line is that this is a mid-size displacement bike with a
bigger bike feel and look. It accelerates, handles and brakes as good as any
and better than most other cruiser bikes. The price is right, the look and
performance are right, it should be a solid seller and a good performer. If
I was in the market for a mid-sized cruiser, this one would be hard to get
past.
Thanks for reading...
Joker
There is no "tear down" required on my Valkyrie. Just pull the rear wheel (tire change) and the splines are accessible, just clean them and regrease. The fluid in the final drive unit is also easy to drain and refill whenever it is required.ZooTech wrote:My dad has an '05 C50, too. I can attest to its quality and nice ride. However, shaft drives are not the "zero maintenance" holy grails they're touted to be. They require tear-down and regreasing at regular intervals which requires far more work than replacing a belt. The main advantage of a shaft drive is the fact that it is nearly impervious to gravel, sand, or rocks that could damage a belt or its pulleys. A belt, on the other hand, offers a smoother ride and more efficient power transfer. Because of these pro's and con's of each system, I'd say they're about equal.
I recently read about a fella that had the belt replaced on his Harley. The new belt broke when he went to pass a car. The heavier strain taken while passing was too much for the belt. He had another new belt installed and the same thing occurred the next time he went to pass a car. Turns out the pulleys also wear and are supposed to be replaced along with the belt, just like a chain final drive. Don't know for sure if this is true, it was just what I had read in an m/c magazine.earwig wrote:My father just got a new C50 and loves it. It's not my favorite style bike, but after riding it I can say it rides smooth as hell... I am used to chain/belt final drive and I must say the shaft is super nice and requires no maintenance other than the oil changes etc. Of course belt drive is awesome too... I was told that the belt doesn't have to be replaced until 50,000 miles on my bike, and after that the replacement never has to be replaced, unless it tears of course.
|
TMW
Privacy Policy - Forum
Privacy Policy - Terms
and Conditions
Follow us on Facebook - Twitter - YouTube - Pinterest - Instagram - Tumblr - Google+ - Linkedin - StockTwits - News RSS Feed |