How good is the MUZ Skorpion sport?
Bob Bluegum
Has anyone out there tried the little Yammy powered MUZ?
It looks a treat, and at 174 kg it should be a hoot through the twisties.
Any thoughts on this little thumper?
It reminds me a lot of the Harri framed stuff out of the UK.
Cheers.
Bob B.
Zebee Johnstone
I test rode one and it was delightful. I have a mate in the
US who rides one and loves it.
It is a magnificent light sporting thumper but it doesn't have
the low down stomp of an undersquare motor, it's not the machine
people tell you the old racing singles were. Nor does it make the
arm-stretching acceleration of a modern high performance four.
What it does do is go through twisty bits well. It's forgiving,
you know you are riding a bike, you can feel the vibes :) and it sucks
you in to trying harder. It's light, chuckable, and if you
are prepared to ride and not just play with horsepower, it will
reward you.
I won't sell my Duke single to buy it but that says more about me and my
love for my single than about the bike.
Don't buy one expecting it to make gobs of horsepower, be smooth, be
able to outdo people on ZX6s. Buy one because you like riding, you
like twistybits, you like the way singles vibe, and you want something
light and fun.
Zebee
RussellM
well, but the single cylinder didn't make sense to me, It always felt wierd.
I could never figure out if you had to thrash it or just ride the torque...
either way not much ever seemed to happen. Twins feel better to me.
--
RussellM
98 Suzuki RGV (Baby twin)
96 Ducati Monster 600 (Bigger twin)
Bob Bluegum wrote in message <7c1oot$3...@gemini.roads.sa.gov.au>...
>Hi all,
>
>Has anyone out there tried the little Yammy powered MUZ?
>
>It looks a treat, and at 174 kg it should be a hoot through the twisties.
>
>Any thoughts on this little thumper?
>
>It reminds me a lot of the Harri framed stuff out of the UK.
>
>Cheers.
>
>Bob B.
Richard Fay
>
> Don't buy one expecting it to make gobs of horsepower, be smooth, be
> able to outdo people on ZX6s.
Why bother???
The modern 600s have all the attributes you decribe PLUS "sufficient"
power.
Buy a ZX6/CBR600/GSXR600 and be able to outdo R1s through the twisties.
Richard
Zebee Johnstone
Richard Fay <fa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>
>>
>> Don't buy one expecting it to make gobs of horsepower, be smooth, be
>> able to outdo people on ZX6s.
>
>Why bother???
>
>The modern 600s have all the attributes you decribe PLUS "sufficient"
>power.
Same reason I bother riding my Ducati. It's small, it's slow, it's got
drum brakes and I find it waaay more fun than a 4cyl.
I find that 4cyls are too top heavy, too antiseptic and smooth,
too heavy generally and don't put a smile on my face.
I'm happy to say I'm not a racetrack rider, so I don't *need* gobs
of horsepower, I need enough to ride smoothly. Plus the skill required
to ride smoothly and fast on a small light bike is skill I value.
You buy a light single because you like such things.
If you buy based on numbers then you won't like the MuZ. If your
requirements for "feel" include the things 4s do well, you won't
like it. If you like small light singles with enough horses to
go places and enough handling to suck you in and enough vibes to let
you know there's a motor there... then you will like it.
Simple.
Zebee
- who can't comprehend what people like about modern 4s.
Geoff Morgan
Zebee Johnstone wrote in message ...
>
>Zebee
> - who can't comprehend what people like about modern 4s.
Umm lessee... they go fast, they don't break down as much and they're
smoooooth....
Morgz (who can't understand why people like old technology)
classic - a motorcycle old enough for people to forget how bad they were :-)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Perth WA
98 CBR1100XX
Need info on good rides in WA? Check out ->
http://www.pplant.com.au/warides
Zebee Johnstone
Geoff Morgan <geoff....@crestoz.com.au.nospamthanx> wrote:
>
>Zebee Johnstone wrote in message ...
>
>>
>>Zebee
>> - who can't comprehend what people like about modern 4s.
>
>Umm lessee... they go fast, they don't break down as much and they're
>smoooooth....
I dunno, the Duke hasn't broken down in my 10 years or so of
ownership. except for a 15yo throttle cable breaking.
and smooth bores me witless.
But that's the fun of it, if we all liked the same thing life would
be boring.
Zebee
CrazyCam
>
> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>
> >
> > Don't buy one expecting it to make gobs of horsepower, be smooth, be
> > able to outdo people on ZX6s.
>
> Why bother???
>
> The modern 600s have all the attributes you decribe PLUS "sufficient"
> power.
>
Not sure, Richard, but I took it that Zebee was saying _not_ to expect to
outdo ZX6's.
As for the "why bother", have you ever tried something like the MuZ?
I had a ride on a similar machine (the BM F650) at a ride day at Eastern
Creek, and thoroughly enjoyed it.
There is no law that sez bikers _must_ ride race-rep 4 cylinder rockets.
Remember, too, that many of us use our various bikes as main transportation,
as well as the weekend ride for fun. Once a machine is depended upon to
provide transport, many other factors become significant, rather than the
horsepower produced.
regards,
CrazyCam
Steve Williams
sentiment....
--
Devo
SRV250 & Duke 450 Special
Doug Cox
>
>Zebee Johnstone wrote in message ...
>
>>
>>Zebee
>> - who can't comprehend what people like about modern 4s.
>
>Umm lessee... they go fast, they don't break down as much
Nobody keeps them for long enough to break down...
Doug Cox
Work to ride, Ride to work...
Doug...@Bigpond.com
http://www.users.bigpond.com/Doug_Cox/
Supe
Zebee Johnstone wrote in message ...
>Zebee
> - who can't comprehend what people like about modern 4s.
Please don't bother with any "I'm a god rider because I ride a slow bike"
oratory Zeebs.
I just thought I'd tell you what I like about my modern 4.
* Arm stretching at high revs. Yes, you'd be surprised how many
motorcyclists actually like power and going F A S T.
* The sound of the RAM AIR.
* The light responsive chassis of a good 600 coupled with this ram air
induction sound comprises quite a visceral experience, add to this the
intensity of speed, force of accellerationa dn deceleration and you get a
very addictive cocktail
* The ability to ride a bugger all revs with zero responsiveness in cruise
mode, not having a jerky bike or having to be ultra delicate with throttle.
Then again, a 1/4 action throttle and 100+ hp is never boring, and that gear
box is always there as your ticket to action.
I won't crap on and on like usual, leave it at that. I find the character
of underpowered bikes very appealing, and get much the same thrills at much
lower speeds, but I'd never trade it full time.
Again, please don't tell me about how good riders of slow bikes are. then
I'll just have to jump on a slow bike, ride faster than them through a set
of twisties and then go back to the 600 I prefer.
Supe.
PS: Re initial thread. the guy who started the Ulysses club rides a Muz,
he's fast for an OLD guy and loves his bike.
Geoff Hansford
Geoff Morgan wrote in message ...
>Zebee Johnstone wrote in message ...
>>
>
>smoooooth....
A lot of people don't _want_ bikes that are dead smooth. The best selling
large roadbike in australia is the VTR1000 a v-twin which is a japanese
cross between the feel of the old sports twin and the ability of the modern
sports bike. This bike vibes very pleasantly to me (some say they don't
like that... I do :)
>Morgz (who can't understand why people like old technology)
Well the VTR and The TRX and the TL and the Dukes are not old but they all
vibrate :)
>classic - a motorcycle old enough for people to forget how bad they were
:-)
If you were at Phillip Island for the Island Classics you would have seen
pushrod v-twin 1200 harley Davidson's lapping PI in around 1 minute 50
seconds with the limiting factor being tyre grip :)
Geoff Hansford
Suzuki Bandit 1200 (Doolan) & RGV250 (Dianne)
IRC Nick Geoff_San
Geoff Hansford
>Zebee Johnstone wrote in message ...
>> - who can't comprehend what people like about modern 4s.
>
>oratory Zeebs.
Can I do it instead supes <evil grin>
>I just thought I'd tell you what I like about my modern 4.
I have an old fashioned modern 4 ;-)
>* Arm stretching at high revs. Yes, you'd be surprised how many
>motorcyclists actually like power and going F A S T.
Nah... 600's don't stretch arms... that requires cubes as well as modern
technology <2nd evil grin>
>* The sound of the RAM AIR.
I'll give you that one :)
>* The light responsive chassis of a good 600 coupled with this ram air
>induction sound comprises quite a visceral experience, add to this the
>intensity of speed, force of accellerationa dn deceleration and you get a
>very addictive cocktail
Which the R1 does all of and does better <3rd evil grin>
>* The ability to ride a bugger all revs with zero responsiveness in cruise
>mode, not having a jerky bike or having to be ultra delicate with throttle.
>Then again, a 1/4 action throttle and 100+ hp is never boring, and that
gear
>box is always there as your ticket to action.
The having to use the box is the bit I don't like... use it sure... have to
use it nup. Something like the R1 grunts as well as revs :)
>I won't crap on and on like usual, leave it at that. I find the character
>of underpowered bikes very appealing, and get much the same thrills at much
>lower speeds, but I'd never trade it full time.
Fair Enough... everyone is different.
>Again, please don't tell me about how good riders of slow bikes are. then
>I'll just have to jump on a slow bike, ride faster than them through a set
>of twisties and then go back to the 600 I prefer.
That is dangerous Supes... there is _always_ someone quicker LOL
>Supe.
>
>PS: Re initial thread. the guy who started the Ulysses club rides a Muz,
>he's fast for an OLD guy and loves his bike.
Oi! Less of the old stuff... not all of us with grey hair are quite ready
for cruisers you know :)
Clem Doherty
Folks,
Can we hear from some people who HAVE owned "old" singles/twins/triples and
still PREFER "modern" fours?
I personally find fours absolutely yawn-inducing; but I'm prepared to listen
to reason.....
Educate me!
Clem
Bruce Campbell
>
> In aus.motorcycles on Tue, 09 Mar 99 15:38:22 GMT
> Bob Bluegum <Bob.B...@hello.net.au> wrote:
> >
> >Has anyone out there tried the little Yammy powered MUZ?
> >
> >It looks a treat, and at 174 kg it should be a hoot through the twisties.
> >
> >Any thoughts on this little thumper?
> >
> >It reminds me a lot of the Harri framed stuff out of the UK.
> >
>
> US who rides one and loves it.
>
> It is a magnificent light sporting thumper but it doesn't have
> the low down stomp of an undersquare motor, it's not the machine
> people tell you the old racing singles were. Nor does it make the
> arm-stretching acceleration of a modern high performance four.
>
> What it does do is go through twisty bits well. It's forgiving,
> you know you are riding a bike, you can feel the vibes :) and it sucks
> you in to trying harder. It's light, chuckable, and if you
> are prepared to ride and not just play with horsepower, it will
> reward you.
>
> I won't sell my Duke single to buy it but that says more about me and my
> love for my single than about the bike.
>
> like twistybits, you like the way singles vibe, and you want something
> light and fun.
>
> Zebee
Bob,
I also had a test ride on a Skorpion and, like Zebee, was real
impressed. It was actually my first choice for a new bike but they
didn't get them onto the market fast enough. Oh well ... next time!
I was very impressed with the riding position - it fitted me better than
any bike I've ridden for the last 20 years. It develops adequate power,
most of it fairly high in the rev range. It also pulses under power but
smooths out once you reach cruising speed. That is, its a normal single.
The level of finish is great and their are a number of items I really
like. Frinstance ... the Traveller has fully adjustable handlebars and
footpegs so you MUST be able to get the jigger to fit.
The things I didn't like .. fat tyres, high exhaust system. That's it,
but these two are my pet hates of modern bikes. The first makes them
lousy in bad conditions (read deep gravel/sand), and the second makes
them uncomfortable for pillion passengers and difficult to fit decent
size panniers. I understand that it may be possible to get skinnier
wheels fitted to the MuZ's on request, and larger panniers are available
for the Traveller. There's not much you can do about the height of the
pillion pegs, unless you are very friendly with Staintune or some other
zorstpipe bender.
If it was me, I'd get a Tour (bottom of the range) and fit BIG panniers
to it, and get the skinny wheel option if possible. Then I'd fit a
handlebar screen of some kind (I don't particularly like full fairings
either).
The bottom line ... I could live with one easily. But notice that my
comments are for the more touring oriented Skorpions, not the Sport or
Replica, although the Sport shares most of its components with the other
two. The Replica is a bit different! Looks to me as if you could take a
Guzzi approach ... start off with something that is basically right then
buy the parts you want to make it perfect for you.
If you live in Sydney, John Fretten M/Cycles at Blacktown have demo
bikes available.
Bruce Campbell
XJ600 450 Desmo
Zebee Johnstone
And the reverse of that question. Is there anyone who started on
fours who now prefers singles and twins?
I know we get a few on the Guzzi list, but people who are into Guzzis
are weird. Just sometimes takes time for them to realise it and
meet their destiny. :)
Zebee
Darryl Georgee
>Zebee
I've been told the old horizontal Guzzi single
was quite slow BUT had about 1000% more
character (?) than modern 4s' :-)
Darryl, 100% of Townsvilles MZ riders.
.
"Howling into hollow blackness,
dusky Diesel shudders in full cry"
Jethro Tull, Journeyman from the album "Heavy Horses"
Zebee Johnstone
Richard Fay <fa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> Zebee
>> - who can't comprehend what people like about modern 4s.
>
>
yes. I found it interesting but not something I'd
pay money for and it didn't make me go more than
"yes, it's what everyone says it is, and I still don't
like it"
They feel top heavy to me, and I find it impossible
to beleive that a 4cyl DOHC bike can weigh the same as a
single. Got any numbers?
I found that my porky old Guzzi at 240kg was less "heavy" in
feel than the CBR600 I tried.
I have no doubt they suit people - if they didn't they wouldn't
sell.
I can't understand why people like them, but so?
Zebee
Damian Carvolth
Ditto to all that. I cna't believe a one line throw away comment has inspired
such intense refuting. I hate to be inflamitory but it reads like insecure
defensiveness to me...
We've had this thread here before. I have ridden the modern japanese 4, I
admire it enormously, it does everything well except interest me. I don't like
teh way 4's make power even tough there may be heaps more of it than my old
thing. They definitley have an high C of G which is important to short arses
like Zebee and I and perhaps less noticable to taller people ?
I think Zebee will agree that neither of us are bagging them as such. If you
like 4's then own one, but we don't and as she said sometimes wonder at the
appeal.
They are also pigs to work on.
--
Damian Carvolth
"I'm just a startled bunny in the headlights of life", L.J. Young
dam...@dem.csiro.au
http://www.brb.dem.csiro.au/unrestricted/people/CarvolthDamian/
http://dove.mtx.net.au/~bryanb/members.htm#Damian Carvolth
Richard Fay
>
>
> Same reason I bother riding my Ducati. It's small, it's slow, it's got
> drum brakes and I find it waaay more fun than a 4cyl.
>
> I find that 4cyls are too top heavy, too antiseptic and smooth,
> too heavy generally and don't put a smile on my face.
>
Huh!?! The modern 600's are NO heavier than the MUZ touted in this
thread.
As for antiseptic (regarding a bike??) I can't agree with you. My 600
puts a smile on my face. And Crazycam will agree that can be sometimes
hard to do :)
>
> Zebee
> - who can't comprehend what people like about modern 4s.
Have you actually ridden a modern (current model) 600????
Richard
Geoff Morgan
Steve Williams wrote in message <36e4...@news.ausmail.com>...
>Don't worry about it Zebee, some of these people will never understand your
>sentiment....
>
>--
news group. My preference is for modern technology.... the more the better.
It comes from my occupation (mechanical engineering) and a fascination with
the process of the development of products like modern motorcycles. I don't
get the same enjoyment from 'old' stuff. It doesn't make me wrong - I just
get my jollies from a different aspect. I totally understand that Zebee
loves her bikes and for different reasons.
Morgz
Zebee Johnstone
Geoff Morgan <geoff....@crestoz.com.au.nospamthanx> wrote:
>
>get the same enjoyment from 'old' stuff. It doesn't make me wrong - I just
>get my jollies from a different aspect. I totally understand that Zebee
>loves her bikes and for different reasons.
>
Pretty much. There are different bikes out there because people
like differnt things.
I can intellectually appreciate the bikes Morgz likes, I just don't
like them myself. He's the same about the ones I like.
Zebee
Damian Carvolth
geoff....@crestoz.com.au.nospamthanx says...
. My preference is for modern technology.... the more the better.
>It comes from my occupation (mechanical engineering) and a fascination with
>the process of the development of products like modern motorcycles.
Oh really ? I'm a mechanical engineer, ex of the automotive industry and now do
reaserch. I abhore complexity and gimmics. Your welcome to your preference but
don't imply it's because of your profession. I know plenty of mech eng's who
shun "modern" machines.
As an engineer you SHOULD know why the americans were still building side valve
bikes and cars 20, nay 50 years after teh early 4 valve DOHC engines.
Everything in engineering is a compromise chosen at the engineers discetion to
meet the design brief. Those choices are rarely black and white and thus
reflect the personal prejudices of the engineer.
2 points arise from this. First this is why we revere some engineers, they
created machines which in the eyes of many are works of art. Second any decent
engineer should be mature enough to recognise that thier way isn't necessarily
right and another's isn't necessarily wrong. Although some are pig awful :)
Tony Seton
>
>We've had this thread here before. I have ridden the modern japanese 4, I
>admire it enormously, it does everything well except interest me. I don't
like
>teh way 4's make power even tough there may be heaps more of it than my old
>thing. They definitley have an high C of G which is important to short
arses
>like Zebee and I and perhaps less noticable to taller people ?
>
>I think Zebee will agree that neither of us are bagging them as such. If
you
>like 4's then own one, but we don't and as she said sometimes wonder at the
>appeal.
>
>They are also pigs to work on.
>
Okay, I appreciate the arguments for and against big lazy singles and
high-revving fours so, fence-sitter that I am, my ideal bike would be a
v-twin along the lines of the VTR1000 (after all, it's the bike responsible
for finally getting me interested enough in biking to do something about it
after all these years).
Given that the conventional advice to learners is to upgrade to a bike
around 600cc when a 250 is no longer enough, where are the 600cc v-twins?.
If my ultimate aim is to ride a relaxed mile-eater, it doesn't make much
sense to me to have a frenetic 4-cyl as an intermediate bike. Given the
vastly different riding position, I wouldn't see something like the XV535 as
a viable option either and given the rigours of a 140km daily commute I'd
need to be convinced of the reliability and durability of the 600 Monster.
Hopefully no-one misinterprets that as bagging either machine, neither one
suits my particular needs, wants and/or prejudices :-)
So, is there a gap in the market big enough to ride a Goldwing through, or
do the manufacturers and bike shops just downplay mid-size twins in favour
of the more glamorous hardware?
Or are the big twins so torquey and easy to ride that going from a 250
single to a litre v-twin is not an act of suicidal insanity?
--
Tony
'84 XT250
Zebee Johnstone
Tony Seton <anthon...@unspam.hunterlink.net.au> wrote:
>
>Given that the conventional advice to learners is to upgrade to a bike
>around 600cc when a 250 is no longer enough, where are the 600cc v-twins?.
can't get enough power out of them to satisfy the horsepower
junkies, and so they put them in cruisers.
The 600 Monster is in a class of its own really.
>Or are the big twins so torquey and easy to ride that going from a 250
>single to a litre v-twin is not an act of suicidal insanity?
What's your right wrist like? Can you restrain it?
If you think you have some riding skill, you are aware
the bike can bite you, and you are willing to learn to ride it
and not think that all it takes is straightline speed, I can't
see why it won't work for you.
Zebee
Greg Walton
> Okay, I appreciate the arguments for and against big lazy singles and
> high-revving fours so, fence-sitter that I am, my ideal bike would be a
> v-twin along the lines of the VTR1000 (after all, it's the bike responsible
> for finally getting me interested enough in biking to do something about it
> after all these years).
>
> Given that the conventional advice to learners is to upgrade to a bike
> around 600cc when a 250 is no longer enough, where are the 600cc v-twins?.
The Suzuki 650 v twins are on their way, stylistically similar to the TL1000s.
> If my ultimate aim is to ride a relaxed mile-eater, it doesn't make much
> sense to me to have a frenetic 4-cyl as an intermediate bike. Given the
> vastly different riding position, I wouldn't see something like the XV535 as
> a viable option either and given the rigours of a 140km daily commute I'd
> need to be convinced of the reliability and durability of the 600 Monster.
> Hopefully no-one misinterprets that as bagging either machine, neither one
> suits my particular needs, wants and/or prejudices :-)
>
> So, is there a gap in the market big enough to ride a Goldwing through, or
> do the manufacturers and bike shops just downplay mid-size twins in favour
> of the more glamorous hardware?
>
> Or are the big twins so torquey and easy to ride that going from a 250
> single to a litre v-twin is not an act of suicidal insanity?
I didnt have any problems, I went straight from a Virago 250 to a TRX850 without
any problems. I had the TRX for 2 years before I dropped it, and it was nothing
to do with excessive power :-(
The TRX would be a good option, its less powerfull and a lot cheaper than the
litre V twins. Gets excellent fuel economy (5 to 5.5 l/100km) and has a more
upright position than most sports bikes.
Cheers
Greg
Greg Walton
> I had a Yamaha SZR660 Super Single for about 3 months, It was Ok, handled
> well, but the single cylinder didn't make sense to me, It always felt wierd.
> I could never figure out if you had to thrash it or just ride the torque...
> either way not much ever seemed to happen. Twins feel better to me.
How big are you Russell? I'm 6'2" and I've never ridden a more ergonomically
incorrect bike than the SZR660. I took a demo bike out and and it sounded, great
felt like it handled well but was so totally wrong for me. My knees were so far
above the tank cutouts it wasnt funny and my feet were somewhere just below my
ears.
I've tried many types of bikes without many problems but the SZR660 was so
incredibly wrong. Does anyone out there fit on one?
Greg
TRX850
RussellM
heavily sculpted you either fit or don't...
--
RussellM
98 Suzuki RGV
96 Ducati Monster 600
Greg Walton wrote in message
<36E5FC68...@cygnus.uwa.edu.nospamthanks.au>...
Richard Fay
>
> Given that the conventional advice to learners is to upgrade to a bike
> around 600cc when a 250 is no longer enough, where are the 600cc v-twins?.
>
> If my ultimate aim is to ride a relaxed mile-eater, it doesn't make much
> sense to me to have a frenetic 4-cyl as an intermediate bike.
Most 600s can rev high. It doesn't mean you need to rev the proverbal
crap out of them. Most of the time my bike doesn't see much past
9500rpm.
My ZX6R is a much better "mile-eater" than my TRX850 ever was. It's
smooth engine (6000rpm at 120km/h), comfortable seat and riding
position, effective fairing, touring range (300+km from a tank before
reserve) and well damped supple suspension were all better than the low
revving TRX850 twin.
You just have to choose the correct 600. The CBR600/ZX6R do a better job
at long distances than the R6/GSXR600 do.
Richard
Supe
re your points below:
Believe it or not at high revs the 600 cranks out about 100hp and, combined
with it's low weight, can really rocket off. So I'd argue your need for
cubes if pulling arms comment. Also, thanks for helping me prove my point
with your R1 comments. Ofcourse it's better, I was telling Zeebee what's
good about a modern 4, and used my own as it's easier for him to believe
what I'm saying. that the R1 is even better is fine, proves just how good
4's are!
As for the there's always someone faster comment, I can assure you that I am
probably the last guy in the world who needs to be told that one. I do
think that some of these guys need a reality check though, esp with the slow
bike comments.
I don't get this one..."
>>PS: Re initial thread. the guy who started the Ulysses club rides a Muz,
>>he's fast for an OLD guy and loves his bike.
>
>
>Oi! Less of the old stuff... not all of us with grey hair are quite ready
>for cruisers you know :)
>
>Geoff Hansford
>Suzuki Bandit 1200 (Doolan) & RGV250 (Dianne)
>IRC Nick Geoff_San"
the muz isn't a cruiser and the guy who I was talking about IS old, he's the
founder of Ulysses for God's sake! His number plate is even OLD 01 !!!!
So, you're feeling a bit delicate about age are you? hehe.
Time to put the boot in then.
I'd say that my 600 that you deny has acceleration would accelerate quicker
than your 1200. Ofcourse, that's with me on mine and you on yours! and
we'd have to be able to use the gearbox as usual for each model of bike.
See you matey,
Geoffrey Superbiker.
Geoff Hansford wrote in message <36e4f18d.0@nap-ns1>...
>Supe wrote in message
>>Zebee Johnstone wrote in message ...
>>>Zebee
>>> - who can't comprehend what people like about modern 4s.
>>
Supe
both well.
I ride my ZX-6R every day to work now. In the terrible weather we had
recently most of the older twins weren't to be seen! The only bikes making
it in the rain were a TLR and an old BMW 4cyl + a scooter ( and my 600
ofcourse).
I love the 600 for everything it does, it isn't the best bike in the world,
but for the amount of money I have it's by far the best compromise. It is
very fuel efficient when you're off the gas, relaxing to ride to and from
work, very comfortable for mile munching (and yes I do do a fair few K's on
it) and has great sproting ability. It has great handling that is of
benefit when scratching, touring and commuting. It would be the perfect
bike if it had the R1's grunt and brakes.
So, I've countered your remarks at the bottom.
CrazyCam wrote in message <36E5D3...@ar.com.au>...
>Richard Fay wrote:
>>
>> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Don't buy one expecting it to make gobs of horsepower, be smooth, be
>> > able to outdo people on ZX6s.
>>
Geoff Morgan
Damian Carvolth wrote in message <7c4q03$3ma$2...@news.cat.csiro.au>...
>In article <pKjF2.37$_31....@nswpull.telstra.net>,
>geoff....@crestoz.com.au.nospamthanx says...
>
>. My preference is for modern technology.... the more the better.
>>It comes from my occupation (mechanical engineering) and a fascination
with
>>the process of the development of products like modern motorcycles.
>
>Oh really ? I'm a mechanical engineer, ex of the automotive industry and
now do
>reaserch. I abhore complexity and gimmics. Your welcome to your preference
but
>don't imply it's because of your profession. I know plenty of mech eng's
who
>shun "modern" machines.
>
I didn't imply it. Read it again. I said "It comes from my occupation.....
and a fascination". A *lot* of engineers drive around in classic cars and on
classic bikes because of the reasons you state. I didn't imply that being an
engineer automatically made you think like I do. Sheesh, some people are
getting a little testy around here......
>As an engineer you SHOULD know why the americans were still building side
valve
>bikes and cars 20, nay 50 years after teh early 4 valve DOHC engines.
>Everything in engineering is a compromise chosen at the engineers discetion
to
>meet the design brief. Those choices are rarely black and white and thus
>reflect the personal prejudices of the engineer.
>
And the market economics of the time. As an engineer, you will understand
this too. Remember too, that Harley *very* nearly went broke for these
reasons, saved by influences other than technical brilliance. And I like
Harleys for those same reasons before you flame me.
>2 points arise from this. First this is why we revere some engineers, they
>created machines which in the eyes of many are works of art. Second any
decent
>engineer should be mature enough to recognise that thier way isn't
necessarily
>right and another's isn't necessarily wrong. Although some are pig awful :)
>
True. There are pig awful 'modern' fours and pig awful classics.
Geoff Hansford
>
>Folks,
>Can we hear from some people who HAVE owned "old" singles/twins/triples and
>still PREFER "modern" fours?
Hmmm well I have owned a Triumph T140 and a 1985 BMW R65 does that count? I
prefer to own modern fours because I don't have the time or the preference
to do most of my own maintenence and I admit to being adicted to _LOTS_ of
grunt. Which is something that until recently was the domain of the big air
cooled UJM. This doesn't mean I like modern fours though strictly as the
modern 4 is liquid cooled and almost totally vibe free. I prefer my fours
air cooled and with some vibes... hence the preference for bikes like the
Bandit 1200, the Diversion 900 and the XJR1300. I must admit I was
seriously tempted by the VTR1000 but the silly small fuel tank was a killer
and put me off it.
>I personally find fours absolutely yawn-inducing; but I'm prepared to
listen
>to reason.....
>Educate me!
>Clem
Well the air cooled Jap 4 nakeds are the most bang for the buck on the
market, and even whilst the magazines talk about the slightly iffy handling
on the Bandit 1200 (which I fixed with some race tech suspension mods) and
the slightly restricted top end (which I fixed with a pipe) they are all
pretty much agreed on the grin factor that these bikes have. Anything with
that much torque in a short wheelbase almost has to be fun :)
Geoff Hansford
>Hi GS,
>
>re your points below:
>
>Believe it or not at high revs the 600 cranks out about 100hp and, combined
>with it's low weight, can really rocket off. So I'd argue your need for
>cubes if pulling arms comment. Also, thanks for helping me prove my point
>with your R1 comments. Ofcourse it's better, I was telling Zeebee what's
>good about a modern 4, and used my own as it's easier for him to believe
>what I'm saying. that the R1 is even better is fine, proves just how good
>4's are!
Acceleration in gears is mostly related to torque not horsepower, of course
a 600 will accelerate well in the top of it's power range where it makes
both good power and torque.. but I wouldn't claim that either my bandit with
115 rear wheel horses or your 600 meet that criterea. A V-Max or a
CBR1100XX do... a stock ZZR1100 almost. Your criterea may vary :)
>As for the there's always someone faster comment, I can assure you that I
am
>probably the last guy in the world who needs to be told that one. I do
>think that some of these guys need a reality check though, esp with the
slow
>bike comments.
Fair Enough :)
>I don't get this one..."
>>>PS: Re initial thread. the guy who started the Ulysses club rides a
Muz,
>>>he's fast for an OLD guy and loves his bike.
>>
>>Oi! Less of the old stuff... not all of us with grey hair are quite ready
>>for cruisers you know :)
>>
>the muz isn't a cruiser and the guy who I was talking about IS old, he's
the
>founder of Ulysses for God's sake! His number plate is even OLD 01 !!!!
>So, you're feeling a bit delicate about age are you? hehe.
That comment was a little tongue in cheek :)
>Time to put the boot in then.
>I'd say that my 600 that you deny has acceleration would accelerate quicker
>than your 1200. Ofcourse, that's with me on mine and you on yours! and
>we'd have to be able to use the gearbox as usual for each model of bike.
Hrrmm I think that since off the mark from 0 to 160 kph I could stay with
shadow's zx9r at full noise I must disagree. If you are talking about 0-240
the almost certainly your bike would get there quicker but that is
aerodynamics. A stock bandit with 98 or so at the rear wheel would probably
lose to 160 as well.
>See you matey,
Yep See you next track day we cross :)
Geoff Hansford
Zebee Johnstone wrote in message ...
>>
>>Given that the conventional advice to learners is to upgrade to a bike
>>around 600cc when a 250 is no longer enough, where are the 600cc v-twins?.
Well they don't have to be V-Twins you know, the GS500 Suzuki and the new
ER500 Kawasaki are already available and the new 650 V-Twin Suzuki's are
almost here. Want to bet they don't sell well though?
>can't get enough power out of them to satisfy the horsepower
>junkies, and so they put them in cruisers.
The new 650 suzi might sell moderately to those that want a V-Twin but can't
afford the entry price for the big ones but it won't sell because it is a
mid size bike it will sell despite it...
>The 600 Monster is in a class of its own really.
Not for long :)
>>Or are the big twins so torquey and easy to ride that going from a 250
>>single to a litre v-twin is not an act of suicidal insanity?
The VTR1000 would be a sensible step up, the TL1000R less so I believe, but
anything can be ridden slowly if you want to :)
sch...@ozemail.com.au
"Tony Seton" <anthon...@unspam.hunterlink.net.au> wrote:
>
> Okay, I appreciate the arguments for and against big lazy singles and
> high-revving fours so, fence-sitter that I am, my ideal bike would be a
> v-twin along the lines of the VTR1000 (after all, it's the bike responsible
> for finally getting me interested enough in biking to do something about it
> after all these years).
>
> around 600cc when a 250 is no longer enough, where are the 600cc v-twins?.
Exactly my problem. I adore VTRs and would like a 600 version. The new
Suzuki SV650 is a baby TLS and is about to hit the shops. There is the
Ducati 750SS. Not a lot else. TRX850....
-------------------------------
Sue Chamberlain
1991 VT250 Spada (will turn into a bigger red twin - happy Clem?)
1997 DR250
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Clem Doherty
Geoff Morgan wrote ..
..(snip)
My preference is for modern technology.... the more the better.
>It comes from my occupation (mechanical engineering) and a fascination with
>the process of the development of products like modern motorcycles.
But is a 16 valve DOHC in-line four really still that exciting??
I know they're quite good (that's why everybody plays the percentages and
makes one) but exciting??
...
clem
(I'm obviously missing something)
Dacious
>Hi all,
>
>Has anyone out there tried the little Yammy powered MUZ?
I have a Skorpian Replica and there are differences, but much of the m/c is
the same. Weight is low as is CofG. Braking with twin Goldline Brembos is
phenomenal on the two examples I have ridden (one-finger if you like, but
with great feel!). Handling is superlative. With Whitepower stuff front and
rear (damping adjustment works from almost nil - stiffish) suspension works
great. Took 2,500km for suspenders to loosen up, which augurs well for long
life - just about when average Jap forks sag and loose their initial good
feel. Tools are good quality, including spanners to adjust shock spring
preload. Finish is good. All the bits like teflon-coated braided lines, big
tacho/speedo & small analogue clock are good; stainless exhausts &
fasteners, good fairing design, bike is easy to clean. Lightweight
Marchesini wheels (same pattern as magnesium race wheels but in aluminium
alloy). Race compound Metzlers - super sticky. There has been little effort
to seriously keep weight down - subframes, swingarm, brackets and fairing
braces are steel (good for longevity on road). Would be easy to shed 20-30kg
for racing - more with some expense.
Minuses - power pulses limit low rpm riding and you must be smooth with
throttle below 3,000 rpm. Top on mine is 100km/h+ overdrive only. 60-70 kays
is third gear only. Due to solid race-style pegs and bars some may not like
transmitted thumps (I do, but I have always liked big singles). I can travel
long distances without numbing. Seat is 2cm of curved foam. I like firm
seats, you might not. Motorcycle could do with 10 or 15 more HP - motor is
very mildly tuned. In Supermono form they are getting 70 rear-wheel hp with
reliability. Mine has a minor wiring fault which causes tacho to malfunction
when lights are on. New wiring loom from Germany exhibited same problem. Is
with Dealer now for fixing - I have their demo Skorpian which has been given
a razzing but still goes and stops great. Looser than mine (more K's) but
goes harder.
Pluses - best performing single, and handling bike, I have ever ridden,
including RGV race bike, TZ U model or any GSXR. Frame rigidity seems right
up there. Despite low weight, quick steering and wide wheels (normally a
formula for bump-steer) my bike doesn't slap or step out of line on bumps.
The suspension is very racer-ish - harsh at low speeds, you feel sharp edged
bumps transmitted to your wrists (typical of USD fork). On smooth roads,
almost any speed the bike laughs at you and says "you cannot be serious".
Seating position is much better for over 5'8" than Yamaha SZR which is based
on late TZR250. MuZ footrest position has four alternate locations. You will
never touch anything down except a knee unless you fall off the Replica.
Would seriously embarrass most machines in really twisty bits. Obviously
with 50hp it will not compete in a straight line, but in roll-ons it will
not loose much between corners. Overall real-world performance is similar to
an RGV, less15km/h from top end (185km/h) but far greater and easier (less
vicious) to ride midrange. Heaps of Over Racing stuff available - 680
hi-comp pistons, cams, carbs, pipes etc. Stock motor with water cooling
should last a long time, however. 20km/litre (60mpg) - around town! I don't
ride it gently. It's narrow so it's great for lanesplitting. In wet it's
still easy to ride quick. Traction is great.High-mount mirrors are good for
sports bike. Despite my "metre-wide" shoulders they give reasonable and
fuzz-free vision to sides and rear.
The biggest kick is how much attention it attracts - at $13K far more than
any other bike I've ever had. I didn't buy it as a fashion statement, but
levels of interest amongst current and former riders is high.
$13k might buy a superceded Supersport bike or big naked/standard, but I
suspect I know which will hold it's value better. Don Stafford who had been
racing his (has acquired 90hp 800cc engine out of Cathcart-tested Over works
racer) has done nothing to frame or suspenders except fit shorter alloy
swingarm and twiddle the adjusters. Looks seriously cheap when quality of
brakes, suspenders and other bits are considered compared to another club
members' $30,000 TZ-framed XT600.
I was going to keep my retired SR500 and restore it, but I have lost
interest in riding it since I got the MuZ.......
Alan Pennykid
>
> In aus.motorcycles on Tue, 9 Mar 1999 21:18:31 +1000
> Clem Doherty <cdoh...@powerup.com.au> wrote:
> >
> >Can we hear from some people who HAVE owned "old" singles/twins/triples and
> >still PREFER "modern" fours?
> >to reason.....
>
> fours who now prefers singles and twins?
>
I've had many fours, Honda, Yamaha, Suzuki, BMW and then I got a Triumph
Triple(Trophy 900), what an engine!, just a pity I wasn't quite so
enthusiastic about the rest of the bike. I'm now on my 3rd boxer and
ridden a fair smattering of Guzzis and Ducatis and now I really feel a
motorcycle doesnt need more than 2 cylinders, they are just so pleasant
to ride (although my K100 outfit still brings a smile ot my face, but it
was a boring solo).
I made a bad tactical error on the weekend and took a Monster out for a
test ride, shit, I've never had new bike fever take hold so quick.
AL
Clem Doherty
Clem Doherty wrote
.
>But is a 16 valve DOHC in-line four really still that exciting??
.
I just realised what it IS!!
My bike (and the kinds of bikes I like) feel good when I'm riding slowly!!
I've always needed to ride an in-line four fast(ly?) to feel good.
Perhaps if they made a big-bang engine......
Clem
.
Oh my God!! I UNDERSTAND why people choose Harleys!!!
Richard Fay
>
> There is no law that sez bikers _must_ ride race-rep 4 cylinder rockets.
>
> Remember, too, that many of us use our various bikes as main transportation,
> as well as the weekend ride for fun.
The reliability of japanese "race-rep" 600s hasn't been questioned in
this thread.
You seem to cope quite admirably with your race-rep spawned Honda Hornet
Richard
Richard Fay
>
> As an engineer you SHOULD know why the americans were still building side valve
> bikes and cars 20, nay 50 years after teh early 4 valve DOHC engines.
Let's see, So they could afford to restyle the fins on their crass
barges every 18months? The same reason they reduced wheelsize, and
therefore brake size, so the cars looked lower. So was the direction of
the US car industry driven by engineering skill or the bean counters
> Everything in engineering is a compromise chosen at the engineers discetion to
> meet the design brief. Those choices are rarely black and white and thus
> reflect the personal prejudices of the engineer.
Yet today Ford and GM produce some of the best DOHC (or is that quadcam)
V8s.
Richard
Richard Fay
> But is a 16 valve DOHC in-line four really still that exciting??
> I know they're quite good (that's why everybody plays the percentages and
> makes one) but exciting??
It probably would if some made one with 20V,variable valve timing, EFI
and a 16,000rpm redline. Where's Honda???
But how about a supercharged one ;) It would at least sound impressive.
Richard
Jonathan Lockyer
too expensive. I bought a TRX850 for $10,600 new ride away. The TRX has got
heaps more power. Suzuki have a new model called the SV650S, (like a baby
TL1000S), 650cc 90 degree V-twin, 169kg, $10K. Looks nice too.
Jonathan Lockyer
Perth, Australia
ICQ #: 14295776
Bob Bluegum wrote in message <7c1oot$3...@gemini.roads.sa.gov.au>...
Hi all,
Has anyone out there tried the little Yammy powered MUZ?
It looks a treat, and at 174 kg it should be a hoot through the twisties.
Any thoughts on this little thumper?
It reminds me a lot of the Harri framed stuff out of the UK.
Cheers.
Bob B.
Zebee Johnstone
Jonathan Lockyer <jloc...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>The MuZ is pricey for what it has to offer. Even Yamaha's SRZ660 is
>too expensive. I bought a TRX850 for $10,600 new ride away. The TRX has got
>heaps more power. Suzuki have a new model called the SV650S, (like a baby
>TL1000S), 650cc 90 degree V-twin, 169kg, $10K. Looks nice too.
>
*grin* and see Dacious's hymn to his bike to see that "what it's
got to offer" varies widely between people.
To me, horsepower is more or less irrelevant as I'm a slow rider
and I know it. I have massive fun on my ancient Ducati single
despite it haveing maybe 40 horses. I like light, I like
small, I like vibes, I like looks.
I''ve been eying one of these MuZ's for a while. I think my problem
is that it's a good allrounder, and I have a stable of specialists :)
Zebee
sch...@ozemail.com.au
sch...@ozemail.com.au wrote:
> In article <7c4qs7$8iu$1...@ghostgum.hunterlink.net.au>,
> "Tony Seton" <anthon...@unspam.hunterlink.net.au> wrote:
> >
> > Okay, I appreciate the arguments for and against big lazy singles and
> > high-revving fours so, fence-sitter that I am, my ideal bike would be a
> > v-twin along the lines of the VTR1000 (after all, it's the bike responsible
> > for finally getting me interested enough in biking to do something about it
> > after all these years).
> >
> > Given that the conventional advice to learners is to upgrade to a bike
> > around 600cc when a 250 is no longer enough, where are the 600cc v-twins?.
>
> Exactly my problem. I adore VTRs and would like a 600 version. The new
> Suzuki SV650 is a baby TLS and is about to hit the shops. There is the
> Ducati 750SS. Not a lot else. TRX850....
And I should have added "Why don't Triumph build a fscking 600????????"
I would lovvvvvvvvvve a 600 version of a T955i.
And no Clem, when it was badged T595 that wouldn't have made enuf
difference ;-)
Craig Motbey
>
> Given that the conventional advice to learners is to upgrade to a bike
> around 600cc when a 250 is no longer enough, where are the 600cc v-twins?.
>
> If my ultimate aim is to ride a relaxed mile-eater, it doesn't make much
> sense to me to have a frenetic 4-cyl as an intermediate bike.
Not much in the way of 600cc V-twins (except for cruisers, and the
soon-to-be-released Suzuki hoonbikes). However, if you want a midsize twin,
and don't mind being not quite on the sporting edge, Honda, Kwakazaki & Suzuki
all have midsize parallel twins; the CB, ER & GS 500's. The CB is reputedly
the best of the lot, but I don't know if they're officially available in
Australia...
There are some nifty midsize Honda V-twin nakeds, the NTV650 and the 400cc
version of the same, but again, I don't think they sell 'em in Oz...shame...
--
Craig Motbey
1984 GPz750 (The Big Red Beastie)
CrazyCam Manson
>
> I'm sure Richard understood Zeebee's comment, but was adding that it can do
> both well.
>
> I ride my ZX-6R every day to work now. In the terrible weather we had
> recently most of the older twins weren't to be seen! The only bikes making
> it in the rain were a TLR and an old BMW 4cyl + a scooter ( and my 600
> ofcourse).
>
> I love the 600 for everything it does, it isn't the best bike in the world,
> but for the amount of money I have it's by far the best compromise. It is
> very fuel efficient when you're off the gas, relaxing to ride to and from
> work, very comfortable for mile munching (and yes I do do a fair few K's on
> it) and has great sproting ability. It has great handling that is of
> benefit when scratching, touring and commuting. It would be the perfect
> bike if it had the R1's grunt and brakes.
>
> So, I've countered your remarks at the bottom.
<snip>
Well, I wouldn't say countered......
I said that there was no law forcing people to ride race-rep 4 cylinder
bikes, that there were alternatives which people may choose.
I am not _against_ 4 cylinder Jap motors revving to buggery......I've
got one myself, and really enjoy it :-) but I also like riding other
types of bike too, and there are yet other types of bike which I
wouldn't ride, but see no need to dismiss with flippant "why bother?"
remarks such as Richard made.
As far as the daily transport bit is concerned, yeah, the wet weather
has thinned out the bikes in the place I park at too. ;-)
I know Richard, and know that his bike is not used as a commuter, but
rather as a week-end toy. That is not to say that _all_ people owning
such a machine use them only as week-end toys.
regards,
CrazyCam
CrazyCam Manson
>
> CrazyCam wrote:
> >
> > There is no law that sez bikers _must_ ride race-rep 4 cylinder rockets.
> >
> > Remember, too, that many of us use our various bikes as main transportation,
> > as well as the weekend ride for fun.
>
> The reliability of japanese "race-rep" 600s hasn't been questioned in
> this thread.
Indeed.
> You seem to cope quite admirably with your race-rep spawned Honda Hornet
Yup! :-)
I like the Hornet.
I also like my 750 Intruder, even tho it doesn't rev hard, and hasn't
got a ton of horsepower.
I also like my baby Honda single (not exactly a _big_ thumper, at 72
cc).
My point wasn't that there was anything _wrong_ with riding one of those
<insert here personal prejuidice> but that there are other types of
bikes which are still motorcycles and other people may like them even if
you don't.
regards,
CrazyCam
Bob Bluegum
Gee my original post got the pot boiling.
After all the "my arms are 2 foot longer now cos of my 600's extreeeeme
power" stuff has been said, followed by the "V twins were not to be seen on
rainy days" ....(really?) .........I get the impression that only Zebee is
weight conscious :-)
Really, that and "does it feel good" would be high on my list of what makes a
good bike. Bikes over 200 kg are OK for long hauls and highways, but you
can't beat a light bike on a twisty road.
As for adequate power? Own up those who've been dusted off by a good rider on
a sub 500cc bike at some stage in their chequered career.
Hmmmmm, thought so :-)
Reading back over the posts makes interesting (amusing?) reading.
I guess I must be getting old when less equals more .......or maybe less and
more are the same.
Did I say that?
Cheers.
Bob B.
Geoff Hansford
I wouldn't call Dacious' MuZ an all rounder he has the replica one! The
others are though I agree. Personally I like the sport :)
Geoff Hansford
> Richard Fay <fa...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
<SNIP>
>Gee my original post got the pot boiling.
Certainly Did :)
>After all the "my arms are 2 foot longer now cos of my 600's extreeeeme
>power" stuff has been said, followed by the "V twins were not to be seen on
>rainy days" ....(really?) .........I get the impression that only Zebee is
>weight conscious :-)
Weight is relative to the size and strength of the rider. You won't see
many posts from Gavin or Andrew (both 190cm or there abouts) complaining
about tall seats or heavy weights will you. You see more from Zebee and
Damion because they are shorter and lack that strength.
>Really, that and "does it feel good" would be high on my list of what makes
a
>good bike. Bikes over 200 kg are OK for long hauls and highways, but you
>can't beat a light bike on a twisty road.
Well... depends upon what you are talking about. My RGV250 is much more fun
on a twisty road like the spurs but it is _not_ faster than my modified
Bandit (at least with me on both). With a 50kg rider the situation would be
reversed I expect :)
>As for adequate power? Own up those who've been dusted off by a good rider
on
>a sub 500cc bike at some stage in their chequered career.
errr well yes...
>Hmmmmm, thought so :-)
hehe
>Reading back over the posts makes interesting (amusing?) reading.
This thread has been one of the most interesting (for me at least) for a
while (and yes I know other threads have gone over similar ground in the
past :)
>I guess I must be getting old when less equals more .......or maybe less
and
>more are the same.
Errr that wasn't why I bought the RGV was it.. err umm well... ;-)
>Did I say that?
You said it for more than yourself I think...
RussellM
the designers were specifically (?) told not to design a baby TL. Bit of a
shame all its going to share is a passing resemblance to the TL.
When will manufacturers stop going th eway of the Americans (Bigger is
better), I'd love a 600 twin with fuel injection, top shelf suspension and
Ram air, not this 'oh 600 twins are for couriers and commuters.....'
Sorry, just rantin'
--
RussellM
98 Suzuki RGV
96 Ducati Monster 600
>>
>> Okay, I appreciate the arguments for and against big lazy singles and
>> high-revving fours so, fence-sitter that I am, my ideal bike would be a
>> v-twin along the lines of the VTR1000 (after all, it's the bike
responsible
>> for finally getting me interested enough in biking to do something about
it
>> after all these years).
>>
>> Given that the conventional advice to learners is to upgrade to a bike
>> around 600cc when a 250 is no longer enough, where are the 600cc
v-twins?.
>
>Exactly my problem. I adore VTRs and would like a 600 version. The new
>Suzuki SV650 is a baby TLS and is about to hit the shops. There is the
>Ducati 750SS. Not a lot else. TRX850....
>
Craig Motbey
<snip>
>I wouldn't call Dacious' MuZ an all rounder he has the replica one! The
>others are though I agree. Personally I like the sport :)
That's the bikini faired one, right? I'd love one o'them with the panniers
from the tourer...
Damian Carvolth
anthon...@unspam.hunterlink.net.au says...
>
>Damian Carvolth wrote in message <7c4a70$sir$2...@news.cat.csiro.au>...
>Given that the conventional advice to learners is to upgrade to a bike
>around 600cc when a 250 is no longer enough, where are the 600cc v-twins?.
Ok. Your assertion that a twin I agree with entirely. I rode singles for years
buy touring I found teh bikes might lose a cylinder and I had nothing to get me
to a safe palce to stop or limp into the next town, so I moved to twins. I just
never went beyond that cos I'm happy with what I've got, but as I said before
each to thier own.
Your assertion about capacity I disagree with. It's a generalisation, because
generally a 600cc jap 4 makes less HP and weighs less etc than a 1000 or
whateaver jap 4.
Howeaver we should forget cc's altogether. What you ahve to consider is:
How big and strong you are and thus how comfortable you feel on xyz bike.
Notwithstanding Zebee and others commenting that we cna all ride anything if we
put enough effort into it, the truth is unless you've got your heart set on xyz
bike look around at bikes that are a size that is comfortable for you.
Then look at power, not just peak power but how it's delivered and how easy teh
bike is to ride slow. Again I'm sure I could potter around all day on a ZZR1100
or whateaver, but it's nicer on something like a guzzi which is less tempting
to rev hard...
Now I think from your previous comments that you like sporty bikes ? Maybe
something with a fairing ? and a late model maybe even new.
As has been pointed out there is the suzuki 600 comming, you've mentioned teh
monster, there is also the SS750 and 600. There are some excellant parallel
twins such as laverda TRX yam etc. Sure the trx is 850 and fast but I believe
it would be an easy bike to ride at sensible pace if it fits otherwise. It's
also light and fairly small and stuff.
I don't know if the riding pos would suit you, I would certainly tour on it but
I'm odd...
>Or are the big twins so torquey and easy to ride that going from a 250
>single to a litre v-twin is not an act of suicidal insanity?
The VTR might be ok, I thought I'd heard about a 600 ish version of it on the
books, maybe it died ? There are various options. What you should do is think
about how tall you are, what build, what you feel comfy with size wise and then
look for something that feels nice.
If you are 6' for example you could get a 3 yo guzzi 1100 for about $10k and
have a bike which will probably get you into less trouble than a CBR600. Dunno
haven't ridden the latter, but the 1100 is an easy bike to potter on, provided
you can reach teh clipons :)
I think if you ahven't got your heart set on a particular marque or model then
you should approach it systematically and choose from teh subset of bikes that
meet your criteria. There will be plenty to pick from :)
--
Damian Carvolth
"I'm just a startled bunny in the headlights of life", L.J. Young
dam...@dem.csiro.au
http://www.brb.dem.csiro.au/unrestricted/people/CarvolthDamian/
http://dove.mtx.net.au/~bryanb/members.htm#Damian Carvolth
Damian Carvolth
geoff....@crestoz.com.au.nospamthanx says...
>
>
>Damian Carvolth wrote in message <7c4q03$3ma$2...@news.cat.csiro.au>...
>>In article <pKjF2.37$_31....@nswpull.telstra.net>,
>>geoff....@crestoz.com.au.nospamthanx says...
>I didn't imply it. Read it again. I said "It comes from my occupation.....
>and a fascination". A *lot* of engineers drive around in classic cars and on
>classic bikes because of the reasons you state. I didn't imply that being an
>engineer automatically made you think like I do. Sheesh, some people are
>getting a little testy around here......
I didn't mean it to sound that way, but your post did read like that. I even
read it twice to make sure. But your right this thread has become awfully
tense, especially considering there is no need for it...
>And the market economics of the time. As an engineer, you will understand
>this too. Remember too, that Harley *very* nearly went broke for these
>reasons, saved by influences other than technical brilliance. And I like
>Harleys for those same reasons before you flame me.
I don't :) But they were in trouble in the late 60's. They kept building side
valves cos teh market wanted them in teh 40's, and there were good reasons why
teh market wanted them. Ultimately we are dictated to by market, and economics.
Not by our desire for elegant solutions. I'm not flaming anyone, I don't care
enough to get upset. I'm just offering a different perspective...
>True. There are pig awful 'modern' fours and pig awful classics.
:D Yes.
Greg Walton
> If you are 6' for example you could get a 3 yo guzzi 1100 for about $10k and
> have a bike which will probably get you into less trouble than a CBR600. Dunno
> haven't ridden the latter, but the 1100 is an easy bike to potter on, provided
> you can reach teh clipons :)
Thats a fair wack of depreciation on the Guzzi ($7000 in 3 years?).
Fine by me though, as a nice second hand 1100 is one of the bikes on my short list
to replace the TRX850 sometime early next century.
Greg
Damian Carvolth
>
>
>Clem Doherty wrote
>Oh my God!! I UNDERSTAND why people choose Harleys!!!
ROFLOL. Very amusing Clem :)
Well Indians were fun to ride before they became trendy. I was out with a
friend on his 39 sport scout about 2 years back and sailing along the warrego I
had to knock teh guz up into 5th a few times...we were cruising a bit above the
speed limit and I was trying to keep up with this 60 yo side valve
"cruiser"....
Damian Carvolth
>
>Damian Carvolth wrote:
>
>>
>> As an engineer you SHOULD know why the americans were still building side
valve
>> bikes and cars 20, nay 50 years after teh early 4 valve DOHC engines.
>
>Let's see, So they could afford to restyle the fins on their crass
>barges every 18months? The same reason they reduced wheelsize, and
>therefore brake size, so the cars looked lower. So was the direction of
>the US car industry driven by engineering skill or the bean counters
ALL automotive manufacturers are driven by market and economics. Sidevalves
survived till teh 50's (I was talking about 40's and 50's cars and bikes...)
because oil filters oil additives and air filters were less wonderful than
today, so you had to decoke your combustion chamber about ever 10k miles or so.
It's a hell of a lot easier on a side valve than a DOHC. And cos fule was cheap
roads were bad and distances travelled were shorter they didn't need hyper
efficient powerful engines....
>Yet today Ford and GM produce some of the best DOHC (or is that quadcam)
>V8s.
So ? The market shifted. My point was that technology for technologies sake is
stupid, otherwise we'd all be driving quad cam 5 valve V12's and stuff...stick
that in a hyundai I'd like to see you :)
Damian Carvolth
>
>About 5'9" or so an I only just fitted it, but I agree, the tank was so
>heavily sculpted you either fit or don't...
That's the one they make in Italy isn't it ? QED...:D
Damian Carvolth
says...
are there any web apges for these ? teh MuZ and teh suzuki 600 thingy ?
Geoff Morgan
Geoff Hansford wrote in message <36e6f837.0@nap-ns1>...
>
>
>Weight is relative to the size and strength of the rider. You won't see
>many posts from Gavin or Andrew (both 190cm or there abouts) complaining
>about tall seats or heavy weights will you. You see more from Zebee and
>Damion because they are shorter and lack that strength.
>
rider being good on a big bike. A certain petite lady I know could ride
circles around most people on any bike..... including my 220kg 'bird...... I
guess it's more about what you feel comfortable on and what does *it* for
you - regardless of what your definition of *it* is.... Me, I'd have a fleet
of bikes in my garage if I had the dough.... One each of:
a) The latest greatest Japanese four cylinder 'superbike' - to satisfy the
technophile in me
b) The latest greatest Italian twin - red with Ducati in it's blood.
c) A Harley
d) a 400 dirt bike.....
Ahh, the Lotto life..... :-)
Morgz
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Perth WA
98 CBR1100XX
Need info on good rides in WA? Check out ->
http://www.pplant.com.au/warides
Iain Chalmers
<-snip->
> My point was that technology for technologies sake is
> stupid, otherwise we'd all be driving quad cam 5 valve V12's and
stuff...stick
> that in a hyundai I'd like to see you :)
Hmmm, that might almost make one fun to drive! I bet it'd sound nice at
13000rpm too...
big
Bob Bluegum
d.car...@cat.csiro.au (Damian Carvolth) wrote:
>In article <7c4qs7$8iu$1...@ghostgum.hunterlink.net.au>,
>>
>>Damian Carvolth wrote in message <7c4a70$sir$2...@news.cat.csiro.au>...
>
<snip good stuff>
>
>How big and strong you are and thus how comfortable you feel on xyz bike.
>Notwithstanding Zebee and others commenting that we cna all ride anything if
we
>put enough effort into it, the truth is unless you've got your heart set on
xyz
>bike look around at bikes that are a size that is comfortable for you.
>
>
Hey, I know you're all gunna hate me for saying this, but.....best of all the
MUZ has got a centre stand.......yep......really trully......just like the
olden days.
Maybe THATS why I like it................. (ducks flying boot and various
sundry missiles):-)
<snip>
>I'm odd...
>
Me too.
Bob B.
Tony Seton
>
>Zebee Johnstone wrote in message ...
>>Tony Seton wrote:
>>>
>>>Given that the conventional advice to learners is to upgrade to a bike
>>>around 600cc when a 250 is no longer enough, where are the 600cc
v-twins?.
>
>
>ER500 Kawasaki are already available and the new 650 V-Twin Suzuki's are
>almost here. Want to bet they don't sell well though?
>
Was reading a test of the ER500 yesterday, seems to be a reasonable
all-round town bike. Two things count against it when measured against my
needs, the drum brake on the rear and the handling on potholed roads. My
daily commute is a mixture of highway and country secondary roads with quite
variable surfaces and the ever-present risk of Skippy trying to hitch a
ride. I expect to need the higher margins of safety afforded by discs all
round and a well-sorted chassis & suspension, just to ride
licence-retentively.
Dunno much about the GS500, but I'll be watching closely for any news of the
SV650...
>
>The new 650 suzi might sell moderately to those that want a V-Twin but
can't
>afford the entry price for the big ones but it won't sell because it is a
>mid size bike it will sell despite it...
Which probably means taking a bath at trade-in time when looking to buy the
big one...
>>The 600 Monster is in a class of its own really.
>
>
>Not for long :)
>
The more the merrier!
>>>Or are the big twins so torquey and easy to ride that going from a 250
>>>single to a litre v-twin is not an act of suicidal insanity?
>
>
>The VTR1000 would be a sensible step up, the TL1000R less so I believe,
Agreed. In fact I personally would be wary of the TL1000S as well, until I
had a couple of years' big-bike experience under my belt (which in my case
will equate to about 60,000 km). The only thing I don't like about the
VTR1000 is the range. I'd have to fill up every (work) day :-(. I guess it's
been around long enough for someone to have come up with an aftermarket fuel
tank to give it more distance between drinks?
Then again I haven't ruled out the Varadero either. It wouldn't be too
foreign (weight aside) after having cut my teeth on a chook-chaser, its
state of tune is even more "sensible" than the VTR, and its 25 litre tank
should give a reasonable range.
> but anything can be ridden slowly if you want to :)
>
There's a saying in my wife's family something along the lines of "_If_ is
the biggest word in the English language" :-)
--
Tony
'84 XT250
Tony Seton
>
Well, I'm not 16 any more and I've settled down with this nice woman....huh?
Oh, you're talking about the throttle, the one on the _bike_ <g>
The answer's pretty much the same I suppose. After 20 years in cages and a
few grey hairs, my hooning days are well and truly gone, and I'm no longer
compelled to thrash vehicles like the poor old 998cc Mini I started out with
that averaged 26 miles per gallon.
>
>If you think you have some riding skill, you are aware
>the bike can bite you, and you are willing to learn to ride it
>and not think that all it takes is straightline speed, I can't
>see why it won't work for you.
>
Makes a lot of sense to me.
--
Tony
'84 XT250
Ted Palmer
[...]
>My bike (and the kinds of bikes I like) feel good when I'm riding slowly!!
>I've always needed to ride an in-line four fast(ly?) to feel good.
>Perhaps if they made a big-bang engine......
A big single is the original big bang engine.
Mister_T
"the KLR is the best open road bike of the bunch by a considerable
margin" AMCN Apr20-May3 1984 Three way traillie comparo
--
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\
| KLR600 RC17 FreeBSD 2.2.5-R NT4W(yerk) Roces BCN |
| tedp[at]replicant[dot]apana[dot]org[dot]au |
\|_________________________________________________________________|
Zebee Johnstone
Damian Carvolth <d.car...@cat.csiro.au> wrote:
>
>are there any web apges for these ? teh MuZ and teh suzuki 600 thingy ?
Dunno about the Suzi, but www.micapeak.com put up a fair bit
when searched for MuZ.
http://www.bikeworx.com/ has some pics and stuff.
Zebee
Adam Harrison
Zebee Johnstone wrote in message ...
http://www.sirius.com/~guldam/muz/ is one for the muz.
There's a little bit of stuff at www.suzuki.co.uk (It's under the sport
category not v-twin sport).
Adam
sch...@ozemail.com.au
ze...@zip.com.au wrote:
> In aus.motorcycles on 11 Mar 1999 01:52:23 GMT
> Damian Carvolth <d.car...@cat.csiro.au> wrote:
> >
>
> >are there any web apges for these ? teh MuZ and teh suzuki 600 thingy ?
>
> Dunno about the Suzi, but www.micapeak.com put up a fair bit
> when searched for MuZ.
>
> http://www.bikeworx.com/ has some pics and stuff.
Geoff Hansford
Greg Walton wrote in message
<36E71FE7...@cygnus.uwa.edu.nospamthanks.au>...
If I could get a guzzi sport for $10k I'd have one! The cheapest I've found
in Vic was $12,500 and most were $13,000 to $14,000. If one of your guzzi
riding friends has one for sale at that sort of price please give me a way
to get in touch... I'd travel to QLD for a straight one at that money :)
[1]
Geoff Hansford
Suzuki Bandit 1200 & RGV250 (Doolan)
IRC Nick Geoff_San
[1] Yes I do suffer from multi-bike itis, I just got rid of all but one when
I needed the money for a house deposit about 3 years back (and no it was
never an option to get rid of all of them ;-)
Geoff Hansford
Craig Motbey wrote in message
>>others are though I agree. Personally I like the sport :)
>
>That's the bikini faired one, right? I'd love one o'them with the panniers
>from the tourer...
The sport is the bikini faired one (yes I'm in a bikini rut ;-)
Geoff_San
Alan Pennykid
>
> Tony Seton wrote:> > >
> > Given that the conventional advice to learners is to upgrade to a bike
> > around 600cc when a 250 is no longer enough, where are the 600cc v-twins?.
> >
> > sense to me to have a frenetic 4-cyl as an intermediate bike.
>
> Not much in the way of 600cc V-twins (except for cruisers, and the
> soon-to-be-released Suzuki hoonbikes).
Except of course for the Ducati 600SS and 600 Monster
> There are some nifty midsize Honda V-twin nakeds, the NTV650 and the 400cc
> version of the same, but again, I don't think they sell 'em in Oz...shame...
> Craig Motbey
> 1984 GPz750 (The Big Red Beastie)
The NTV(we got the shaft drive, restricted gutless version to begin
with, then they fixed up the power a bit) used to sell here but didnt
sell real well, as "sensible" bikes very rarely do in Australia. Just
another one on the long list of "Jeez why dont they bring that here,
it'll sell heaps!" bikes that dont perform on the market.
Al
Clem Doherty
Iain Chalmers wrote
(stuff)
Hey, are you the famous law-of-averages "Iain" of AMCN fame?
Clem
Clem Doherty
Richard Fay wrote
(about in-line fours)
>But how about a supercharged one ;) It would at least sound impressive.
You've obviously seen Coltraine's-Planes-and-Automobiles' "Superchargers"
episode!
I still get a shiver when thinking about the sound of the Mercedes racers
engaging their superchargers.
oooh!
Clem (I think I need a towellette)
guz...@hubble.dialix.com.au
: Zebee
: - who can't comprehend what people like about modern 4s.
Lairy paint jobs?
Gary
guz...@hubble.dialix.com.au
: They definitley have an high C of G which is important to short arses
: like Zebee and I and perhaps less noticable to taller people ?
Not this little black duck - err, emu. Having half the engine between my
legs is the standout feature of every Jap 4.
Disclaimer: what would you expect from someone who's ridden BMW twins for
over 20 years?
Gary
sch...@ozemail.com.au
Alan Pennykid <penn...@zip.com.au> wrote:
> >
> > Not much in the way of 600cc V-twins (except for cruisers, and the
> > soon-to-be-released Suzuki hoonbikes).
>
> Except of course for the Ducati 600SS and 600 Monster
Was told by a Ducati dealer that they're not bringing the 600SS
here any more. :(
Damian Carvolth
>
>
>Greg Walton wrote in message
><36E71FE7...@cygnus.uwa.edu.nospamthanks.au>...
>>Damian Carvolth wrote:
>If I could get a guzzi sport for $10k I'd have one! The cheapest I've found
>in Vic was $12,500 and most were $13,000 to $14,000. If one of your guzzi
>riding friends has one for sale at that sort of price please give me a way
>to get in touch... I'd travel to QLD for a straight one at that money :)
>[1]
You obviously don't buy just bikes nor motorcycle trader. Call me tomorrow not
too early [1] on 07 3201 2423 and I'll get a list together for you of recent
ads.
I think there is one in this weeks trading post in bris for $10500...
[1] I'm going to the New Bon Turks tonight so won't be home till reasonable
late. Also you heathens are still on daylight saving time aren't you ?
We aren't....
Damian Carvolth
buck...@cygnus.uwa.edu.nospamthanks.au says...
>
>Damian Carvolth wrote:
>Thats a fair wack of depreciation on the Guzzi ($7000 in 3 years?).
>
>Fine by me though, as a nice second hand 1100 is one of the bikes on my short
list
>to replace the TRX850 sometime early next century.
>
>Greg
>
Asking prices for carburetted sports are between $9900 and $12500. They seem to
be selling between $9 and $11k
Likewise Laverda 668 sport advertised NEW at dealers about the $10 - 12 mark.
650 formula was even cheaper I think. 750 S with very few kms was about the
same money...
Both bikes (not the 750S) are essentially superceded. Funny how a 88 1000S is
worth more than a 95 sport and the 90 lemans 5 is worth the same as the
sport...:)
Does anyone know what teh skorpian sport is worth ? If the replica is $12500
the the sport should be about $9k ?
Damian Carvolth
>
>In article <slrn7eejpm...@zipper.zip.com.au>,
> ze...@zip.com.au wrote:
>> In aus.motorcycles on 11 Mar 1999 01:52:23 GMT
>> Damian Carvolth <d.car...@cat.csiro.au> wrote:
Wow. I looked at it and though "why would anyone buy one in prefernce to a
monster?" then I saw the price. $7300 canadian about $7500 aus. If they are
that cheap in aus ducati will need to do some serious manouvering to keep any
market share for the 600 monster....
Bob Bluegum
"Dacious" <mca...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>Bob Bluegum wrote in message <7c1oot$3...@gemini.roads.sa.gov.au>...
>>Hi all,
>>
>>Has anyone out there tried the little Yammy powered MUZ?
>
>
<snip really good stuff>
>Pluses - best performing single, and handling bike, I have ever ridden,
>including RGV race bike, TZ U model or any GSXR.
<snip>
Interesting stuff Dacious, thanks.
Have you checked out this site "http://www.sirius.com/~guldam/muz/" which has
some comments from US owners.
There seem to be some niggles with rattles in the forks and cooling fans not
working.
Even with those comments, the owners seem pretty rapped in the little beastie.
I might take one for a test ride soon.
Cheers.
Bob B.
Theo Bekkers
Damian Carvolth wrote in message <7c9isa$p0a$2...@news.cat.csiro.au>...
>Also you heathens are still on daylight saving time aren't you ?
>
>We aren't....
We never were. If Sideny and Melbourne have been on daylight saving for 5
months they should have saved 6 days by now. Does that make today the 6th of
March on the East coast?
Cheers
Theo
Zebee Johnstone
Theo Bekkers <th...@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
>
>We never were. If Sideny and Melbourne have been on daylight saving for 5
>months they should have saved 6 days by now. Does that make today the 6th of
>March on the East coast?
Yes, but due to taxes and the Olympic levy, we are now more around the
1st of April.
Zebee
Theo Bekkers
Zebee Johnstone wrote in message ...
A tax on your daylight savings? Sounds like something the Govt would do.
Perhaps that why we have had 3 referenda (and a trial) in WA in the last 15
years. The people said "NO" each time, but why would a Govt listen to the
people?
Cheers
Theo
sch...@ozemail.com.au
d.car...@cat.csiro.au (Damian Carvolth) wrote:
> >http://chappell.ca/sv650
>
> Wow. I looked at it and though "why would anyone buy one in prefernce to a
> monster?" then I saw the price. $7300 canadian about $7500 aus. If they are
> that cheap in aus ducati will need to do some serious manouvering to keep any
> market share for the 600 monster....
Second comment here - unfortunately the prices quoted by dealers here
are more like $11-12k. Should find out for sure soon...
Zebee Johnstone
Theo Bekkers <th...@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>A tax on your daylight savings? Sounds like something the Govt would do.
>Perhaps that why we have had 3 referenda (and a trial) in WA in the last 15
>years. The people said "NO" each time, but why would a Govt listen to the
>people?
>
because parliament house has good thick curtains so the carpets don't fade?
I am not particularly in favour of it, especially for farmers and those
who have to get up early for some reason. Daylight saving was in the
stonefruit season meaning that in order to get to the markets at
5am you had to leave in the pitch black. Plus it just made the insanity
of scheduling athletics as the 3rd term school sport even worse.
Zebee
sch...@ozemail.com.au
>
> Wow. I looked at it and though "why would anyone buy one in prefernce to a
> monster?" then I saw the price. $7300 canadian about $7500 aus. If they are
> that cheap in aus ducati will need to do some serious manouvering to keep any
> market share for the 600 monster....
I'm obviously in the red twin 600 market, but I just can't come at a
Monster. I think they're really sexy, but IMHO only about 15% of the
ppl I've seen on them have looked like they fit the bike. It's
something to do with the ergonomics of it, but to me lots of ppl
look like real gumbies on them!
The Monster will still have its market share as the SV is much more
of a sports bike. Look at that site and see how much racing they are
doing with them in the US! The Monster is a more cruisy (NOT cruiser!)
styled bike.
Now the 750SS.....dribble....drool....slobber....
Bruce Campbell
>
> The NTV(we got the shaft drive, restricted gutless version to begin
> with, then they fixed up the power a bit) used to sell here but didnt
> sell real well, as "sensible" bikes very rarely do in Australia. Just
> another one on the long list of "Jeez why dont they bring that here,
> it'll sell heaps!" bikes that dont perform on the market.
>
> Al
Yeah, remember that one (NTV). Always thought it was a good bike (once
the inlet was fixed up). Pity it came and went from the market before
the bike I had was properly run in. Would have been real tempted by one
of those rather than the frenetic 600cc four I've now got. Which, by the
way, is the second multi I've had in 32 years riding, and will be the
last. Blechhhh!
PS. wonder if the guy who enquired about the MuZ Skorpion is still
reading all this and wondering what in the hell he started!
Bruce Campbell
XJ600 450 Desmo
RussellM
they have a habit of turning you into a maniac. The position on them makes
sense once you get into the habit of 'muscleing' (?) them around, They
become very physical and very agressive and Ducatis sound sweeter than any
Japanese twin ever will. (sorry but its true, TL's, VTR's etc sound great,
but they don't sound like Ducati's)
--
RussellM
98 Suzuki RGV
96 Ducati Monster 600
sch...@ozemail.com.au wrote in message <7ca1cj$b7o$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
Theo Bekkers
Zebee Johnstone wrote in message ...
>
>who have to get up early for some reason. Daylight saving was in the
>stonefruit season meaning that in order to get to the markets at
>5am you had to leave in the pitch black. Plus it just made the insanity
>of scheduling athletics as the 3rd term school sport even worse.
There is also a significant difference between WA and Sydney "local time".
Sydney is about 6 minutes (in time, not ē) East of their time meridian
whereas Perth is 16 minutes West of their's. This means that if the sun goes
down at 6 pm in Sydney today, it will go down at 6:21 pm in Perth. Also
Perth's sunset is into the ocean (a level horizon), In Sydney it goes out of
sight sometime before it reaches that level. The total result of all this is
that it gets dark, by the clock, a half hour earlier in Sydney than in
Perth. So you people in Sydney need at least six months of daylight saving
just to keep up with us on the West Coast.
So by my quick mental arithmetic, after 20 years East Coast daylight
savings, today would be October 30, 1998 in Sydney, and it is April 23, 1999
in Perth. I'll call this the Theodorian calender.
Cheers
Theo
Alan Pennykid
muuuuuch more comfortable then my R1100GS. Anyone wanna buy a GS? It
felt good, no idea how much of a gumby I looked< I couldnt find any shop
windows to strike a pose :)
AL
s
Richard Fay
>
> The Monster will still have its market share as the SV is much more
> of a sports bike. Look at that site and see how much racing they are
> doing with them in the US! The Monster is a more cruisy (NOT cruiser!)
> styled bike.
>
The SV comes as two models.
Unfair and Faired. The unfaired version has different geometry and
gearing to the faired TLS lookalike
Richard
Tony Seton
>In article <7c4qs7$8iu$1...@ghostgum.hunterlink.net.au>,
> "Tony Seton" <anthon...@unspam.hunterlink.net.au> wrote:
>>
>> Given that the conventional advice to learners is to upgrade to a bike
>> around 600cc when a 250 is no longer enough, where are the 600cc
v-twins?.
>
>Suzuki SV650 is a baby TLS and is about to hit the shops. There is the
>Ducati 750SS. Not a lot else. TRX850....
>
Sue,
I had a look around the SV650 mailing list home page
http://www.sport-twin.com/sv650.shtml
last night, specifically the mail archive and Eric Stratten's SV650
webpage: http://userdata.acd.net/stratten/sv650.html . From what I've seen
written by people who have ridden and bought them in the 'States, it sounds
like the SV650 is closer to a baby VTR than a baby TL-S.
Comments have been along the lines of:
- surprising performance under 5000 rpm (during run-in)
- sweet handling
- conservative cam profiles (giving the boy racers some room to extract
more performance)
Comparing the relative prices in the US and UK between the SV650 and GS500
suggests a RRP of around $9,000 here for the unfaired model. Same comparison
for the bikini-faired SV650S on UK prices (it's not sold in the US) suggest
around $10,000 (maybe $9990??).
Any idea when they'll hit the shops? I can feel an urge to save up my
pennies coming on.....
--
Tony
'84 XT250
sch...@ozemail.com.au
"Tony Seton" <anthon...@unspam.hunterlink.net.au> wrote:
<snip SV650 stuff>
> Any idea when they'll hit the shops? I can feel an urge to save up my
> pennies coming on.....
I think they're imminent. Starting to advertise in bike press.
Lyle Noordhoek
That stated when Daylight savings time starts on April 1 USA and we move
the cloks forward one hour and people suddenly have to get up one hour
earlier. That the accident rate goes ballistic for the next 7-10 days as
people adapt.
There are marked increases in # of car accidents, industrial accidents,
ER admissions for accidents, and HEART ATTACKS go up markedly also.
General sick days increase absenteeism is rampant problem.
In the fall USA/ October when the clocks get set back one hour and
everyone gets an extra hour of sleep that the lawyers have owed us since
April, there are no detectable increases in any of the above mentioned
rates!
It is the sleep deprived state in the April that is dangerous!
Lyle Noordhoek
Mike O'Connor
-------------------------------->8 snip!
Hold on! an article in the what?...........
I'm frequently surprised by the range of interests revealed in this forum.
obmoto When I changed the gearbox oil last weekend, the old oil came out the
colour of white coffee. It sank under the sump oil in the pan I sue to drain
stuff like that. Should I worry?
Mike
'83 BMW R65LS
Zebee Johnstone
Mike O'Connor <mike.o...@vu.edu.au> wrote:
>
>obmoto When I changed the gearbox oil last weekend, the old oil came out the
>colour of white coffee. It sank under the sump oil in the pan I sue to drain
>stuff like that. Should I worry?
Yes, it means water has got in.
When that happened in my MZ, I drained the oil, refilled with old
oil, drained again, then refilled with kero, ran the bike in gear
for a few seconds to get the kero everywhere, then drained the
kero and refilled with old oil again, drained that, and back
to proper oil.
May have been overly paranoid, but it worked...
I tracked the problem to the clutch cable which was allowing water to
sneak in. I silasticked the appropriate externals and no
problem.
Zebee
Peter Sanders
>
> In article <36EEED...@media-net.net>,
> lnoor...@media-net.net wrote:
> > There was an article in The Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
> > That stated .....
> -------------------------------->8 snip!
> Hold on! an article in the what?...........
>
> I'm frequently surprised by the range of interests revealed in this forum.
>
> colour of white coffee. It sank under the sump oil in the pan I sue to drain
> stuff like that. Should I worry?
>
What you've got there is an emulsion of water and oil. It has
approximately the lubricating properties of water. Some of the color
will be due to rust. Yes, I would expect that a good worry would
be required about now. :-<
============================================================
_--_|\ peter....@dsto.defence.gov.au (Business)
/ DSTO \ Combatant Protection & Nutrition Branch, AMRL.
\_.--._/ Defence Science & Technology Organisation
v Fax : 61-3-9626 8410 Voice: 61-3-9626 8411
Peter Sanders
sand...@melbpc.org.au (Private)
Voice: 61-3-9337-6612
BMW K100RT (Brunnhilde the Blue)
============================================================
Peter Cremasco
<mike.o...@vu.edu.au> wrote:
>obmoto When I changed the gearbox oil last weekend, the old oil came out the
>colour of white coffee. It sank under the sump oil in the pan I sue to drain
>stuff like that. Should I worry?
You betcha. You've got oil in your water.
So, unless your kids have been playing with the garden hose, or you've
been using your machine for a submarine, I suspect you've got a
missing plug or a crack or something that's letting external water get
in fairly easily.
---
Cheers
PeterC [aka MildThing]
'81 Suzuki GS450-s
[Shades on; gloves on; pick up helmet; shades off; helmet on; shades on; gloves off; do up helmet; gloves on; key; key?; gloves off; find key; gloves on; ride]