Question:
When Choosing A First Street Bike?
anonymous
2009-01-15 23:48:57 UTC
Hey I'm 20, 155 pounds, 6 feet tall. Male.

Anyway, I have done my research over the past couple of months dealing with this subject.

I took the class about a month ago and they had us riding around on the 250s. When I took that class, I felt really comfortable riding and throughout the class. Basically that size bike was a little smaller than what I wanted to shoot for. I always thought about getting a 250 Ninja or so as a first bike until I finished up with this class. I figured if I felt that good riding, that I may become bored and ready to move up real soon and end up spending more money than if I decided to move up to 600cc for a first bike.

Not trying to convince anyone to agree with me... but I do understand how sensitive these bikes are. Couple friends have r6s, gixxer 600s/750s etc... At first, they always told me that it is capable of starting on 600 but just be careful.

I really do believe that I can start out at the 600 taking it slow and learning safely. I already do have my gear and am planning to buy one within the next month.

So, I really like the r6. As I said, been around friends with them and that was what I wanted to go after.

Do you think it is ok to start with a 600cc? Thanks.
Nine answers:
The Freak Show
2009-01-16 09:59:23 UTC
This isn't anything I wrote. I stole it from gixxer.com. It's good advice though.



Quote:



After a rash of posts about what bike to get as a first bike, and a lot of posts defending the reasoning behind "only a 600" or "having respect", or "too big to ride a small bike"....



Why not a GSXR/R6/ZXR/CBR/996 etc?



Well, I am not sure that the fact that these are "only 600's" means a great deal, they are seen as "slow" by newer riders, and therefore easier to master than the 1000cc versions. Many people have said that they feel a 750 would be fine.



I guess that your idea of slow, is a fair bit different to mine. My idea of slow is something that accelerates like, say, a Geo Metro, not something that accelerates faster than a Dodge Viper.



Lets face it, the modern 600 is faster than a 750 of six or seven years ago, in a straight line, up to about 130mph.......



Six years ago the 750 class was in the middle of open warefare season, the (then new) SRAD 750 was the king of the beasts, trouncing the CBR900RR, and the FZR1000 and destroying everything else in its path. Not just in a straight line either, but the 96 SRAD was a marvellous corner carver.



In its day, it was brutal - it still is, wild head shakes, inadvertant wheelies, and an utterly brutal rush beyond 10K RPM.



The latest 600's whilst just as fast, are only slightly more civilised, the power is not as brutal, but there is still a huge rush, and on the dyno they are only a couple of HP short of the benchmark.



So the power of the latest 600's is amazing, there is frankly more than 99% of people can use, and more than anyone can need on the street - on the track its a different matter, but we are talking street bikes here.....



Its not just the power either, its the power delivery.



These bikes are race-bikes with lights, or at least they are very, very similar to race bikes. In order to be competative in racing, where modifications are minimal, the engines are tuned to be very "racer friendly". The throttle response beyond a few thousand revs is instant, this is great if you are on a track, but merely OK on the road. If you are heavy-handed, it can be very dangerous. The MSF course teaches you to roll on the throttle in a curve, to a newr rider, rolling on is just that, add 1/4 turn maybe ? Well with a modern sports bike 1/4 turn is FULL throttle. Rolling on on these bikes means may 1/32nd of a turn - if that.



This is not a nice trait - you have just gone from 20hp to 80hp in the blink of an eye, and you lowsided - if you are lucky- into the scenery.



So, handling is the next problem.



These bikes are race bikes with lights, this means that they are super-fast handling. In fact they are astonishingly nervous, in order to make they turn fast, they are set-up to respond to minute inputs, and this is another major issue for a new rider. A new rider will not have the subltly of input that the bike needs, rather than push the bars, you apply a slight pressure, and the bike sails into the bends, push on the bars hard, and it becomes all nervous and unsettled, and again, the new rider may be lucky to get through the bend.



Obviously this will not be a good thing - to an experienced rider these bikes feel planted, and predictable, for a new rider, they feel horrible, and your confidence takes a hit.



Ok - Brakes



Again, these bikes are similar to race bikes. One of the few places that they differ is in the braking department. The brake pads have to last a little longer than race compound ones, so they are a little less brutal than those on a racer, also they have rubber hoses, which have a little "give" in them, making it harder to lock the fronts.



But, they are still eye-poppingly good, its possible to stand any of these bikes on its nose, at really, really high speeds, assumning you are hard enough on the brakes.



Then there is the rear brake, and again this is overly efficient, all too easy to lock it, all to easy to high-side as a result of the locked brake.



Repair costs.



As they are race replica's they comer covered in expensive plastic. Each side is $600 or more. A slow-speed drop could easily cost you over $1000 just in plastic bits. Add to that the normal "consumables" and you are in the $1300 range for a 10mph spill.



Combine all of these factors, and I hope that you see why a sportsbike is not a good first bike.



It has exactly the wrong set of characteristics for a new rider to learn to ride. Its too fast, too responsive, too twitchy, too nervous, the brakes are too sharp and they cost a lot to fix.



I'm not going to tell you that you should not get one (I'm not your mother), just that you need to bear in mind that these bikes belong in the "expert class", not the "new rider" one.
anonymous
2016-04-10 15:18:25 UTC
Yeah, well... "undropped, unmolested" may not be your best bet as a first street bike. The 600's will give you the best value for money, of the ones you listed, but I'll give you the best advice I can: Get an SV650. Crashes better (no bodywork), costs less, easier to work on, and easier to ride, MUCH better around town, and doesn't attract police I've never met ANY serious motorcyclist who didn't *love* SV650s. The only guys who bash them are the ones who judge a motorcycle on its penis-compensating ability. There is NO downside to an SV650. You can buy them cheap and if you don't like it, you can get your money right back out of it. Hell, if you want a crotch rocket, get one for good weather, and keep the SV for when being comfortable and safe is more important than maximum speed. Besides, if they'll do 0-60 in 2.8 seconds, how much faster do you need in a "first street bike"?
a929pilot
2009-01-16 09:58:20 UTC
Go for the R-6 or a CBR 600.A 250 will kill you just the same as a 600 will.My opinion is they are more dangerous as they dont have the power on the highway to avoid danger.I strated on a 250 and was bored very fast ,sold it to my best friend and he was run off the road and killed.Also when your friends decide to get into the throttle on their r-6 you would be left in the dust on a 250.I am 6 foot and 165 lbs and its top speed was 105 mph down hill and with the wind at my back.Up hill was 90 mph.Get the 600 dont listen to the na sayers.
boom!!!
2009-01-18 16:22:46 UTC
i took the coarse and the 250's i rode felt alot smaller than my ninja 250, i am 17, 6 foot 160. my dad has a ninja 500 and that is a great bike and i ride it from time to time and it is alot faster than my 250 and still easy to handle. the insurance in cheap, it is like 80 bucks a year, a 600 would be alot more. over all if you feel comfortable on a bike get the 500 if not get the 250.
fiep
2009-01-16 04:59:06 UTC
if wherever you live (I so wished you folks would uderstand the concept of WWW and give people trying to help all the infop they need) there are no displacement or hp regulations for new riders



try to get away of rating bikes by displacement, use hp instead, get no mor than 50, for longer interstate rides at least 30

the lower rpm for max power and the bigger the difference rpm for max power and max torque the easier to ride the engine generally is

get a pre owned, per scratched but mechanically sound bike



check the relevant data for the R6

and think some more

can you see yourself buy a bike you think on the small/weak side, pre owned + pre scratched to learn to ride and in a few month selling your learner for almost as much as you paid for it (noobs always look for well kept learner bikes) and not just cling on for dear life but really test ride the R6 to see if you like the bike
arus.geo
2009-01-16 00:36:28 UTC
if your heart is set on a 600 cc, then get an older 600 (ie late 90's) bike



Honda CBR F3

Suzuki GSXR 600

Kawasaki Ninja 500R

Yamaha FZR 600



they are cheap to buy, since its your first bike, you wont FEEL as bad if you drop it (and YOU will drop it). easier to fix (cost wise, cheaper too), and you can pretty much sell it for the same amount you bought it for (as long as you take care of it).



Get a bout 1000 hours of riding time on your first bike before graduating to a newer 600cc bike.
fredo
2009-01-16 00:32:30 UTC
Hi, Are mad? I'm a biker of 30 years plus. I recommend if you want a 600 to go for a zzr600 they are a great bike, it would be excellent for learning.

The r6 would be to dangerous as there power is to high for a beginner.
Rebel Ryder
2009-01-16 09:51:35 UTC
If your friends think that it's safe, they can let you try out one of THEIR bikes, can't they?
bigv10
2009-01-15 23:57:52 UTC
hell no!!! buy a "AMERICAN MADE" bike! whats wrong with us? BUY AMERICAN when you can


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...