Forum Replies Created
Kymco Vitality 50
-
AuthorPosts
-
MattParticipant
No experience with the R6 directly… but speaking to a coworker who moved from a Ninja 500 to an R6 (I think, might have been a GSX-R) his comment was that even compared to his 500 it was a whole new world. It responded so much faster, particularly to throttle inputs.
If a super sport is the way you want to go, I’d suggest not selling your CBR125 until after you’ve gotten comfortable with the R6. Keep the CBR for commuting for now, the R6 will be a handful until you are comfortable with it. So keep take it out for parking lot rides, and routes your are familiar with that won’t get you into trouble. Once you’ve gotten comfortable with it, then think about selling the little CBR.
You’ll pretty much always be able to sell the CBR for a pretty penny (well, maybe not in November, but hold on until spring and it’ll be worth more again), and the worst case is you find the R6 to be too much and you sell it (hopefully you get a good deal and can sell it for what you paid.)
Just remember, that is a bike that will bite you, so spend lots of time practicing before taking it out on the wild roads. I also recommend taking the Experienced Rider’s Course as soon as you can, and take it on that bike, not the CBR. I’m assuming you’ve taken the MSF / Gearing-up course already, if not, absolutely do that before getting on the R6.
—
“The two seconds between ‘Oh S**!’ and the crash isn’t a lot of practice time.”December 17, 2008 at 3:20 am in reply to: Ontario Bill C-117: No child passengers on motorcycles #15304MattParticipant“Would you find any better statistics than those being used for this law?”
As someone who spends his 9-5 compiling and preparing statics specifically for the purposes of increased safety, yes, I would look for better statistics than what they use. The numbers they haul out are incomplete. The Ministry of transportation numbers (the initial 199 injured that are used to justify the introduction of the bill) have no mention of cause. You cannot solve a problem without first identifying a problem.
Things I would want to know (at bare minimum):
Injury types and causes of the specific injuries (would proper fitting gear have solved the majority of the issues?)
Situation of incident (time of day, single vehicle accident, multi-vehicle accident, if so what other parties involved and how, what was the cause of the accident)
Experience of rider (How are the children’s injuries related to the experience of the driver? If the vast majority of injuries are related to inexperienced drivers, then you can limit the law to new drivers, if the spread is wider, then full bans begin to make more sense.—
“The two seconds between ‘Oh S**!’ and the crash isn’t a lot of practice time.”December 16, 2008 at 1:07 pm in reply to: Ontario Bill C-117: No child passengers on motorcycles #15287MattParticipantSorry Eon, but that isn’t Devil’s Advocate, that is a straw man (a logical fallacy).
You are presenting something that is already blatantly illegal in Ontario and asking if it is responsible.
Under Ontario Law (as I pointed out in the first post) the child must be able to reach rear pegs (and not said, but is law, passenger must be on designeated passenger seat, not the tank).
Helmet, though it doesn’t have to fit (seriously? that part of the higway code does need to be revisited) does have to meet DOT which I’m guessing that kid’s doesn’t.
And I’m not saying the kid is responsible enough to chose what is safe- it isn’t his job to. It is the driver’s. The driver must enusre the safe operation of the vehicle and all passengers, if not it is reckless endangerment, and throw the book at them.
My point is, that we already have laws to protect children from these sorts of things. If politicians want to ensure all the children are being cared for on Motorcycles, the enforce the current laws, don’t make new overly broad ones that take away the rights of thousands of people because you imagine that someone could be doing something dangerous. Better yet, look at WHY being a passenger on a motorcycle is dangerous (hint: other road users) and do something about that.
I want to point out two of the arguments made in favour of this law:
Ms. Helena Jaczek (MPP who proposed the bill):
As a family physician working in the emergency room, one of the most tragic cases I ever saw was a boy of about 10 who had been run over by a car. He was conscious and in extreme pain as we removed his clothes to examine his torso, where the tire marks were clearly visible and had done severe damage to his internal organs. Happily, he survived after emergency surgery, but it is an image I will never forget.As a former medical officer of health in this province, I took my responsibility to administer the injury prevention program of the Health Protection and Promotion Act very seriously. Now, as an elected member of this Legislative Assembly, I believe one of our prime duties is to enact legislation that protects the most vulnerable members of our society. This, of course, includes our children, who, through lack of physical development or mature judgment, are exposed to harm.
While I have no doubt that this event deeply affected Ms Jaczek, it has no relation to this bill. The child was HIT BY A CAR. She does not in any way mention the situation the child was in. Did he fall off the back of a motorcycle, or was he hit by a car while crossing the road? Her emotional appeal to “protect the most vulnerable memebers of our society” is much like Eon’s picture. It is very compelling, but utterly unrelated to the bill at hand.
Ms. Helena Jaczek:
According to the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario’s road safety reports, from 1995 to 2005, a total of 199 motorcycle passengers aged zero to 15 years of age sustained injuries. Since then, however, SmartRisk, an organization that compiles injury data, has noted that in the fiscal year 2005-06, of those hospitalized in Ontario due to serious motorcycle-related injuries, eight were aged five to nine and 38 were between the ages of 10 and 14, for a total of 46. Furthermore, of the emergency department visits in 2005-06 for motorcycle-related injury, eight were aged zero to four years of age, 106 were between five and nine and 442 were aged 10 to 14. That is a total of 556 injured children in one year in Ontario.
These numbers would also seem to indicate that injuries are increasing.This is a perfect case of lying with statistics. The first grouping is from the Ministry of Transportation, thus the injuries described are limited to children who are injured on Ontario roads. The second grouping is from children entering a hospital. There is no way of knowing whether those injuries occured on the road, on a moto-cross track, on a mini-bike go-kart track, or out in the trails on a dirt bike. Because you have two seperate numbers describing two very seperate groups with different qualifications, there is no way to compare the first group with the second and claim that those injuries are in fact increasing.
Similarly, I would love to see SmartRisk’s number for how many children visited the hospital for after school sports related injuries. I expect that number would absolutely dwarf the 556 motorcycle related injuries. (Simply going from my own experience, every year through grade school at least one child in my class would have had to visit the hospital for a football, hockey, or skiing related injury).
—
“The two seconds between ‘Oh S**!’ and the crash isn’t a lot of practice time.”MattParticipantThis is, as Martha would say, a “Good Thing(TM)”.
—
“The two seconds between ‘Oh S**!’ and the crash isn’t a lot of practice time.”MattParticipantSimply put, the power band is the rev range where the engine makes the most power.
Basically, every engine is efficient (produces the most torque) through a set range of revs. Below that range, and it struggles to push you, too high and the power peters off and you aren’t accelerating as fast as you could be (usualy happens close to the redline).
The simplest way to know your powerband is to play with your throttle at various engine speeds. If you are toodling along at 2000rpm (below the powerband of most bikes) you can give the throttle a sharp quick twist and not much will happen (if you hold the throttle steady, you’ll feel the acceleration “build up”, or get stronger as the revs climb). But if you try the same thing in the power band the bike will accelerate cleanly (no “building up” of acceleration, it just goes).
Be careful doing this on the CBR1000RR. Its has enough torque that even when you are technically below its powerband (but above the minimum useful revs) it should still pull cleanly. If you give it a whack of full throttle while in the powerband it WILL lift the front end.
—
“The two seconds between ‘Oh S**!’ and the crash isn’t a lot of practice time.”MattParticipant“How do you pop a wheelie?”
You need a sudden surge in power, any sufficiently powerful surge will do it.On most lower power bikes that means you need have the engine in the powerband, but not putting power to the back wheel (clutch in). Then when you let go of the clutch quickly (usually by mistake) the rear tire hooks up and starts accelerating the back of the bike near instantly and torque lifts the front of the bike (Remember Newton’s laws, for every reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction… well, all the torque being transferred into the ground to rotate the front of your tire “down” is also rotating your bike “up”).
Any bike with enough available torque can “power wheelie”, that is, wheelie without dropping the clutch. You simply have the bike in a low state of power deliver (cruising along with minimal throttle, but engine in power band) and snap the power on.
This is (one of the many reasons) why big torque bikes like the Trimph triples and litre bikes like your own CBR1000RR are ill advised starter bikes. The amount of torque available during sedate riding (without having to pull in the clutch or drop a gear) is enough to loft the front wheel with a snap of the wrist.
On inline four bikes (again like your CBR1000RR, but also like the smaller 750cc and many 600cc super sports) there is also a dramatic rise in torque as you enter the power band. This means that at 4000rpm you can twist the throttle and only produce, say 25 pounds of torque. You get used to that, ride in that way, and never worry about lifting the front wheel. But then by 7000rpm that same twist of the wrist might make 40 or 50 pounds of torque, which is now enough to lift the front wheel. So someone learns the bike, “respects the bike”, and then one day, plays with the revs a bit higher, and the power delivery is much more than their body is expecting or knows how to handle.
—
“The two seconds between ‘Oh S**!’ and the crash isn’t a lot of practice time.”MattParticipantI refrained from commenting directly on the engine layout because I have no direct personal experience with an I4’s power delivery – and personal experience was what was asked for.
I’ve ridden parallel twins between 250 and 800cc producing power from 15hp up to 75hp. I’ve ridden a small V-twin, and a small V4. All are known for decent torque spread and lack of peak (btw- if you ever want to try “instant power” ride a BMW 800 twin – as long as you are moving it has smooth-acceleration-to-extra-legal-speeds-grunt that just isn’t imaginable on the Ninja 250 or other bike that needs to wind up).
As I’ve mentioned before, the tach on a ZX-6R is very telling. It has a with “low rev” zone extending below 5000rpm, a green “stay here” rev zone extending all the way up to the red line. That is an engine that should not be under revved.
(for UranGrape)
Looking at dyno charts, everything I’ve ridden basically has a flat torque curve. You get to a minimum rev, and then it just makes the same torque from there to almost readline. The bike accelerates the same as you move up the revs, the push still feels the same. The I4, even a so called “detuned” one like the FZ6 has a rising torque curve. Flat for a bit, then you start to enter the enter the power band and it increases dramatically. The faster you go, the faster you accelerate.
In a super sport 600, that torque curve is quiet late. I’ve been told by some riders that their bikes have to be spinning as much 5000rpm just to move off the line (slipping the clutch). Otherwise the lack of torque stalls the bike. My personal guess is that the bikes could handle a lower rev than their riders say… but only a guess
Road oriented 600s (and early 90s or older SS), have more torque lower down at the cost of peak power. This means the engine doesn’t have as a high a minimum rev. But until you start to enter that powerband, the bike is making way less power than a twin does.According to the reviews I’ve read, the Yamaha is pretty much the worst for this. Its engine is the least “detuned”, so you need to “rev the nuts off of it” to pull away from stops, making it a poor city bike compared to the others in its class.
Again, this is a personal preference thing. Some guys love revving their bikes every change they get. Some guys want a bike that “just works”. But I expect a bike that “just works” is going to be much easier to learn on.
I’d be interested in input from Ben and Fotobits, as they both have experience with both I4s and twins.
@ briderdt :
“I can’t imagine doing those maneuvers on my SV”At my ERC I had to do all those manuevers again on my ZZR-250, it wasn’t bad. I did bascially as well as the more experienced guys on GS500s, old BMWs, and the like.
A few really experienced guys did ’em on SS 600s nicely. Three experienced girls did it on 800 pound Electra Glides!!!
But the guys who looked the best? Three brand new riders doing it on their CBR125s.
Learning on a little bike definitely has advantages.—
“The two seconds between ‘Oh S**!’ and the crash isn’t a lot of practice time.”MattParticipantWell, you know how to rebuild a bike and know what is involved in keeping an old girl on the road. The Hawk will have a much more limited parts supply than the older nighhawk did however.
Personally, the SV650 is the newer, “better” bike. But he Hawk holds a special emotional appeal. The GS is a purely practical descision.
I’d ride both the Hawk and the SV and then decide which you liked better. If the Hawk feels better, does it feel good enough to justify all the extra work and money it wil involve? Really, the SV650 is the closest we have to a successor of the original Hawk.
—
“The two seconds between ‘Oh S**!’ and the crash isn’t a lot of practice time.”MattParticipantI have a magnetic tank bag, that I had planned to use to carry my Camera. While I can fit my camera bag (one body, regular lense, telephoto lense, no extra flash) in the bag, the bag’s magnets really aren’t strong enough to hold it as secure as I like, so I back-pack it.
My dad uses soft saddle bags for his camera, and that seems to work just fine.
—
“The two seconds between ‘Oh S**!’ and the crash isn’t a lot of practice time.”MattParticipantAs I said in my post above- I started on a nearly 70hp 500cc Interceptor.
Actually, the first bike I did any real time on after the MSF was a 40hp Suzuki GS450 – My Dad’s.
Then I purchased a 68hp Interceptor 500.
I then moved on to a ZZR-250, not because the 500 was too much power, but because the 500 died in the arms of a dealership mechanic, and the 250 was all I could replace it with from that dealership (so I could lose several thousands of dollars and look elsewhere, or I could take a showroom condition ZZR-250 for wholesale value… not a hard choice)In the case of the Interceptor, the horsepower wasn’t really an issue, it was manageable because it came on midway through the revs and the bike still had sufficient torque in the low band, so you didn’t have to stray into the powerband if you didn’t want to.
One big issue with the bike (similar issue with the GS450) was that it was more than 400 pounds dry. Weight (and weight distribution) is a big deal on parking lot maneuvers.
I initially found the GS450 to be (and I still do) annoying at slow speeds because of the way it tips in (high centre of gravity).
The Interceptor was much better (better weight distribution for me).
A 450 dry pound Shadow VLX (600cc cruiser) is incredibly easy to hold up (very low centre of gravity) but I find unnerving how it tips in at low speeds.All three bikes are a comparative pain to move/push about once off the bike, or in a tight parking situation (especially on dirt/gravel parking lots).
Compared to all three, the ZZR-250 is a godsend in any slow speed, parking, or pushing/maneuvering situation.
The Interceptor (a very similar bike in many ways to a modern sporting bike like a Bandit, 599, or FZ6R) did have one draw back, and that was over confidence. I took an hour long ride through some 40mph twisties second day on that bike, and the entire time I was sitting just below the power band. The bike was just begging me to open it up. I have no question that bike could have done the entire route at 80mph or more. But the simple fact was, even if the bike could, I couldn’t.
A competent friendly bike like the Ninja 250/500, GS500, and yes, most the 650s will allow you to get away with some mistakes. It’ll cover or you. The problem comes when you pass what the bike can make-up. Then you are in trouble, beyond your comfort zone, and something is very very wrong. If that happens on a slower bike, you have more time to react (With human reactions typically between 0.1 and 0.2 seconds, every tenth of a second helps), and the consequences are less. If that happens on a lighter bike, it is easier to recover. When you have both speed and weight working against you (as is the case with a 450 pound 70 horespower bike) it is much harder to recover, and you have less time to do so. Some people say “I’ll respect the bike”. But true respect is hard on a bike that provides confidence the way that Interceptor did. And that argument totally ignores the simple fact that people fatigue and make mistakes.As an aside, I did that same route six months later on my 250. I did it at much the same speed, and the bike didn’t “egg me on” (though is capable of doing it at significant speeds). At the very end I was taking a long sweeper with lots of tar snakes. My focus was on the exit of the corner, and I was tired. I hit a tar snake at 40mph and both wheels skipped sideways. Not much, but it bounced me, and BOTH my left hand and left foot came off the bar and the peg. I was going through a left hander without any contact to the left side of my bike.
I was able to quickly get settled back on the bike and carry with nothing more than a scare and a good lesson learned.
I am not confident things would have gone so smoothly had I been on the Interceptor. I think it would have been a close call at the same speed, let alone going faster.
I also think that had I been on something more aggressive that I would have gone off.In the debate about 250s, I will say right off the bat, if you’ve seen a Ninja 250 struggling on the freeway than simply put- you are either imagining the rider wants to be going faster than he does, or the rider is a bit clueless. I own a 220hp V6 family sedan (Mazda 6), and it simply cannot keep up with my 250 up until the 90mph mark (at which point the bike starts its slow crawl to a top speed of 100mph). Given that 95mph will land me a $2000 – $10000 (yes, four zeros) fine, suspension of lisence, and impoundment of the vehicle, I don’t really play up there.
The only times I’ve found I wasn’t accelerating as quickly as I wanted on the freeways, I was in top gear when I should have (just like driving a car) dropped it down a gear or two first. I have no problems taking my bike onto crowded freeways with traffic traveling 75mph.
Now, I think this debate has kind of moved off course. You started with the question of 500 vs 600, yet all the stuff I’ve read recently is talk between a 250 and a (mild) 600.
My last paragraph included.
Indeed, great pains are made to distinguish the FZ6R 600 from a super-sport 600, yet the arguments seem to be targeted at 250s instead of 500s (which are a far closer competitor to the FZ6R than the 250s are).In the case against a Ninja/GS 500, I really don’t think there is any reason beyond style to chose a 600/650 as a first bike. Both make 50+ hp, will do zero to 60 in under 4 seconds (More than a second faster than any stock Camero ever sold, faster than almost any Corvette on the road). Both can cruise long distances comfortably with frugal fuel economy. Both handle well, though slower and more forgiving than a “more sporting” bike. Both weight under 400 pounds dry. Both have long standing histories as cheap and easy to maintain.
So the question is- why don’t they sell more 500s? The simple answer is that they do, but only in Europe and Asia. Kawasaki and Honda makes a full line of 500s for Britain. We don’t get them because in North America cubic centimetres sell.
So, my question to you is this:
Given that the Ninja 250 doesn’t fit you, what advantages does the FZ6R actually have over a 500cc Ninja or GS? What beyond the sales pitch makes it a better place to start? Heck, what IN the sales pitch makes it a better way to enter the world of motorcycles?—
“The two seconds between ‘Oh S**!’ and the crash isn’t a lot of practice time.”MattParticipantAccidental Clutching wheeling Rebel 250 by a 50 year old woman – in second gear – seen it.
Power/clutch wheeling (on purpose) an 800 pound Harely touring cruiser (fully loaded) done by a 90 pound 35 year old woman – seen it.
Wheeling a cruiser is harder, and not something I’d worry about in a smaller displacement one (like the 650). But it isn’t impossible. You’ll probably have one or two popped-clutch scares on any bike, but nothing like you would on a proper “hooligan bike”.
—
“The two seconds between ‘Oh S**!’ and the crash isn’t a lot of practice time.”MattParticipant“I’m really not trying to overpower myself with my first bike, but I’m not trying to underpower myself either. I’ve sat on the Ninja 250 – I really dont see how people that are 6′ tall claim it fits them well and is comfortable. It feels like a mini-bike to me (no offense to anyone who owns one, I’m merely talking about the comfort that a couple more inches of seat height offer).”
You say that about a 250, but have you sat on a 600?
The ZZR600 is one of the most comfortable 600cc sport bikes (technically a sport-touring) out there. I’m 6′ and compared to my 250, it puts my knees in an awful bend. Sitting on a full-on supersport is nothing resembling comfortable for me. Sure the bike doesn’t feel tiny underneath me, instead it feels small and cramped wrapped around me.
Both the Ninja 650 and SV650 (faired) feel bigger because the tank comes up into your chest, but are no more comfortable for my legs.
What I’ve found after a year of owning my ZZR-250 is that the small size of it, while feeling slightly conspicuous at first, is actually a really good thing in city riding. That feeling like the bike is small and I can just toss it around makes a big psychological difference. Adding a tall tank bag raises the “tank” up to the same position as an SV650’s tank, making the bike feel a bit more substantial (and definitely took some getting used to once I started commuting with it on).
I’ve found that after long rides (4+ hours) my knees still hurt on the 250, and so I’ll likely be adding a custom seat next spring that raises my seat up an additional inch. All of the 600/650s I’ve sat on I’d still need to do that.
The bike you have your eyes on the FZ6R, the new steel framed 600cc UJM that looks like a sport bike.
Have you looked at the stats on it carefully?
The power and braking have all been talked about, but I skipped over if anyone talked about this beast’s weight.
470 pounds is a LOT.You won’t notice it on the highway, and you won’t notice it in city driving much. But you will when you are trying low speed (less than 10 mph) riding – like when you are parking it. My previous bike as 420pounds dry, and getting it on to its centre stand was HARD. More than once I damn near dropped it on its side when parking. Moving down to a 330pound bike made a huge difference. Remember, not all parking spots will be on level smooth pavement. Some will be on hills (and you need to push that sucker up it), some will be on soft dirt.
The FZ6R does no service to you as a starting bike. It has more power than you need or want, it expects you to already have muscle memory you don’t yet, and it will make you pay for all mistakes with a hundred pounds more consequence than other starting bikes (150 pounds more than some).
It is a lot to pay for a bike that doesn’t look small under you. (Truth be told, most bikes look small under their riders anyways)Last point:
“These are not the superbikes of the 600 class I’m talking about. I dont think either one of them are going to win any races unless they are against they’re next of kin”
You are dead wrong in this. You don’t seem to understand just how high up the performance ladder their kin are. The new GSX650F (the FZ6Rs closest competitor) is stat for stat almost identical to the 1988 GSX-R 600. A modern super sport? Absolutely not. But in the hands of a capable rider, it can absolutely keep up with a modern super sport on real (potholed, bumpy, dirty) roads. And on the track it will do everything that a late 80s early 90s 600cc super sport will do.
Which by the way, can be summed up as “embarrass anything short of a super car”.Powerful motorcycles are one of those things that simply have to be experienced first hand. No one can tell you what a “fast bike”, or even a “mild sporting bike” feels like with words or comparisons. It is like describing colour to a blind man, no matter how many times someone says “It is faster than most any car” (not that many people have truly experienced being in a genuinely fast car either, they think they can imagine it, but it is always more than they expected) you’ll never understand until you do it.
And that is the hard part of all this. You have no way to judge what you are getting into with any motorcycle. You ask for descriptions and comparisons, but in the end they aren’t worth much. And everyone has a different tolerance. To hear an experienced rider talk, we can all start on 650-twins. Talk to an MSF instructor, and they’ll tell you how many brave and otherwise competent people can’t handle a 250 properly.
My advice to you is this: The FZ6R looks like a great second bike. There is nothing it won’t do on the roads. And for someone with the muscle memory and skill, it will only take extra effort in when the bike is moving very slowly or you need to man-handle it around in a parking / service situation. But it will make learning very hard.
Forget about whether or not a bike looks or feels like a toy under you, ultimately that line of thought ends up with “what will people think of me on my bike?”
Instead, get something that is physically comfortable, meets your needs, and is as learning friendly as possible. The more friendly it is, the faster you’ll be able to move up to the FZ6R/GSX650F/etc confidently and safely.
We don’t have a lot of choice for bikes that fit that bill in North America, but the ones we do have are very good. The Ninja 500 and GS500 are incredibly capable bikes despite being forgiving. Both have a large but quiet following who love them as sport-touring bikes.—
“The two seconds between ‘Oh S**!’ and the crash isn’t a lot of practice time.”MattParticipantThe Seca II isn’t talked about on this page because it is too old for most people to find. And beyond even finding one, maintaining an old bike can be a lot of trouble. If you are mechanically inclined and have access to spare parts, an old bike is a great way to go, but for joe average, I would NOT recommend an older bike. I owned a 1984 Interceptor, and it was destroyed by a shop technician who wasn’t familiar with bikes that old. One Honda dealership asked me NOT to bring the bike to them since they didn’t have any mechanics with any experience on bikes that old.
The Seca II isn’t that old, and it doesn’t have the issues that made the VF500F such a pain to work on, but, if nothing else, parts are limited.
So, why recommend it when a Ninja 500 or GS500 can be found more easily, but have current dealer support?
(The Seca II competed pretty much head to head with these and the Bandit 600 – despite being a 600, it is not like a current 600cc sport bike).Glad to hear you are enjoying your new ride. I *almost* got a Seca II as my first bike, but it was sold out from under me
—
“The two seconds between ‘Oh S**!’ and the crash isn’t a lot of practice time.”MattParticipantI have no experience with the Buell 1200, but as it is based on the sporty’s 1200, I expect it’ll be a fairly low revving engine with lots of grunt. Not the sort of thing you need to worry about under-revving and lugging the engine.
If you are keeping the revs low enough that accelerating feels like it is working the engine until it gains some more revs, you’re probably cruising a little too low, otherwise, you’re doing fine. The lower the revs, the better the gas mileage (within reason, again so long as you aren’t lugging the engine). Your bartender is probably thinking you are on a bike with a Japanese style inline four that requires higher revs. But at the litre size, even those are pretty easy going about being at low revs (compared to the 600cc bikes which demand the higher revs).
—
“The two seconds between ‘Oh S**!’ and the crash isn’t a lot of practice time.”MattParticipantDifferent engines work in different ways. What bike are you riding?
A Ninja 250 cruises at a minimum of 6000rpm, 8000rpm in top gear on the freeway.
In contrast, my dad’s GS450 red lines about there and spends most of its time about 4000rpm.
Cruisers are harder to be specific with since few have tachs, but definitely operate at a lower RPM. The Honda Shadow 600 is happy as close to idle as possible.I was looking at a ZX-6R the other day that had a colour coded tach. 1-5000rpm was white, 5000 to redline (14000 I think, didn’t pay close attention) was green, and above that was red (obviously), but the meaning was quiet plain. You want to be in the green anytime you are putting load on the engine, which includes cruising at freeway speeds.
—
“The two seconds between ‘Oh S**!’ and the crash isn’t a lot of practice time.” -
AuthorPosts