Restrictor kits

[Lozzo]

Seriously, who leaves them in for the full 2 years?

My daughter had them fitted purely to get the dyno charts or certificates, and then pulled them out as soon as the bikes arrived home. She got pulled a couple of times and was never asked about restrictors, even when she was nicked with me for serious hoonery on her NC30.

Are they a waste of time and is the government kidding itself that people stick to the letter of this pathetic and discriminatory law? Opinions please.

[21QUEST]

Law abiding citizens.


Ben

[Lozzo]

If we were all that law abiding we wouldn't have any need at all for SV650s, a simple SR250 with it's 80mph top speed would suffice, so that argument can be flushed.

[Wideboy]

there is nothing written in law to say the you cant fit them yourself and you need a certificate.

so find some second hand and you can save a bit of dosh

and im keeping mine in, although they are annoying

[yorkie_chris]

Seriously, who leaves them in for the full 2 years?


Anybody who wants to avoid serious flamery on here says they do.

Anybody with 2 ounces of common sense doesn't say they don't on a public forum :p


Anybody who can't justify the loss of licence (however small the risk) against a few more bhp.
Then again some other people find an only slightly illegal and easily reversible way round the restriction.

[Lozzo]

Why should anyone flame, no-one ever does when speeding in 60 or 70 limits is mentioned. Where's the difference. It's a bit more than a few bhp, it's about the same again.

[Sean_C]

Not a fan of it but its there and its staying there for the time being, but I'm only 3 months in. Though I do think its better that I learn how to control 33bhp before I learn how to control ~70bhp. Also, after paying 1150 quid for insurance, I'm not about to invalidate it.

I'm off to have a think about chris's riddle...

[sinbad]

Because some of us spend a good few quid to legally be allowed to ride unrestricted machinery. "Pathetic, discriminatory law"? 12 year olds can't drive a car, 17 year olds can't ride 34bhp+ motorcycles. Quite simple. All very well taking the restrictors out, till something happens and the insurance company of either party investigates. Foolish risk, just for some stronger acceleration. Some people can't relax with those sorts of thoughts in their minds all the time.

[Lozzo]

But it's ok for a 17 year old to drive a 500bhp car that can do far more damage - there's the discrimination. Sorry, but your argument doesn't hold water either. I have never heard of any insurance company checking a bike for restrictors after a crash, and I've been working in the bike trade for years.

Btw, the law is pathetic, because it is almost impossible to police it.

[yorkie_chris]

Btw, the law is pathetic, because it is almost impossible to police it.

And because it's easy enough to kill yourself with 33bhp anyway

[Lozzo]

If we took notice of all the risks in life, we'd never get out of bed.

[yorkie_chris]

Because some of us spend a good few quid to legally be allowed to ride unrestricted machinery.

And us on 33bhp get our licenses for free? :rolleyes:

I'd do DAS if I could, but I'm under 21.

[yorkie_chris]

If we took notice of all the risks in life, we'd never get out of bed.

And risk deep vein thrombosis!? #shock#

[zunkus]

If we took notice of all the risks in life, we'd never get out of bed.

Just a thought; most people actually die in bed

So enjoy life while we still have it.
Well anyways back to the subject. Looking back at the foolish things I've done whilst still a beginner, 33bhp does not look so bad. It still good enough to get a decent move on and the bike will be more easy with your learning troubles. I think it makes sense. Hey we all wished we were grown ups when we were kids so we could do all the grown up stuff. Time passes and when we do grow up we sometimes secretly wish we hadn't.

[sinbad]

And us on 33bhp get our licenses for free? :rolleyes:

I'd do DAS if I could, but I'm under 21.

Of course not ( :rolleyes: ), but a 125 test is inexpensive by comparison, as after cbt which we all do, you can learn by yourself.

BTW @ op, it's not an argument. There's nothing to debate here. If the question is: Why do people keep the restrictor kits in until they're legally entitled to remove them? Then the simple answer is: because it's the law. The less simple answer is: because they might be caught breaking the law. The idea that it's ok to break this particular law because the cops don't enforce it vigorously is an idea that holds no water. In the end you make your own choice, and live with the consequences. Just because you've never heard of that happening, by the way, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

I don't get where you're coming from. At the end of the day, you (the generic you) know the rules before you even think about taking the tests. Don't bother if you can't or won't stick to them, and go and make a proper formal complaint if you actually, genuinely, care about the usefulness of the law, rather than just breaking it and telling yourself and others it makes no sense so that you feel better about yourself.

[scottjames]

i think this could be argued till the cows come home. fact is its the law an if your prepared to run this risk of being caught then its down to you. i do know of some one who didnt have their thundercat restricted, had some one knok him off an ended up in a big mess when they searched the bike. No licence, no bike and a big debt is not some thing im willing to risk. im keeping restrictor till my times up. scott. :)

[yorkie_chris]

Where did the big debt come from if someone knocked him off?

[Wideboy]

Of course not ( :rolleyes: ), but a 125 test is inexpensive by comparison

both the 125 test and DAS test are exactly the same only difference is the bikes and when i did mine they where both the same price aswell

i think the 33bhp rule is just crap although i'm going to stick to it, as people have said its the law. i really don't care if people break it, its on their head

just me £22's worth :-D

[sinbad]

both the 125 test and DAS test are exactly the same only difference is the bikes and when i did mine they where both the same price aswell

i think the 33bhp rule is just crap although i'm going to stick to it, as people have said its the law. i really don't care if people break it, its on their head

just me £22's worth :-D

Tuition for a day on a 500 cost the same as a day of hiring a 125 for the day? Maybe I should have been more specific, but it does cost more to learn on a 500 because you have to pay an instructor to ride with you.

[Red Herring]

I suspect the more people are concerned with the "will I get caught" aspect of removing the restrictors early, then the "will I kill myself approach". The only two ways you are likely to get caught are after a serious enough crash to warrant police investigation (fatal etc) or if you get caught at some really high speed (don't know what the top end is on a 33bhp bike but I'm guessing it's not 130mph). In the first instance it is quite probable you will be the dead one, so I wouldn't worry to much about that, and in the second getting nicked at 130 mph will probably be as bad as getting caught on a de-restricted bike, no so extra deterent there either. The least likely but most worrying scenario is probably you killing/seriously injuring someone else, your bike being investigated, your insurance company refusing to cover you........and you having to put it all to rights. Personally I'd wait the two years.

[Lozzo]

The insurance company cannot weasel out of payments to a third party involved in an accident if the bike is derestricted - that's set in law. They can refuse to pay out for your bike, but not anyone you might hit. This is not common knowledge, it's one of those things insurance companies would rather you did not know.

[shonadoll]

I've got 11 months left, and will be keeping them in. Personally - I tookt eh restricted test as I wasn't confident (cruciate ligament injuy) on a heavier bike. The terms of insurance expect me to keep the restrictors in, and I'd prefer to learn to control it at 33bhp before I go any bigger.

[Alpinestarhero]

Mines still in, where it shall remain till 12th july 2008 - two years from passing my test.

Matt

[Lozzo]

This same question has been posted to a number of other forums and bike groups, this is the only one where the posters have said they would prefer to keep restrictors in. Everyone else thinks the idea sucks and junked them asap.

[Alpinestarhero]

Perhaps on this forum, people are more concerned with ultimate machine control, rather than oujtright speed? TBH, with all the london riding i do, 33bhp is still more than I need

Matt

[21QUEST]

Perhaps on this forum, people are more concerned with ultimate machine control, rather than oujtright speed? TBH, with all the london riding i do, 33bhp is still more than I need

Matt

Nah....probably more a case of, a "better class" ...........


Ben

[Lozzo]

Wow, now as well as sounding up yourself you're throwing in a bit of patronising too, Well done, want to go for the hat trick?

[Alpinestarhero]

Whos up who's self?

Fiiiiigggggghhhhht!

Or not

It's christmas!

Matt

[21QUEST]

A hat trick is not out of the question...still just warming up, mind :D:


Ben

[Alpinestarhero]

You mean, there is MORE to come, quest?

Anyway - restrictor kits, not a bad idea for someone with not as much confidence. If you feel you can handle the power, go for it, its your lisence, not mine. If you are like me, and want to take things steady and understand cornering before throwing higher velocities into the mix before your mind can cope, then keep the kit in.

this really isnt a good discussion....its quite silly and pointless, really

Matt

[Lozzo]

So you're all in favour of even more restrictive legislation being passed then?

Good luck to you.

[sinbad]

This same question has been posted to a number of other forums and bike groups, this is the only one where the posters have said they would prefer to keep restrictors in. Everyone else thinks the idea sucks and junked them asap.

So? What anybody else does/thinks shouldn't affect the individual's decision on something like this. Why are you even asking this question? Why isn't the debate: "Does the 33bhp rule work?"? Instead of: "It's stupid why would any of you stick to it?"

What's the real motivation for asking this? I'm almost inclined to think your daughter needs reassurance, or has gotten into trouble for it, or something like that. Nevermind, though. Merry xmas to all and to all a g'night.

[metalmonkey]

Oh this argument again dam it!

Okay I agree that 17 year old car drivers being what car they want with without restriction sucks and is a bad idea. You know if they do it to one, then hey they should do it to other right?

I guess the problem is our bikes, can out more or less out run any car, we have more power to hand and accerlate well you know how fast! So I'm guessing thats why its in place, I didn't make the law so i'm just guessing here.

If ppl want the law changed write your mp and lobby parliment they make the laws.

If you are on a restricted licence and do remove before 2 years keep your mouth shut, people aren't gonna know otherwise are they? Its the dumb ones that caught really most of the time anway.

Yeah if your doing a silly speed, you will probally get banned, or worse so that will be the least of your problems.

[Lozzo]

My daughter is 26, she took her restrictors out 9 years ago when she passed her test just after her 17th birthday. My question came about after I read another post on this forum regarding flaming those who took them out early.

I don't think the 33bhp limit works, I think it's another restrictive piece of legislation that had no statistical proof in it's efficiency, from either before or after it came about. What's wrong with passing a test and riding what you want? It isn't the younger people who were hurting themselves, it's the older 30+ people who were, so why penalise the youngsters.

All this legislation has done is put new riders off buying bikes, and pushed the demographic up by 10 years.

[metalmonkey]

Yeah the w/end warriors who only go out if its sunny,the windy blowing the right way ect are more at risk, becasue they don't ride enough, there skills will be rusty after not being on the bike for months.

Yeah more people should be encouraged to ride, for one better for the enivroment etc, but for some reason its not in the govrnements plan to reduce congestion ect, which is just plain mad if you ask me.

I'm ****ed of with politicans and mp's any way, they don't doing anything to help the people and serve just themslves, its them that can change the law grr...

But if you do take the kit off I don't want to know about it.

But I think the biggest improvement to a bike, is the rider doing advanced training.

[northwind]

I think it's a pretty ludicrous law, myself... I would have abided by it though, because if you get caught out you're ****ed (and it does happen, all the time, especially after accidents where insurers have a vested interest in proving you'd been riding illegally) Lozzo's spot on that it doesn't invalidate 3rd party liability cover, but the insurers may well come after you for the money- you may also be done for riding without a licence (because that's effectively what you're doing) and for insurance fraud, if you don't declare the offence yourself. And an insurance fraud conviction is seriously bad news for all sorts of things, it sits on your credit score for 3 years, and you have to declare it to any future insurers- many will walk away, others will charge you through the nose.

This stuff all happens- a mate of mine is an insurance assessor for one of the main underwriters and every single bike they lay their hands on with a claim against it which claims to be restricted gets checked, without exception. So I think personally you have to be a bit silly to risk it, and I wouldn't myself.

But that doesn't change the fact I think it's a daft law. I was less skilled in every way when I passed my DAS than my mate Stewart was after 6 months on his 125. But the question is, what to replace it with? More testing? A more advanced full power test? Some people have suggested that if you register a new bike you have to do your driving test again on it, which strikes me as insane... Not convinced that just removing the restricted licence entirely is the way to go

[kcowgergmm]

the concept of making better riders is a good goal but i don't feel the government should restrict such things i bought a 33hp ecu for my bike and when i installed it i took it for one ride and hated how chopped off the power was it just felt bad not underpowered just bad. I am against any law that the government makes that infringes on the right of the citizens and i feel this does but that just my opinion.

[Stig]

If people don't want to ride a bike with restrictors in, then do the required bike test to ride without restrictors.

[dirtydog]

If people don't want to ride a bike with restrictors in, then do the required bike test to ride without restrictors.


Hmmm this one again :rolleyes:

I find myself having to agree with Big ape on this one, ok fair enough you cant do DAS until your 21. I did my test on a 125 and complied with the law and didn't ride over 33bhp

As for the law itself, yeah it may be stupid and it probably doesn't work for everyone but it may work for a few riding a lower pwered bike for a couple of years. But at the end of the day it is a law, as is speeding, drink driving etc and laws will always be broken

[yorkie_chris]

Oh this argument again dam it!
+1


If people don't want to ride a bike with restrictors in, then do the required bike test to ride without restrictors.

Unless you're unlucky enough to be under 21

[Stig]

Unless you're unlucky enough to be under 21

Those are the laws of the land. I didn't make them. I actually agree with this law for reasons I have stated before.

[Stig]

I correct myself.

I don't see why anyone should have to wait until they are 21. I think direct access should be available for all. BUT I do think the restricted licence thing is a good idea.

[yorkie_chris]

I correct myself.

I don't see why anyone should have to wait until they are 21. I think direct access should be available for all. BUT I do think the restricted licence thing is a good idea.

Restricted for people who choose to do the 125 test? Or restricted for all?

[Stig]

Restricted for people who choose to do the 125 test? Or restricted for all?

Personally I think it would be a good idea if everyone had to go the restricted route. I just think it's wrong to be 17-21 year olds.

[yorkie_chris]

At least that's fair, I still think 2 years is excessive though

[ljharmitt]

Here are my views

I think there should be no age restriction.

You take one test it allows you to ride 33bhp but restricted 1 - 2 years then any power.

But if you wanted you could take DAS which is harder and you get tested on a 80bhp+ bike. This could be taken by any age, and if they wanted A.S.A the person passed their a2 (33bhp) test

[metalmonkey]

There is a major flaw in this law, okay so I'm 17 I take my test and past at 19 I can ride anything I want, but whats to stop me passing the test at 17 and not riding for 2 years, then buying anything I want......

same goes for any age, also what about the w/end riders that only go out in the summer (sorry but its true) ride a few hundred or 1-2 thousand miles/year these are at risk as well.

I still say the best way to deal with is training, people should be doing advanced training, that makes better riders, age is nothing to with it. Its down to the person, I think the law should reflect this. By this when they are ready to sit a test, to ride what they want then go for it, whats the issue if that persons is 17/18.

Training, Training is the way ahead!

End of the day this the law we have right now, I would rather see loads of teenagers out on restricted bikes than not riding at all. Riding is ace, bikes are ace, I love mine, I hope to loads of people on bikes next year.Rather than than go the law sucks (which it does) then lest get out there on our bikes, thats what its about!

Hey maybe if we lobby enough it might be changed, but wouldn't great to give them the finger and for more and more peeople to be out on bikes!! No matter what....

As I said err so many times, I look foward to the summer, and all us getting out on bikes, no matter that are!! Enjoy it life is far too short!

[northwind]

There is a major flaw in this law, okay so I'm 17 I take my test and past at 19 I can ride anything I want, but whats to stop me passing the test at 17 and not riding for 2 years, then buying anything I want......

Exactly, that's one of the things that makes a bit of a mockery of it. Others being that judging by power alone doesn't make any sense- a derestricted RS125 will take a GS500 to pieces, not to mention being far harder to ride... And the frequency with which the law is ignored- taking a few people apart when you catch them out doesn't seem a very effective deterrant. And the fact that the DAS test isn't really much more difficult than the A test. And the fact that economics rather than skill often forces people into the cheaper option as DAS is generally very expensive. And the fact that DAS qualifies you equally to ride a 34bhp bike or a 600bhp turbo'd Busa. And the fact that there's so very few good 33bhp options, due to the near-death of the smaller engine classes. And also the fact that people who ride illegally on an A1 licence haven't been statistically demonstrated to be any less safe than those who ride legally on either an A1 or DAS (though of course, that's a difficult one to assess at all)

Power to weight ratios would be a better place to start than the crude 33bhp rule we use for one (or the 400cc rule the japanese use, which also doesn't work) I have no solution for the other questions that wouldn't involve further, more complex legislation or greater expense, though... I totally agree that the ideal is better training, and maybe better evaluations, but it already costs too much to get a full bike licence tbh.

So I'll resort to being a poo-flinging monkey and knock down the current system without proposing a replacement ;)

[ASM-Forever]

I swear this topic comes up every week. :)

IMO the current system is definitely flawed. Its not easily enforceable and by the time it is, its too late to be of any relevance.

Some 17 year olds have the maturity/ability to ride any bike well/safely, but in my experience a majority do not. I shudder to think of the prospect of someone handing me the keys to a speedy 600/1000 at 17.

Lets face it there are lots of dodgy drivers on the roads, as motorcyclists we are most vulnerable and best placed to see this. Its no coincidence that the majority of the poor driving is being done by the young or old.

The whole 'car equivalent issue" aside, in an ideal world i would hope there would be some form of restriction.

I agree with Bigapes suggestion....everyone should be restricted for a period of time, so they ride a smaller capacity bike, until they have got some miles under their belts and learned some roadcraft. I suppose they would also have to demonstrate a certain level of responsibility, with only 6 points on their licenses.

At the end of the day, i rode a few 125's and put up with being restricted. At the time i wanted a faster bike, but i learned valuable lessons, that perhaps i wouldn't have on a larger bike. Also lets face it, at that age 2 years really isn't that long....its one big alcohol fuelled blur, with some exams, women etc thrown in. Time will soon fly by!

I think Alpinestarhero(matt) is a good example to the youth of today :).....he has kept his bike restricted and more importantly doesn't seem to gripe about it.

[svscratcha]

:)just my penny's worth.

All the posts above have valid elements, but esentially it comes down to the individuals own decision, and will hopefully be an informed one. Imposing 33bhp or any other restriction is another step towards a nanny state.

In my case, I've been riding since 16 yrs old (now 30 ish), on various machines upto 125.taking loads of C.B.T.'s along the way. partly due to my bosses at a delivery firm I worked for, paying for them to get renewed each time, and partly because when I payed for them, it was the cheapest way of keeping me on two wheels.

When the time/finances aloud me to sit the bike test, again money and comon sense talked and I took the restricted test but, I put my self through it on my 125 cagiva. With all the C.b.t's, riding experience, being a driving instructor and also an emergency response (blue light) trained driver I felt qualified to do this and past 1st time.:smt080

Soon after, I bought a restricted SV 650s and after 6mths I took the restrictor out. This was my decision, and an educated one at that. I didn't take it out straight away as like all things it was a new experience which needed to be mastered firstbefor using fully. After 6 mnths of riding every day, almost, in all weather, I new i was ready to remove the restrictors. Again I rode as if having just passed and began to re learn riding with more power. So after a year into my restriction I feel my ability now matches the power.:cheers:

A better training system has to be the way forward, educating riders better so as they themselves can make an educated decision on what bike suits there needs. 33bhp rule is as crazy as DAS as it stands now. A guy with a 1 weeks training on a ER5/CB500 can ride any bike they want?CRAZY:smt119

[svscratcha]

P.s. experience is the key. There is no substitute for it:)

[Stig]

P.s. experience is the key. There is no substitute for it:)

In fairness you were not a typical new rider just passing a motorcycle test. You had years of experience on a 125. You are also a highly trained driver. This makes a big difference as you already had the experience and road craft well before you passed your test. Whether it was your circumstance or not, it was your choice to take the restricted licence route. You should have kept the restriction or taken the alternative test. Or is it a case of the law only applies if I personally think it makes sense :?: Yes the law is flawed, but it's a law that is going in the right direction.

As I have stated before, I used to be an instructor (before restricted licences came into effect) Many of my students passed their test on a low powered motorcycle then went to the nearest dealer and bought a super-sports thousand cc bike. A couple of weeks later, bike and rider in pieces. With a restriction of 33BHP this is enough to restrict the serious power but still allow the rider to get used to a heavier, more powerful machine than the 125cc bike they passed their test on.

People that go out and take their bike test, then not get a bike or ride a bike for two years, has got to be very remote. The ratio has got to be massively in favour of the ones that pass the test and get a bigger bike straight away. With this restriction law for two years, this is where the experience is coming from before they move up to more powerful machinery.

[Alpinestarhero]

I was thinking about this the other day again; If you pass on a 125, then you havnt shown you can handle a bike with a fair bit of power, so 33bhp is quite enough. If you pass on a bigger bike (cb500 for example) then thats ok, its a big bike, with a fair amount of power (enough to cause real trouble anyway) and big-bike handling. Maybe the big bike test should be avaliable for all, but younger people with lessser strength might do better on an 125

I found it easier to do on a 125, than to have to get used to a big heavy 500

Matt

[TOY40]

Here in N.Ireland we dont have the option of the direct access.So you must do your test on a 125cc.then if over21 you can get a restricted bike.which is ok in the fact that you are at the end of the day on a large bike,ok 33bhp but its a start.Im am 36yrs old, 5mts into my restriction and I am loving every minute of it.and the end of my 2yrs restriction.I will have a 70bhp SV FOC.

[dirtydog]

Exactly, that's one of the things that makes a bit of a mockery of it. Others being that judging by power alone doesn't make any sense- a derestricted RS125 will take a GS500 to pieces, not to mention being far harder to ride...
Power to weight ratios would be a better place to start than the crude 33bhp rule we use for one

I always thought there was a power to weight restriction as well? Or at least i think there used to be when i passed my test in 1997 as i looked at getting a derestricted RS125

There is a major flaw in this law, okay so I'm 17 I take my test and past at 19 I can ride anything I want, but whats to stop me passing the test at 17 and not riding for 2 years, then buying anything I want......



That's pretty much what i did, passed my test rode for another 6 months until the insurance on my 125 ran out then didn't ride for another 18 months and went and bought a jap import 400 (with a whopping 50bhp)

People that go out and take their bike test, then not get a bike or ride a bike for two years, has got to be very remote.

Hey! who you calling remote? ;)

[shonadoll]

I think the problem is though, that people tend to think they are better than they are, so there's got to be a cut off point, or rules.I was crap at first, now I'm getting better, but I'm still a learner, a year after passing my test.

I actually think a restriction should be compulsory -for a certain period, for every new rider, and if they are desperate to upgrade they could take an extra proficiency test. I don't get the rush to get aon a huge bike straight away, I suppose, but then I'm 40.

The fact of the matter is, if I took my restrictors out tomorrow, I'd be illegal, and personally, if anything happened I couldn't live with that on my conscience.So I suppose it is individual choice, but my choice is to stay legal till next year.

[Sean_C]

I thought I wasn't bad for 3 months into riding, then I saw how Pete rode with Lissa on the back in the rain.. There will always be more to learn :)

I think if there are going to be restrictions, they should apply to everyone, or no-one. Then a 2 year period til the restriction is lifted, or take a DAS once a year has passed to get de-restricted.

The fact that restrictions are on 17-21 year olds, does not make sense to me. And I suddenly much more mature and capable after my 21st birthday?

The darwinism approach sounds best- if you jump on a big bike after you pass your test and kill yourself, well, that's that, sorted. :D

[Stig]

I've been riding for over 20 years. Hell I qualified as an instructor. I only really started to learn properly how to ride since my accident in 2004. I have so much still to learn.

[sinbad]

The fact that restrictions are on 17-21 year olds, does not make sense to me. And I suddenly much more mature and capable after my 21st birthday?


As an insurance risk you are.
2 years is a long time, I did DAS because I was impatient. Half of the reason for getting on 2 wheels was so I could ride something a bit quick. Without DAS a lot of people wouldn't bother, I think.

I don't think the DAS idea is flawed.
If people are qualifying without the necessary skills to ride the machines they are qualified for then the fault lies with the tuition or, most likely, the exam. But the idea that you can train people to ride bigger bikes is not a ludicrous one. Getting on a 33bhp sv650 after a cb125 must feel like a leap anyway, at least with DAS you're being observed and helped by professionals when you get on the bigger machines, and you can't argue with proper instruction.

[yorkie_chris]

Getting on a 33bhp sv650 after a cb125 must feel like a leap anyway,

For about a week :smt016

[mitch-sv-650]

Hi Im new To The suzuki SV650s and i have to say they are a great bike.

i have a question that i thought someone on here has to now! :P


yesterday i had 33bhp restrictor fitted to my sv and have not ridden it yet. and was wondering what the top end will be on the sv now, also i heard the restrictor dosn't really affect acceleration! is this true???

before i bought the bike i test rode it without a restrictor and it was so smooth.

thanks

Mitch

[kcowgergmm]

it still goes alright but it feels dead to me since i put one on after the fact to see what was like

[Sean_C]

Still got plenty of torque. It'll still go quick enough to get you into trouble, mine had 115 on the clocks once (quicker than Plowsie's restricted sofa:smt068) but that was slightly downhill and with the wind on my private runway.. and it took a while to get there. Probably a genuine 105 or so.
Sometimes I can't get it above 95, depends on the weather :rolleyes:

[maultin]

mine is staying in purely because i havent got the 1st idea how to get it out, or for that matter where the hell it is.

having ragged it down the M6 when i picked it up & having left my mate on his varadero standing at the lights, at the risk of soundling like a right gayer, i am quite happy with the pickk up & top end i get

for all i know i might have spent a fortune on exactly nothing :confused:

[Sean_C]

Mautlin, if you want your restrictor out, have a look at the FAQs on the main site, it tells you how to there. Looks easy enough to me, though I can't do it for another 641 days. Not that I'm counting.

[plowsie]

Still got plenty of torque. It'll still go quick enough to get you into trouble, mine had 115 on the clocks once (quicker than Plowsie's restricted sofa:smt068) but that was slightly downhill and with the wind on my private runway.. and it took a while to get there. Probably a genuine 105 or so.
Sometimes I can't get it above 95, depends on the weather :rolleyes:
My restricted Sofa lol, i've only just realised the bike may be a bit quicker if i werent so frickin fat lol.

[Sean_C]

Well, don't get any lighter than me, can't have you leaving me for dead can we :rolleyes:

[plowsie]

Wait till the dry, you can lead me round N.wales i quote LyleJs sig:
it arouses contempt in Plowsies heart..! Make the B*st**d chase you..... he will follow
Thats if he can keep speed :lol:

[Sean_C]

Wait till the dry, you can lead me round N.wales i quote LyleJs sig:

Thats if he can keep speed :lol:

You're coming on the EAR rideout aren't you :rolleyes: ;)

[plowsie]

You're coming on the EAR rideout aren't you :rolleyes: ;)
Oh yeah so i am cool see you then :) if i dont get lost :)

[northwind]

My restricted Sofa lol, i've only just realised the bike may be a bit quicker if i werent so frickin fat lol.

See, I weigh as much as your average 10 year old and I'm still dead slow :mrgreen:

[mitch-sv-650]

cheers guys that was reasurance :P

i owned a H reg zzr250 but that fell apart thats why i saved up for a decent bike (the Suzuki SV650S). so i am guessing the performance may be similar to that or better. im happy that my sv still has some torque 2! thats the best bit LOL :D

on the sv650s is there anything i need to look for good or bad? and what are they like to live with?

cheers
Mitch