SV vs CBR600F for starter rider [Archive] - SV650.org

Durbs

26-07-07, 02:04 PM

Hi, currently doing my DA and have been looking for a while at various bike options. Had decided on a newish SV but after chatting to a chap in my local bike shop whilst buying some kit the other day he kinda put me off the SV saying it wasnt really the best choice as a starter bike and the CBR600F would be a far better option.

His arguments were: poor reliability (said the engines fail), poor build quality and finish and he said the characteristics of the twin engine (immediate power) didnt make it newbie friendly as an accidental heavy throttle hand could easily have you on your @rse whereas the 4's are a bit smoother.

He said that he'd look at the CBR600F (not the sportier RR model) as a good starter so i was wondering whether anyone had any experience of riding both to comment on their pros/cons and also how they found the SV as a first bike? Also i've not seen the CBR really billed as a starter bike, would it be an easier or harder ride in the hands of a newb and how different would it be to the SV?

Still fancy the SV but if i'm shelling out a few grand want to make sure i'm going for the best option out of my 2 bike shortlist.

Ta

stuartyboy

26-07-07, 02:09 PM

Lights blue touch paper and runs for cover...:cool:

I've had both...

SV cracking bike, sounds the business but let down by build and crap suspension. You *might* grow out of the SV and move on to an IL4

CBR - I've had two. Phenomenal bike and better than the SV in every way (IMO)

EDIT: The cbr in town is much easier to ride especially round about town as the power doesn't kick at you. The twin - yes I'd agree a bit lurchier in traffic. Lots of riding the clutch. Get it wrong and you'll end up in someones garden.

The CBR is much more work going through the twisties at high revs. You're more likely to be up and down a few gears and lots more braking whereas a twin you can get away with one gear (say 3rd) on certain roads and much less braking - relying on the twins far superior engine braking to slow you down.

Dan

26-07-07, 02:17 PM

Did this bike shop happen to have a CBR600F for sale :D

SV - definitely less smooth to ride until you're used to it, the IL4 will be easier to get to immediate grips with. Engine's don't fail very often, in fact the SV motor's pretty strong and bulletproof until tuned heavily. Finish is crap. Suspension's a bit crap. The power's there in a nice solid dollop without any threatening peaks, and isn't in massive quantities. SV will also cost less to put back together when you drop it. Which you will, without a doubt.

Don't know anything about the CBR to be honest, but I started out with an SV and enjoyed it without any issues, and plenty of others do too.

Stu

26-07-07, 02:18 PM

Can you get a test ride once you've passed? or is that difficult?

Sounds like the dealer's got an axe to grind slagging the SV so bad, I woundn't say they were that bad.
Would you not have to pay a lot more for the CBR of same age?
The CBR is a 160mph bike - you decide if that's suitable for a newbie?

He's not far off the truth, really best to get a try & see which you think you will enjoy most. (& check insurance quotes)

sarah

26-07-07, 02:21 PM

Eviltwin had a CBR600F as a first big bike had a couple of years break from biking and then got an SV650s. He'd probably be a good person to ask.

ASM-Forever

26-07-07, 02:24 PM

The only valid point the dealer has is the poor build quality....i.e. suzuki cheese bolts. If you dont look after it, winter can do alot of damage. That said if you clean/lube it properly it is fine.

SV's IMO are very reliable bikes....not much truth in what he has said on that score. Try something Italian if you want unreliable!

As for the "heavy throttle hand" argument...that is complete tosh as well. Yes it has lots of low down torque...but if you are hard on the throttle on a CBR, it is more powerful. I am too lazy to check the BHP of the respective bikes but the CBR will have comfortably more horses.

The SV is a great bike for its price and a good choice for a DAS rider. That said the 600F is a better bike pretty much across the board...suspension,handling,build quality etc.

The negatives of the F are the higher purchase/insurance costs and also that if you are a new rider its quite likely you will bin the bike....it will be worse to damage a F than an SV financially.

In summary SV= great bike for the money and certainly should not be discounted.

600F=better bike, but it costs more and some people might not like the riding position.

I would say if you really want a sports bike and have the £'s, then get one or you will only end up trading up in the near future.

stuartyboy

26-07-07, 02:24 PM

Sounds like the dealer's got an axe to grind slagging the SV so bad, I woundn't say they were that bad.

Seems to be a common trait amongst dealers Stu. When I was shopping around and mentiioned the SV they were all pretty much the same. Even the suzuki dealer said I'd get bored of it and move on after 6 months. And you're right they're great bikes - best in their class by far.

EDIT: Yeah...test ride both.

ASM-Forever

26-07-07, 02:29 PM

Seems to be a common trait amongst dealers Stu. When I was shopping around and mentiioned the SV they were all pretty much the same. Even the suzuki dealer said I'd get bored of it and move on after 6 months.

Most of the dealers i come across rate them....if Dave Wood likes them thats good enough for me.

I suppose there is less to be made from selling a SV in comparison to a sports bike though.

hovis

26-07-07, 02:34 PM

depends on the year of bike as well (IMO)

but you need to test them both, i would have said go for the SV a few months ago, but after riding a CBR (900) i wont

stuartyboy

26-07-07, 02:35 PM

As for the "heavy throttle hand" argument...that is complete tosh as well. Yes it has lots of low down torque...but if you are hard on the throttle on a CBR, it is more powerful.

Dont agree. I've owned both bikes side by side. In low speed situations like traffic you'd need to be very hard on the throttle on a cbr. Never had to ride the clutch on the cbr anywhere near as much on the SV. A heavy tweak of the throttle on the SV can get you into bother whereas you need to wring the cbrs neck to get the same response.

Alpinestarhero

26-07-07, 02:36 PM

This dealer isnt being straight with you. The SV is a great bike, and reliable too - I dont know of any engine woes apart from those where the owner hasnt been too kind to the bike anyway. Which would cause any engine to fail, even mighty honda lump!

If you can afford it, go for the CBR, its a great bike and probably better finised than an SV (i'm 99.99999999999% certain of this). That being said, a tidy SV is better than an untidy CBR

SV's arn't boring - sure, they dont have the most power, and the suspension isnt that great aswell (BTW, this is quite easily sorted), but its a happy, fun little bike. I wouldnt sell mine for the world. Theres a truck-load of torque avaliable, which for a new rider means that when you run into a turn too hot, and brake loosing revs, you can still pull out really easily from as little as 3000 rpm

Matt

philbut

26-07-07, 02:36 PM

If i was only concerned with getting the best all round bike I'd go for CBR, but factor in insurance, and the age / milage of bike you can get for the same cash, it's close. I opted for the SV and got a sub 5000 mile minter as opposed to a 30k CBR - fair bit cheaper on the insurance too, but I am only 24.

In hind sight, i wish I'd gone for the CBR as i do quite a lot of long distance 2 up and the missiz hates the SV - CBR F looks much comfier and I think they have better wind protection. I also miss the top end rush of the four pots but thats just personal taste i guess. V twins generally give you less work for your left foot to do, so good for the ride back from work when you really can't be asked to stir the gear box all the time.

Having said that, I do love the SV, and it's been a great first "sports" bike - sounds better than a CBR with a race exhaust too :D. Thud thud thud...

thor

26-07-07, 02:39 PM

You should ride both and see which you like best. Bare in mind with a little tweaking, the SV can very smooth. Go with your heart as both bikes are great, just different.

Toypop

26-07-07, 02:41 PM

You can't argue with him.

The SV does suffer from the water problems in the front cylinder which is a black mark on reliability. Sure you can take measures to prevent it but you shouldn't have to when you have just spent £4000 on a new bike.

The SV does have a poor quality finish. A comparison of any SV & CBR of the same age, mileages and weather usage will always confirm that.

Also I have never felt that the SV is a beginners bike. It is quite tricky to ride in comparison to an IL4 due to the engine characteristics. Mainly in terms of slow speed stuff like tight junctions and mini roundabouts where it can be snatchy.

The performance of the CBR should be better too. Better handling and more powerful and perhaps more comfortable in terms of the throttle hand numbness and nasty seat on the SV.

Downsides are obvious. High price, high price and high price. The IL4's don't lack mid range or need a lot of gearbox stirring, they just run small gears that make them rev higher all the time - which avoids those problems but causes another - a buzzy ride.

Depends on your budget really. You can splash out on the "better" CBR but as a first proper bike you may not keep it long and want to move onto something better. Granted with its extra power and sporty characteristics it has more "growing into it" potential than the SV but I think after a year you may want to go for a full SS600 or a larger capacity bike so the cheaper SV would make a more cost effective short term first bike.

ASM-Forever

26-07-07, 02:53 PM

Dont agree. I've owned both bikes side by side. In low speed situations like traffic you'd need to be very hard on the throttle on a cbr. Never had to ride the clutch on the cbr anywhere near as much on the SV. A heavy tweak of the throttle on the SV can get you into bother whereas you need to wring the cbrs neck to get the same response.

I was taking a more general overview but yes i agree with your point...but if you are pootling along in traffic you would be a bit of a tit to let fly with the throttle, especially as a novice. I also would of thougt that new bikers would err on the side of caution not let it rip....but maybe im more sensible :cool:. At the end of the day you can get into trouble on any bike if you are not sensible/malcoordinated.

I also thinks it depends on the year CBR as they got a better low/midrange in 2005. Prior to that they were a bit lacking but its sorted on the newer bikes. My mate had an older version then upgraded and he reckons the difference is staggering...allows for lazy gear changes.

weazelz

26-07-07, 03:00 PM

depends whether you want a girls' bike or not <ducks>

Stu

26-07-07, 03:02 PM

I have bought my Bandit & then SV without test rides so depends on your POV just buy something & see how you like it, can always sell on (as long as it's not brand new!)

fizzwheel

26-07-07, 03:03 PM

Did this bike shop happen to have a CBR600F for sale :D

My thoughts exactly. I'm of the opinion that most sales people are that, they just want to make a sale and get as much cash out of you as they can rather than selling you the right bike for you.

Test ride both, make your own mind up as to which you like best.

Bear in mind the SV might cost less to insure, which as a new rider might well swing things in its favour. You might find the SV a little less intimidating, and perhaps because of that more confidence inspiring.

I know for me when I started I didnt want a IL4 600 for precisely those reasons. Both bikes should have plenty of room to grow into, but with perhaps the CBR edging the SV out in those stakes so you might end up keeping it for longer...

stuartyboy

26-07-07, 03:08 PM

thougt that new bikers would err on the side of caution not let it rip....but maybe im more sensible :cool:.

I'm with you there dude...I posted something about this a few months ago. Someone at pro scot training was on a twin doing a u-turn but messed it up. Got a bit heavy on the throttle and the bike landed in someone's garden. Woops!

northwind

26-07-07, 03:12 PM

Of all the assorted race rep 600s, the last CBR600F is IMO far and away the best learner, and maybe the best all round, phenomenal bike- not the fastest, or the most agile, or the most powerful, but it's not so far off the pace that I minded much, and for compensation it's more comfortable, better made and more practical than the rest. Great bike... The earlier ones were great as well, there's never been a bad one as far as I'm concerned.

But, I have to admit I've never clicked with one, which is why I have an SV instead, if logic ruled biking I'd have a last-model CBR600F in the garage, or maybe a Hornet. Arguably, it's a bit more bike than is ideal for a learner, but not horrendously so IMO, the brakes are effective rather than massively powerful, the engine's smooth and easy to use... Bit too much expensive plastic for a learner maybe :)

The SV, well, it's not as good on paper. Much less good handling and build quality. And yep, the throttle could give an incompetent a lot of trouble, rolling off the throttle abruptly can upset the bike. But I still prefer it, I love the engine. As a learner bike, well, it's tough and cheap to crash, a very hard bike to kill... Generally very reliable too (and bear in mind they don't get the love a lot of bikes do, the only reason most GSXRs fare better frinstance is that they get more TLC).

Hornet's a great third option, one of the best first big bikes. Solid, tough, cheap to crash... But also a good bit more power, better built than the SV, and better handling. Deserved champion of the naked 600s, IMO, and faired it's a great workhorse. But again, I don't seem to be compatible :(

I reckon none has the killer advantage of a rubbish bike for learning- going fast on a good bike is almost too easy, going fast on a rubbish bike brings out the best in a rider. I learned on a 125 and rode it for 10000 miles, and I'm glad of it, you learn a lot and also, you appreciate anything else more. A GS500 seemed like a beast when I first got on one :) So, personally I don't think anything this good is a great starter bike, GS500, CB500 are both better in my book. But the SV, Hornet and CBR will all give you room to grow, maybe a rougher initial learning period though.

Actually, I think everyone should ahve to spend a year on a terrible 125cc cruiser that breaks down every time it rains. But that's just me being bitter.

Durbs

26-07-07, 03:21 PM

Phew, lot of conflicting responses there!

Still undecided. The test ride thing would be good but i'm assuming that finding a place that will allow me to do that will be difficult? (have heard a lot of places require you to have held a lic for 12 months, is this the case?). Its every newb bikers nightmare riding away from a salesman on a totally unfamiliar bike too! I prefer the 'buy it and take it somewhere no-one can see for an hour to get used to it' technique.

People seem to suggest that the SV will be less intimidating as a first ride so i'm gonna try for a ride on one to see how twitchy the throttle actually is.

fizzwheel

26-07-07, 03:26 PM

see how twitchy the throttle actually is.

Its not I've never ridden an SV with a twitchy throttle, IMHO most people that suffer from this are giving the bike great big handfuls of throttle all the time which makes the bike snatchy in response and also pogo around on its suspension.

Being smooth and gentle with the throttle is what you want to be doing.

Sosha

26-07-07, 03:32 PM

n hind sight, i wish I'd gone for the CBR as i do quite a lot of long distance 2 up and the missiz hates the SV - CBR F looks much comfier and I think they have better wind protection.

Blade..... :smt069

Biker Biggles

26-07-07, 03:33 PM

SoulKiss

26-07-07, 03:34 PM

The SV does suffer from the water problems in the front cylinder which is a black mark on reliability.

This is mainly down to poor maintainance and cack-handed plug changes.

I say this as the owner of a pointy SV who was riding it through some fairly deep flood water at the weekend in the Reading/Thatcham area with the water being chucked over my screen and hitting me in the visor on an S.

I was expecting to have problems with the bike following that, but no problems at all.

As long as the drain hole is kept clear, and the HT lead and the in-built seal are seated properly I dont see there being a problem.

And 50p's worth of Silicone Grease can be added for peace of mind.

Toypop

26-07-07, 03:39 PM

Its not I've never ridden an SV with a twitchy throttle, IMHO most people that suffer from this are giving the bike great big handfuls of throttle all the time which makes the bike snatchy in response and also pogo around on its suspension.

Being smooth and gentle with the throttle is what you want to be doing.

I think it might more be to do with the fuelling at low revs as the throttle is fine at normal riding speeds/revs?

On a mini roundabout the throttle can be like an on/off switch and I had to slip the clutch at times when taking the third exit. No smoothness about it, the bike was either engine braking or surging towards the curb!

Also when I ride into work I ride one handed and hold up my parking pass to show the guards. That was scary on the SV for the same reasons as mentioned above! Yet on the Bandit, 6R and 10R it is fine. The SV is the only bike I have had those problems with. It is also the only v-twin I have had so I don't know if it is an SV/fuelling problem or a general v-twin problem.

Mine was a K5 pointy.

fizzwheel

26-07-07, 03:45 PM

I think it might more be to do with the fuelling at low revs as the throttle is fine at normal riding speeds/revs?

On a mini roundabout the throttle can be like an on/off switch and I had to slip the clutch at times when taking the third exit. No smoothness about it, the bike was either engine braking or surging towards the curb!

Also when I ride into work I ride one handed and hold up my parking pass to show the guards. That was scary on the SV for the same reasons as mentioned above! Yet on the Bandit, 6R and 10R it is fine. The SV is the only bike I have had those problems with. It is also the only v-twin I have had so I don't know if it is an SV/fuelling problem or a general v-twin problem.

Mine was a K5 pointy.

I've got a Curvey, I've ridden 3 different pointies, ( my other halfs K5, a K5 loan bike and a K6 loan bike that I had for nearly a month and put nearly 1500 miles on ) none of which had snatchy throttle.

Not saying you're guilty of this, but IMHO most people seem to find it easier to blame their bike rather than looking at their own riding as the cause of the problems they have...

kwak zzr

26-07-07, 03:55 PM

ive had both cbr and sv, both very good bikes in there own right, cant knock the cbr, does everything brilliantly but does have lots of power on tap tho for a beginner to biking? also insurance will be more. the lill sv what can i say, brilliant bike for everyone, cheap to buy cheap to run and insure, does everything well on a budget, personal pref really i like v twins but 5 years ago i liked il4's.

Baph

26-07-07, 04:02 PM

People seem to suggest that the SV will be less intimidating as a first ride so i'm gonna try for a ride on one to see how twitchy the throttle actually is.

Nice interesting thread.

I went from riding a CG125, to the SV650S, quite a jump in power. I didn't realise, and turned around a corner, then happily just rammed the throttle open like I did on the CG.

Front wheel up (not much) - but what do you expect when going from zero to almost full throttle in 1st gear? Then she settled herself down.

If it'd of been an IL4, which as a general rule kick out more bhp, and have a power band higher up the revs it'd of probably spit me off the back. That's why you need a steady smooth hand on the throttle.

As for snatchy throttle, I know what people are talking about, but I've only seen it when something needed adjusting (throttle cable freeplay, or Throttle Position Sensor for example).

Personally, if I had to go back to step 1 again, I'd choose the SV again. I've ridden quite a few different bikes, and I'm now looking to upgrade to something with more power, but the SV has served me well. Probably a tad short of 25,000 miles so far this year (I got on the road last Aug).

kwak zzr

26-07-07, 04:09 PM

ride the sv1000s if you want to feel snatchy, even with a smooth throttle hand it still takes some getting used to.

stuartyboy

26-07-07, 04:13 PM

I've got a Curvey, I've ridden 3 different pointies, ( my other halfs K5, a K5 loan bike and a K6 loan bike that I had for nearly a month and put nearly 1500 miles on ) none of which had snatchy throttle.

Not saying you're guilty of this, but IMHO most people seem to find it easier to blame their bike rather than looking at their own riding as the cause of the problems they have...

I'm with Toypop on this one Fizz. I had a K6 and the throttle was on off no matter how smooth you tried to be. Dealer tested and agreed.

It's well documented on here about the TPS adjustment. Some of the FI bikes are fierce until you dial out the revs which improves the response somewhat.

Jelster

26-07-07, 04:18 PM

I started with a curvy SVS, which I had for about a year and I covered over 15k miles in that time, including a trip to France and a trip to the South West.

Admittedly, being of an age that I had over 20 years of driving experience when I did my DAS, perhaps I was a bit more cautious than many. However, the SV never let me down, I never had any problems with the rain, and I loved every mile I covered on it.

I never experienced a "jerky" throttle, though I have never been one for whacking them right open anyway. The SV is light and manoeuvrable. Rather than worry about a Jerky throttle, I found that the biggest "issue" was locking the back wheel while changing down. Until you get used to "blipping" the throttle I think that is a bigger worry.

However, move forward a number of years and if I knew then what I know now, I may well have opted for a CBR600. There is no doubt that the build quality of the Honda is miles ahead of most Suzuki's. The CBR600F is the most popular sports bike ever made (it's been going some time) and rightfully so. Most people would probably class it as a bit of a "Sports Tourer" these days, as it isn't track focused like most sports bikes. It's comfortable, relaxed and is better for pillions too.

You may still want to consider a naked as your first bike. They are easier to ride; you have better vision, they are more comfortable and in traffic they are far better. Also riding fast for long periods takes getting used to.

And as somebody has pointed out, when you drop it (and you will, either while riding it or moving it around the drive) it is far cheaper to put back on the road.

Personally I'd probably look at a 2005 Hornet, now the new one is out they should be available a decent prices, and I'd rather pay £4,000 for a 12 month old Hornet than I would for a new SV. But then I'm a Honda convert...

.

Baph

26-07-07, 04:18 PM

I'm with Toypop on this one Fizz. I had a K6 and the throttle was on off no matter how smooth you tried to be. Dealer tested and agreed.

It's well documented on here about the TPS adjustment. Some of the FI bikes are fierce until you dial out the revs which improves the response somewhat.

Before you get Sid Squid blowing steam out of his ears. :D

The TPS combined with the position of the throttle bodies (denoted by the amount of twist on the throttle) helps to control the amount of fuel going into the cylinder (over time, not per rev).

If the TPS is mal-aligned, usually, this results in it being effective too high up the rev range, which (I think) will result in an extra little squirt of jungle juice into the cylinders, which in turn will cause a snatchy feeling from the bike (and the pogo symptoms kwak was talking about).

However, if your throttle cables are out of adjustment, this too can cause snatchyness. Just as clutch adjustment (and use of the clutch) can cause it.

If the bike went into the dealership with a snatchy throttle, it really shouldn't of come back out with one, because it's pretty simple to fix. I know, I've done it with my bike, and I'm not a dealership mechanic!!

stuartyboy

26-07-07, 04:25 PM

If the bike went into the dealership with a snatchy throttle, it really shouldn't of come back out with one, because it's pretty simple to fix.

It didn't...they fixed it. Cupar motorcycles will readily admit that some SVs come out the factory with snatchy throttles and they're usually fixed under warranty. As was mine.

EDIT: As an aside and just to confuse things even more...the 03 cbr600f is renowned for it's snatchy throttle. See the cbr forums. ;)

Baph

26-07-07, 04:27 PM

It didn't...they fixed it. Cupar motorcycles will readily admit that some SVs come out the factory with snatchy throttles and they're usually fixed under warranty. As was mine.

IMO, it doesn't need to be done under warranty. It should (but isn't always apparently) be done for the PDI (to the extent where the bike doesn't have a snatchy throttle on the PDI ride), and IMO, should be done again on every service. But then I service my own bike.

stuartyboy

26-07-07, 04:31 PM

IMO, it doesn't need to be done under warranty. It should (but isn't always apparently) be done for the PDI (to the extent where the bike doesn't have a snatchy throttle on the PDI ride), and IMO, should be done again on every service. But then I service my own bike.

But we are agreed...they do have snatchy throttles.;)

Hey...my post count has went up like billio today :)

Stu

26-07-07, 04:41 PM

i'm gonna try for a ride on one to see how twitchy the throttle actually is.
Post up your location and see if you can blag a go from someone here. Even a pillion ride will give you an idea.

StreetHawk

26-07-07, 04:50 PM

I changed from an SV to a CBR (RR model) and the CBR was much easier to ride that the SV. It felt lighter, easier to turn and more stable which gave me more confidence.. I don't see the power difference being much of an issue. You really have to work the CBR to get it to take off, it's not like it's suddenly gonna reach warp speed without you wanting it to.

I don't know if the F model is similar as i've not ridden one. I would say wait until you have passed and ride a couple of diff bikes. I bought my SV before riding it (before passing) and I have to say that I would have bought the CBR straight away if I had ridden them both. Not to say the SV is a bad bike at all, I just felt much more at home on a CBR..

My 2p.

muffles

26-07-07, 05:36 PM

depends on the year of bike as well (IMO)

but you need to test them both, i would have said go for the SV a few months ago, but after riding a CBR (900) i wont

Never would have expected to hear this sort of talk from you Hovis! Is the SV well and truly out of the window now then?

I wouldnt sell mine for the world.

:-k but the world would include your bike? So you wouldn't sell your bike for your bike plus everything else, ever? :D

the throttle can be like an on/off switch

<snip>

Mine was a K5 pointy.

I wonder if this was because it was a later model - my K3 SV was perfectly fine on the throttle, not snatchy at all, yet my GSX-R - there's this really irritating point on the throttle where it just goes on-off-on-off grr... :smt071

Front wheel up (not much) - but what do you expect when going from zero to almost full throttle in 1st gear? Then she settled herself down.

If it'd of been an IL4, which as a general rule kick out more bhp, and have a power band higher up the revs it'd of probably spit me off the back. That's why you need a steady smooth hand on the throttle.

And back on topic (for me)...I think that the SV is better in terms of power delivery, at least compared to my gixer (and admittedly the latest SS600s are notorious for sticking loads of power higher up and not much low down).

I think part of it is due to what I think Baph is describing - with an SV you can't get "carried away" with it by lots of throttle, because it gives a big squirt and then tails away before you go too far. But with the gixer, you give it some beans and at first not very much happens (say starting at 4krpm) but then it does seem to take over - you can so easily run into trouble that way! Maybe if you never enter that part of the power band it'd seem tamer, but I don't think that's very likely :D

Also personally I found it so easy to ride the torque on the SV in town - I have to slip the clutch quite a lot in stop/start traffic (and any slow speed control) on the gixer as it doesn't want to behave when at low revs. A good example is at traffic lights, I could pull away on the SV pretty much releasing the clutch fully straight away, if I do that on the gixer it'll stall and leave me looking a t*t at the lights :smt103 (I know from experience!!)

ASM-Forever

26-07-07, 06:12 PM

Also personally I found it so easy to ride the torque on the SV in town - I have to slip the clutch quite a lot in stop/start traffic (and any slow speed control) on the gixer as it doesn't want to behave when at low revs. A good example is at traffic lights, I could pull away on the SV pretty much releasing the clutch fully straight away, if I do that on the gixer it'll stall and leave me looking a t*t at the lights :smt103 (I know from experience!!)

Agreed....on a sports 600 the clutch/revs need a bit more minding in traffic, especially first gear work....but at the end of the day i am sure you will agree it is a small price to pay to have gixer/R6/CBR etc. Its not designed for town work...but it can function well enough to be manageable in this capacity and when you get out on the twisties it more than makes up for it :cool:

sinbad

26-07-07, 06:25 PM

Good advice. Just remember loads of us have gone to an SV650 as their very first bike, never mind first big bike. And the vast majority don't have any problem with them.
I'm very happy that I chose the SV, I might be equally happy with another similar bike, but I don't think I could be much happier.

Also the throttle isn't jerky, there might be the odd time at low revs in second gear for instance when it surprises you initially, but it's not a jerk, and you get used to it, and it happens less and less.

muffles

26-07-07, 08:23 PM

but at the end of the day i am sure you will agree it is a small price to pay to have gixer/R6/CBR etc.

Hell yeah, it's why I've got it! :D :smt023

leon c

26-07-07, 09:13 PM

only had sv not ridden any other bike above 125 passed test year ago when bought bike learning more about riding everytime i go out on her find engine breaking great when you get hang of it (when following mates on other bikes there brake lights flashing on twisties im not touching mine takes some getting used to) long straights i get hammered on dont care one little bit sv top for me glad i bought it many smiles:) :) :)

Dan

26-07-07, 09:24 PM

leon c

26-07-07, 09:34 PM

sorry sir ..... :?: :?: :scratch: must try harder lol

muffles

27-07-07, 07:32 AM

Just don't try and read that aloud without taking a VERY deep breath.

What happened to full stops? :rolleyes:

What do you mean why do you need full stops it's perfectly readable any fool could read it I don't know why you're complaining is it because you're short of breath I don't understand you need to explain it. :albino:

muffles

27-07-07, 07:35 AM

I've only had the SV - I've not ridden any other bikes above 125cc. I passed my test a year ago, that's when I bought the bike, I'm learning more about riding everytime I go out on her.

I find engine braking great when you get the hang of it (when I'm following mates on other bikes, their brake lights are flashing on the twisties and I'm not touching mine - takes some getting used to). Long straights I get hammered on, but I dont care one little bit - the SV is top for me and I'm glad I bought it, it gives me many smiles :) :) :)

Translated :D

Dan

27-07-07, 07:35 AM

What do you mean why do you need full stops it's perfectly readable any fool could read it I don't know why you're complaining is it because you're short of breath I don't understand you need to explain it. :albino:

#-o

muffles

27-07-07, 07:38 AM

#-o

:p:p:p:p

gettin2dizzy

27-07-07, 11:00 AM

sorry sir ..... :?: :?: :scratch: must try harder lol

I found them here :) ^

Steve H

27-07-07, 11:13 AM

Dan

27-07-07, 11:15 AM

I found them here :) ^

Priceless. F**kin priceless.

Steve H

27-07-07, 11:22 AM

I used to own a zx6r and actually got rid of that for a SVS in 2002.
I still have the SVS, and have no reason to change it atm.
All I have done is uprate the suspension, add a race can and giving it 'naked'
gearing.
I honestly feel that for what i require from a bike, it does it all. :D

Oh, I have ridden a mates CBRf. It is a very 'polished' bike, but as boring
as hell imo.

Stu

27-07-07, 01:17 PM

A CBRf is a 160mph motorbike? :smt043
onda CBR600F (2000-current)
£6,299

599cc, 108bhp, 155mph, Insurance group 14
I'm sorry, i was 5mph out (sure the clocks would read at least 160 :razz:)

compared with
Suzuki SV650/S (1999-current) (http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/bikereviews/searchresults/Bike-Reviews/Suzuki/Suzuki-SV650S-1999-current/?&R=EPI-441)

£4,599

645cc, 69bhp, 123mph, Insurance group 9

Baph

27-07-07, 01:21 PM

Stu, that link is obviously wrong.

I've seen the 'wrong' side (in the eyes of the law concerning public roads) of 140mph on my speedo (I wasn't on public roads officer, so the law doesn't count!!). :rolleyes:

Stu

27-07-07, 01:33 PM

140mph on my speedo
So what was the calibrated speed?

Baph

27-07-07, 02:01 PM

So what was the calibrated speed?
Shush now, you're getting off topic!

:lol:

gettin2dizzy

27-07-07, 02:03 PM

Yeah, they have a lot of rubbish on that site though. It's also quoted to same for all 4 Svs (curvy/point n/s). daft. Besides - it'll do over 140 indicated in my lightweight guise :)

stuartyboy

27-07-07, 02:11 PM

Ride or Bike magazine recorded a cbr600 (99) model at 158 a couple of months ago IIRC I'll try and dig it out. The FI ones will do 150+ out the box.

Steve H

27-07-07, 02:41 PM

Ride or Bike magazine recorded a cbr600 (99) model at 158 a couple of months ago IIRC I'll try and dig it out. The FI ones will do 150+ out the box.

Bo**ocks. If it was Ride that said this, I'm more likely to get real bike information from me old nan.

Steve H

27-07-07, 02:44 PM

I'm sorry, i was 5mph out (sure the clocks would read at least 160 :razz:)

compared with

:confused: So you read on the internet 'of all places' that a CBR will do 155mph +
The internet also says that an SV will do 135 ish.

The only thing we agree on is that your quoted 123 for the SV is nearer to
the mark.

Stu

27-07-07, 03:17 PM

I have seen 137 on my SV clocks but I'm willing to accept that's closer to 123 true speed.
The CBR has an extra 39bhp (or do you not believe that either :roll:) so it is not beyond the bounds of my comprehension that it would go an extra 30mph faster (at least on the clocks). So what do you say it would do?

The real point is that the SV is 5 insurance groups lower which should mean something to a new rider.

muffles

27-07-07, 03:29 PM

The CBR has an extra 39bhp (or do you not believe that either :roll:) so it is not beyond the bounds of my comprehension that it would go an extra 30mph faster (at least on the clocks).

I don't know if the CBR would do 155 or not, but isn't the power/top speed curve an exponential one? All that jazz about top speed, and power squared, etc, etc (I forget, I could look it up but I cba ;)). Basically just saying, is a 26% higher top speed achievable with 56% more power? I know they're different aerodynamically too, which will affect things!

Jelster

27-07-07, 03:40 PM

I had an indicated 168mph on my K4 GSXR which is similar top end to the 600F; I would guess that's actually about 150'ish... (It was 'kin' fast I know that...)

The best I ever saw on my curvy SV was about 130.

(I have seen an indicated 286kph on my 'Blade, on a motorway in Europe - That was very, very fast... And not something I intend doing again, but I was late for the ferry at the time)

leon c

27-07-07, 06:09 PM

Translated :D
Thanks for translation made me chuckle :thumleft:

hovis

27-07-07, 06:14 PM

muffles

27-07-07, 06:16 PM

well......... its for sale

Blimey...don't know what the forum will do without you!

hovis

27-07-07, 06:17 PM

Blimey...don't know what the forum will do without you!

please let me stay.:smt088

muffles

27-07-07, 06:19 PM

please let me stay.:smt088

Haha oh go on then! Are you still going to support the yellow curvies whenever a thread pops up about what bike to buy, etc etc?

hovis

27-07-07, 06:28 PM

Haha oh go on then! Are you still going to support the yellow curvies whenever a thread pops up about what bike to buy, etc etc?
if it is a disscussion on SV only, yes, i will fight in the yellow curvy corner

muffles

27-07-07, 06:30 PM

Heheh...so you have given up on the GSX-R now?

svdemon

27-07-07, 06:36 PM

I had this same decsision to make, the CBR600 insurance was £670 and the SV650S £330. Plus the V-twin noise! Made my mind up there and then.

hovis

27-07-07, 06:39 PM

Heheh...so you have given up on the GSX-R now?

dunno?

i got the blade cos it was cheap & i needed a bike for the nurburgring cos my sv was playing up. & i had to have a bike in 3 days
the plan was to sell the 2 bikes & get a newer one, but i quite like the blade.

i may still sell them both & go for a VTR or a newer blade, i have always liked the reliability of HONDA and the problems i have had has put me off suzuki a bit.

i thought i would miss the v-twin, but i dont, after doing 1200 miles on the blade last weekend, i went out on the sv weds night for 2 hours, & i did not seem to enjoy myself as much, it seemed to make a lot of noise but not acctuly go anywhere, although the SV is easier to wheelie

bet you wished you never asked;)

muffles

27-07-07, 08:14 PM

Ah see I think that's cos you've got a 900cc IL4 not a 600 - I know the litre bikes are supposed to have huge torque anyway, so I guess the 900 would be like that too?

I know what you mean about Honda, I think I will be going non-Suzuki after this bike and I want to see if Honda's are actually boring or if it's an unjust reputation. I just want to get away from the Suzuki build quality issues really, though.

kwak zzr

27-07-07, 09:33 PM

my cbr wasn't boring the word it think was predictable? it did everything great but never actually made the hairs stand up on the back of my neck like the 1000 v twin.

Jelster

27-07-07, 10:07 PM

..... I want to see if Honda's are actually boring or if it's an unjust reputation.

My 'Blade's not boring. Predictable, reliable, even "easy to ride", but 70 in 1st and 3 figures in 2nd is not boring :D

Just because I'm able to hold a line, knowing how far and when the back will slide, knowing that you WILL make that gap.... Priceless. For everything else......

.

markmoto

27-07-07, 10:16 PM

How about a 600 ninja? phenominal bike ive had three ticks all the boxes

glade

29-07-07, 03:43 PM

I'd be inclined to go for a cheapish bike for starters,keep it for about a year while I made all the usual mistakes,and then buy something better.Something like an older curvy SV for about £1200 where you can learn to ride it and service it,mod it a bit and still save shedloads of money towards that newer better bike.
That's not really the advice you wanted to hear though is it?:)

Listen to this man... very sensible advice.

I bought my SV new as my first bike, and after a year I want to trade up.

I do, however, think that the SV is a cracking first bike and I intend to keep it for at least another year. I've never found the power delivery/throttle a problem. I use the bike as a commuter, every week I go out and screw the **** of it for a few hours and it never fails to put a smile on my face... really do i need to go faster???... probably not, but i might have to uprate the suspension/gearing this year to keep the interest.

lukemillar

29-07-07, 04:09 PM

depends whether you want a girls' bike or not <ducks>

lol - says the man with the SV who brought his female friend to Mallory yesterday with her CBR600F!

kwak zzr

29-07-07, 04:10 PM

in the real world i cant really see anyone wanting more than the lill 650.

markmoto

29-07-07, 04:18 PM

in the real world i cant really see anyone wanting more than the lill 650.

For everyday practical use the 650 is more than enough! but after you have been riding a few years you always want that bit more in reserve eh :cool:

kwak zzr

29-07-07, 04:21 PM

i dont know because ive done things abit backwards? the sv650s is prob the slowest bike ive owned but the most enjoyable to ride, when i bent my 650 i got the 1000 but after riding it ive alway hanker'd after a 650 again?

yorkie_chris

29-07-07, 05:01 PM

After going from a CG125 to an SV650 (33bhp - bloody EU :smt097) I can say the SV makes an excellent first bike, the power first time out (full power - private road) was great but nowhere near nasty, and nothing like what would land you in someones garden unless you're a total muppet. The engine braking did suprise me the very first time I rolled off, after that was fine. As to blipping on downshifts, we should all be able to do that, if you can't then don't blame the bike.
The forks are cr4p though, mine are getting the hagon treatment soon.

Having never ridden a CBRF im not going to comment on what they're like, but the SV will be cheaper to buy, insure (important at 19 years old!), repair, simpler to service (8valve, 2 carbs/TBs), will look better, sound better and be much easier on tyres and other consumables.

I want a 1050 speed triple next though...

Chris

jim@55

29-07-07, 05:51 PM

chris-as for the 'looks btr''bit ,subjective dont you think
as for the less wear n tear on tyres -i totally disagree .i went from a yellow curvy 'y'reg to a 'w'reg cbr600f and my curvy eat through a rear in 2000 mls (conti road attack) and my michelin on the cbr is a wee bit squared off .nothing like the sv though.iv been told its to do with the power pulses from the v twin and a torquier motor (at low revs anyway)so youre more likely to really open the throttle at lower speeds for all out acceleration ,and in the process shred the tire even more ..check the wear on them -sv-front ,barely worn rear -totally shagged ,,,,cbr front worn a bit ,rear worn a bit more ,,what im gtng at is theres not as much of a gulf f/r with the cbr ;)

jonboy99

29-07-07, 10:53 PM

Had a cbr600f (fi model) for 6 years, sv650 for about a year. The cbr feels slower without a doubt below 7k rpm. Suspension is in a different league to the sv, but as to smoothness of throttle, the sv is much better ( and that's after much cbr tweaking with power commander etc.)
SV much more fun despite suspension, full of character and I enjoy riding it much more.
As a new rider, i'd take the sv. You'll inevitably end up selling it before long to get something more powerful, but if you're enlightened you'll come back to it before long. 600f is just dull.

yorkie_chris

30-07-07, 12:22 AM

chris-as for the 'looks btr''bit ,subjective dont you think
as for the less wear n tear on tyres -i totally disagree

Fair point, was just guessing about the tyres as the CBR has overall more power, anywho.
The looks are subjective, but the SV is a distinctive bike, whereas most faired sports bikes don't really stand out apart from lairy colour schemes. UJMs.

jonboy99

30-07-07, 12:26 AM

Fair point, was just guessing about the tyres as the CBR has overall more power, anywho.
The looks are subjective, but the SV is a distinctive bike, whereas most faired sports bikes don't really stand out apart from lairy colour schemes. UJMs.

Show me a cbr that looks as good.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v340/jonboy99/Bikes/SV650s/svrearleft.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v340/jonboy99/Bikes/SV650s/svfrontleft.jpg

Jelster

30-07-07, 07:17 AM

Show me a cbr that looks as good.

Shame it's not in focus....

http://bikeintro.com/wp-content/honda_cbr600fs_2001.jpg

Admittedly, that is an F "sport", but it's the same bike, just with a different tail section. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so while you may consider your SV the personification of beauty, others may not.

.

hovis

30-07-07, 08:26 AM

http://bikeintro.com/wp-content/honda_cbr600fs_2001.jpg
.

:winner:

Steve H

30-07-07, 08:31 AM

. But then I'm a Honda convert...

.[/quote]

Really?! :rolleyes:

Steve H

30-07-07, 08:33 AM

:winner:

Only because its a picture of a pointy!

Hovis, you are a bit fickle aren't you?! ;)

hovis

30-07-07, 08:39 AM

Only because its a picture of a pointy!

Hovis, you are a bit fickle aren't you?! ;)

out of the two piccys the CBR looks far nicer

the question asked "Show me a cbr that looks as good." than a red pointy

if it was a yellow curvy V's the red CBR that might be differant
HTH;)

Steve H

30-07-07, 08:53 AM

out of the two piccys the CBR looks far nicer

the question asked "Show me a cbr that looks as good." than a red pointy

if it was a yellow curvy V's the red CBR that might be differant
HTH;)

Fair enough. Nothing to do with recently buying a Honda then? :rolleyes: ;)

Jelster

30-07-07, 09:02 AM

Fair enough. Nothing to do with recently buying a Honda then? :rolleyes: ;)

I do think that that I covered why some may find the CBR "better" in the looks stakes.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so while you may consider your SV the personification of beauty, others may not.

Personally, I've taken a step back from semi faired bikes... They're nether one thing or the other. I prefer a full on sports or touring fairing, or a completely naked look.

.

jonboy99

30-07-07, 10:02 AM

Actually, I think it's only fair we compare like for like, so here's a pic of my cbr in a similar state of undress to the sv.. :D

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v340/jonboy99/Bikes/cbr6/100_0073.jpg

kwak zzr

30-07-07, 10:20 AM

thats why honda cover the engine up on there bike's cuz if fugin ugly.

stuartyboy

30-07-07, 10:21 AM

but never actually made the hairs stand up on the back of my neck

You never redline the bugger in 3rd or 4th? The hairs on the back of my neck sure stood up :cool:

How about a 600 ninja? phenominal bike ive had three ticks all the boxes

Can't agree more mate but I would say it's not a newbies bike. They're lumpy at low revs and they kick in at 8k compared to the honda 10k+. Anything above 10k on the kwak is superb. 159mph stock bike according to the book.

I was on track recently and some guys on 600rrs came up at the end of the session asking about my zx6r. Got some respect from them as they were a class above and they couldn't get near me accelerating out off the bends.