SVs as a trackbike?

Originally Posted by Sideshow#36

As soon as the Sv's suspension is sorted it is a superb bike. A little heavy and cumbersome maybe but I get a huge sense of satisfaction of muscling it around a race track. And its the rider that matters most not the bike. Any monkey can buy a 600 road bike and get it round a track in a half decent time.

Yamaha R6 '08' £7000
Matching A* leathers with ebay 'used' knee sliders £1150
Track day in the experienced group £150

The look on their faces as you go around the outside of them....

Priceless.

Starting with a bike that is fundamentally flawed as a track bike (heavy and cumbersome) makes absolutely no sense at all. If he already had an SV, then fair enough it might be worth it. But when you can get a better bike for the job at the same or less money, you'd be stupid to pick the lesser option!

Someone who is crap on an '08 R6 would likely be even worse on an SV, assuming the same amount of experience was spent on both.

Don't get me wrong, I really do like my SV, but I am under no illusion that it's better than a SS600. I bought it as a road bike, upgraded the suspension a bit and it's quite fast (can out-ride both my dad and my uncle on bikes with double the horsepower). But if I wanted a dedicated track bike, I'd look elsewhere... but that's now I suppose. If the OP is relatively inexperienced for example (and there is nothing wrong with admitting it, I'd be novice group on the track), the SV is a good bike to learn on (it's taught me a hell of a lot about fast riding) because it has enough power (usable) without the ridiculous top end speed that could land you in trouble. Also there is the fact it's a twin over an IL4, but that's personal preference.

Originally Posted by St0rmer66

Starting with a bike that is fundamentally flawed as a track bike (heavy and cumbersome) makes absolutely no sense at all. If he already had an SV, then fair enough it might be worth it. But when you can get a better bike for the job at the same or less money, you'd be stupid to pick the lesser option!

Someone who is crap on an '08 R6 would likely be even worse on an SV, assuming the same amount of experience was spent on both.

Don't get me wrong, I really do like my SV, but I am under no illusion that it's better than a SS600. I bought it as a road bike, upgraded the suspension a bit and it's quite fast (can out-ride both my dad and my uncle on bikes with double the horsepower). But if I wanted a track bike, I'd look elsewhere.

Sorry I think we have crossed wires here, you see when I was born I was issued with a sense of humor. I suggest you try and find one

Originally Posted by fastdruid

True though, I rode a stock '96 CBR600 round cadwell and it's fantastic. You can pick up an old steelie for 500quid.

+1.

I love my SV650S K5 to bits as a road bike, but it would tie itself in knots round a track if I rode it anywhere near as fast as I ride my CBR600 trackbike, and my SV has mildly uprated suspension front and back - lovely on the road, but not up to much on track.

The CBR600 goes better, handles better, and stops far better than my SV, and it's 8 years older, has 28,000 miles more on the clock, has a knackered rear shock, the wrong fork oil in and cost me 400 quid as opposed to nearly 3 grand for the SV.

So I think we are all agreed (except sideshow ) that unless you intend to do minitwins or have a donor bike already, or have a V-twin fetish and can't afford a proper one, an SV as a trackbike makes little sense.

Hopefully that has answered your question daytona63?

Give us a bit more info on why you are considering an SV and we can give a more prescribed answer

I've got 1, see left <-- It's an awesome track bike. Obviously it has no power compared to most other things. My road bike is a 141 rwhp zx9r so everytime I get on the sv it fells like a 125. It handles well with £150 spent on the supension and weighs less then a fart.
I run sticky Michelin power races in medium soft compound. I can get the pegs down going at 50% and I've had the belly pan down a loads of times on turn 3 at Croft.

Well,i was looking for a sv650 as a road bike but after reading some of the negative comments on here,i think i might look for another old 30,000 mile cbr6,seems they go,stop and handle better than a modern sv!??? i thought you all loved your svs on here.?

[fastdruid]

Originally Posted by lexinoo

Well,i was looking for a sv650 as a road bike but after reading some of the negative comments on here,i think i might look for another old 30,000 mile cbr6,seems they go,stop and handle better than a modern sv!??? i thought you all loved your svs on here.?

Oh we love them alright but for a first trackbike it doesn't make sense to get a stock SV in comparison to an SS600. Especially as the SS600's are dirt cheap.

I still prefer the SV to a SS600 on the road as the SS600's are so silly fast but without the torque to be fun at low speeds.
For example the 2003 Hornet 600 I had as a hire bike for a while, no power below 25mph (5k) and the only real power (in first) came in at 50mph (10k)!

Druid

I prefer my SV as a road bike because it's not as frantic. I ride in different modes:

Fairly brisk on the road - which is why the SV makes sense because I love the V-twin power delivery and fairly plush ride quality. It's not as manic as the CBR and doesn't encourage too much hooliganism from me.

Very quick on track - I need something that has low value but does the job well, which is why I bought the CBR.

[jambo]

Originally Posted by lexinoo

Well,i was looking for a sv650 as a road bike but after reading some of the negative comments on here,i think i might look for another old 30,000 mile cbr6,seems they go,stop and handle better than a modern sv!??? i thought you all loved your svs on here.?

Horses for courses. You go on a pan-European forum and ask what the best back road bike is, sure some will say they go b-road bashing on their pan European's, but most would point you to something lighter

The SV is a very good bike for the money, but the suspension's a bit basic, for hard track use you'd be looking to upgrade it, which leaves you using donor shocks from another bike that may or may not suit, or expensive new components.

A SS600 will be more powerful, better suspended (assuming the shocks not knackered, and it has fresh oil in the forks) and better braked (assuming the calipers are in good working order). As those are the sort of things you want on a track bike, if it's a dedicated track bike I'd look at a good, used SS600.

That said someone on here has a dedicated track CB500. It's very cheap, fast enough for novice, and when funds permit can compete in the CB500 cup!

I have also seen a GS500, and a 1980's Motoguzzi, make SS600s look very silly on track, so it's mostly about the rider.

Jambo

As others have said, the SV is a great roadbike and for many of us it makes way more sense than an SS6 or thou on the road.

They can be modified to make a 1/2 decent track tool, but it costs money and it will always be underpowered and inferior to even a standard-ish, modern-ish SS600.

That said, an SV with sorted suspension is actually fair bit easier to ride on track than a 600 or thou, simply as you don't have to account for the speed/power ...

You can ride the heart out of a SV on the track and keep up with some quicker kit on an overall lap, but they have to either be really plops, or you have to be making things up the hard way as they will take miles out of you down every straight ...