Overated bikes, or ones that you just dont get

[fizzwheel]

Originally Posted by Skip

Sorry Fizz but I have to disagree - I really like nearly all the bikes you say that you dont

But why do you like em ?

[G]

Originally Posted by plowsie

Try it as your exiting, as you do, nail it, dip the clutch and gloat in your coolness!

as you run over your foot?

TL1000R

why

whats the point

fatter, slower, crapper than the TL-S.

Fizz, i disagree about the SP1. I love them, whenever i see one i have to watch it, i have to listen to it, i have to let it remind me about all those WSBK races, all those moments....and that fantastic final round clash with edwards and bayliss at imola (ok, ok, that was SP2...but they look to same, so the memory is still relived). I love the fact its a HRC machine, not just rolled off the commoner fireblade factory floor. It shares pedigree with the RC30, the RC45. Which brings me onto the NC35. its the RC45 for people who cant afford RC45's. Its got more than enough power, it sounds awesome, it looks great. i'd like one, but i'd prefer an NC30, because i want an RC30 but cant afford one

[Skip]

Originally Posted by fizzwheel

But why do you like em ?

Go on then - I'll bite

TLS

I get the big twin thing. But why a TLS, it just looks like a big curvey SV, all the ones I looked at in my eyes had the potential to turn into a money pit very quickly and I'd want the rear suspension sorting out properly which = cost.

Thats why its great - it looks like a curvy SV Not ridden one but apparently a absolute stonker of an engine and with the suspension sorted (agreed it does cost though) they can ride well and are something different (in a good way).

SP1

Again the big twin thing I get, but I'm kinda averse to spending money on something that then needs a the fueling setting up properly and has a tiny tank range.

Agreed here - too track focussed for the road for me.

848 / 1098 / 1198

Dont get this either, looks like a jap bike and looks very cheaply made i.e. quality of plastics etc etc, and the fact it looks like Mr Blobby has done the welding on the swing arrm, sure as eggs are eggs I'd not want to buy a Duke with a wet clutch either.

Drop dead gorgeous looks, styled with function and form in harmony, fantastic engines and only the 848 has a wet clutch (so I read) - not sure I would want one as a road bike but still - I "get" them which is the point of this thread

VFR, RVF ( NC30, NC35 )

10, 15 year old bikes, b*stard to service, cost a fortune to buy as demand keeps 2nd hand prices high. Has no more performance than an SV and the one I rode ( NC35 ) didnt handle any better ( well felt like that to me ) than my Curvey SV did.

There is just something cool I think about a little 400cc sports bike - all the glamour of a bigger bike but just miniturised - they look great - keep them on the boil and they go fast enough to enjoy thrashing them on the road and they do handle well. Yes in certain areas they can be a pain to service (so I have heard) but thats a small price to pay. Plus with the prices as they are you will never really lose money on one.

Best I could do!

Originally Posted by chakraist

An SS600 bike is about 3 seconds slower per lap round a typical track (e.g. Misano on Sunday), it makes up time in the corners.

A WSS bike is around 3 secs a lap slower than a WSBK bike yes, but they get a relatively greater amount of tuning from the 600's than the 1000's so the difference would be greater between a CBR600RR and a CBR1000RR for example.

Eg, a WSS 600 bike has around 145 bhp which is around 65-70% of the WSBK bhp (around 215bhp)

A CBR600RR has around 100bhp compared to the 170bhp odd of the Blade (less than 60% of the power).

Sorry for geeky answer

TL1000r I would have in the blink of an eye, its not "refined" power delivery is not smooth, riding position isn't great but is still better than my sv. . . . BUT that engine, frame etc

loved the one i rode.


What I would never buy again is an aprillia - its just fell apart!

Originally Posted by carty

A WSS bike is around 3 secs a lap slower than a WSBK bike yes, but they get a relatively greater amount of tuning from the 600's than the 1000's so the difference would be greater between a CBR600RR and a CBR1000RR for example.

Eg, a WSS 600 bike has around 145 bhp which is around 65-70% of the WSBK bhp (around 215bhp)

A CBR600RR has around 100bhp compared to the 170bhp odd of the Blade (less than 60% of the power).

Sorry for geeky answer

The RR has a bit more than 100 bhp. But I do get your point.

A bike that most people don't like that I so want is the new blade, I love them.

p.s vfr400/rvf400 are amazing.

you can corner them with EVERYTHING down - not just your knee and change of direction is scarily fast!!

Now I've got a VFR, bikes I don't really 'get' are pretty much all the others

Comfort, top-box, potential for panniers, performance when necessary, and reliability

Originally Posted by plowsie

A bike that most people don't like that I so want is the new blade, I love them.

I love them too - they're tiny and look so beautiful and compact, but you know it would make you sh!t yourself!