A marginally different bike opinion thread

[bushguy]

I have been noticing lately that the riding community as a whole seem to hold the SV650 in relatively low regard, now being an SV rider myself and having no problems with it myself (indeed I am truly in love with the bike) this puzzles me somewhat and although I admit Im not the most experienced rider having only ridden one other bike for more then a couple of miles (NSR) Im curious to find out the reason for this.
To my eyes it comes at a more then a reasonable price tag, the riding position i find to be as comfortable as any other sports bike, MPG seem pretty good, even in its restricted form it seems to have all the power you need on your average ride but still has the oomph you need if you want to have a blast. Sure its not the quickest bike out there but its never been that noticable when I ride along side guys on their 600's (mainly GSXRs/CBRS and the odd thundercat). The only real reason I could see for people having a problem with it is that it seems to to fall apart underneath you if you leave it exposed to the elements for too long without out allot of TLC.
Reasons not to be accepted: asthetics and audio, both of these factors are opinion and personally I find them to be as good as, if not better then sex itself-any denial of this will be counted as sacrelidge and punished accordingly.
So why the hate?

[Ben.]

i give up, im allways wrong no one listen to what i say
____________________
follow my racing season
Race bike - R6
Road bike - sv650

[.Chris.]

Perhaps people perceive them as a bit dull. A bit like when people slagged off the CBR600F that somebody just bought. They're both bikes that you see all the time and do exactly what they say on the tin - the sensible but unimaginative choice, which is perhaps why people turn up their noses at them.

Personally I don't mind them although I'm not keen on the look of the half-faired SV650S version.
____________________
Chris
1985 Kawasaki Z550F

[thegubner]

[bs16]

Don't worry about what others think of your bike. If you like it, it does what you want, and does it reliably enough for you then that is all that matters.

I ride a CBR and there was a recent post which said they were pig-shit, and some people also consider them bland. Maybe after a year or so I will agree but at the moment I love it, and so as a house I know is called llamedos

Of course whilst other's opinions do not count mine does so sell it immediately and buy a CBR

[Ben.]

____________________
follow my racing season
Race bike - R6
Road bike - sv650

[Mudskipper]

[TUG]

[MarJay]

I think they are great. Better than an NC30 by about two hundred miles.

They are newer, have more power, are physically larger, easier to get parts for, cheaper to insure, easier to get tyres for, more comfortable... the list is endless. If I were choosing over a £1500 NC30 and a £1500 SV, it would be the SV every day of the week.

People on here tend to have an obsession with 400s, and also it seems an obsession with labelling bikes.

Obvious fact number 1: Of course an SV isn't as powerful or as fast as a 600 sportsbike. Its not a 600 supersports contender!

Why do people insist on comparing everything with the latest 600cc sportsbikes? In isolation its a easily manageable relatively decent handling little sporty all rounder. Similar to the CBR600F previously mentioned. I also take issue with anyone who says an SV is boring. A CG125 is boring. Any bike that can do 130mph and has a 0-60 time in the 5s region can't possibly be boring. I used to have an absolute hoot thrashing my SV to within an inch of its life. If I did that on a 600cc sportsbike, I'd either be dead, in prison or extraordinarily paranoid. Anyone who says an SV is too slow is either Valentino Rossi, or lying. Yes, some people would like a bit more power in their bikes - but that doesn't make it a bad bike. Also its interesting to note that one particular person who seems to dislike his SV has had many bad experiences most of which (IIRC) actually come from lack of maintenance, neglect and oil starvation from wheelies!

I reckon, with the right mods (I've said this before) an SV would make an awesome track bike too. Its been proven by the people with Mini Twin race bikes. I know a few people on this forum who have had a lot of fun riding a mini twin on track.

Additionally, I've mentioned that wheelies can destroy engines through oil starvation. I believe that there are one or two mods that you can do to lessen this. In this case the SV would make a fair stunt bike - and its the only bike I've owned where I could lift the front wheel on demand rather than just accidentally. And that includes my Buell!

You've either got to take it as a slightly-more-exciting-than-a-CB500 commuter, or use it as a blank canvas to build something special. As said, its not a sportsbike but I think its an ideal first bike and in actual fact is a LOT of fun.
____________________
British beauty: Triumph Street Triple R; Loony stroker: KR1S; Track fun: GSXR750 L1; Commuter Missile: GSX-S1000F; Cheap project: CBR900RR FireBlade
Remember kids, bikes aren't like lego. You can't easily take a part from one bike and then fit it to another.

[Blau Zedong]

It has all the character of a two wheeled car. Competent yet strangely dull. I quite fancied one till I rode it - quickish but flat power delivery and cheap suspension ruins the admittedly reasonable chassis. When you can buy a GSXR750 for £1000 which has top bollock suspension, grunt to spare and last but not least an "image", why buy a slower v-twin with an engine that is exciting for about five minutes.

For me the 600 fazer is another bike of simillar ilk - reasonable for most purposes but lacking in soul. Bikes have to give me "that" feeling, and what "that" feeling is only becomes clear after riding various types / sizes of bike.
____________________
18:54:48 Rob Fzs: jews don't give away stuff for free

18:54:59 Rob Fzs: unless its their clothes/ hair/ golden teeth

[repiV]

Like Marjay said, no bike with that kind of performance can possibly be considered boring. I think a lot of people these days try to take on too much, too soon - 600 supersports as a first bike?
Yeah, it can be done, but the thing is if you crash a 125 or a 250 or something of that ilk, you'll probably be a bit bruised and scraped. You crash a bike that does 80 in first gear and you're liable to die or be seriously injured.
I was starting to find my Fazer a bit slow, but when I crashed it and lay immobile on the ground in unbelievable agony, it left me in no doubt of what a brutal and deadly machine it actually is. Something we could all do with reminding of from time to time, hopefully without the pain.
Personally I think the DAS is way out of date and should be teaching people how to handle modern sportsbikes, instead of how to ride 500cc commuters in traffic.

[G]

Pretty much any bike can 'keep up' and has plenty enough speed for the roads.
So going for more powerful bikes with better suspension is all about the ease of going fast, or that's what it boils down to.

The SV suspension is definitely lacking as standard when pushed.
The engine is a bland commuter one, with to my mind very little 'character' - little difference in the feel of power output as you
The riding position of the faired bike seems a rather poor compromise between fairly sporty bars and fairly upright footpegs.

I suspect if you ride some decently sized bikes for a while you might find the power and ease of delivery distinctly lacking, definitely on a restricted bike. Personally I quite like low power, but certainly wanted more when I was first riding.

The early ones are definitely pretty ugly and the sound with a race can is great if you like tractor racing.

I do actually recommend it often as a good alternative to a 500 twin for a 'first big bike', but don't think it's worth spending more than £1500 on one say; ideally more around the £1k mark.
Doesn't mean it's a great bike, though .

A CG125 can undoubtedly be more fun that an SV in the right conditions - while an SV in the wrong conditions can definitely be fun.
You can have fun with pretty much any vehicle (I still seem to manage it with shopping trolleys ); but the question for me is how much the vehicle /entices/ you to have fun compared to others.
The SV is rather low down on that list for me.

[thegubner]

[Mudskipper]

[G]

[repiV]

[Keir]

them SV650's are animals. i jumped off my 160bhp GSXR 1000 and proceeded to be thrown off the 65bhp SV in about 3 minutes!
From my experience id recomends new riders get a GSXR 1000 over an SV!
____________________
Current : '08 Yamaha FZ1s
Previous: '99 Honda CBR 600FX, 03 ZX636 B1H, 99 Fazer 600 (red), 02 GSX-R 600 K2, 00 SV650s (red), 2008 ZX10R, 97 Bandit 1200N, 04 ZX6RR K1H, 04 GSX-R 1000, 98 Fazer 600 (gold), 05 Madness 110 Pit bike, 04 CR125R, 00 SV650s (black), 06 KTM 625 SMC, 99 SRAD 600 track bike, 03 SV650, 98 Bandit 1200N, Bandit 600SY, 03 GSX-R 600 K3, 01 GSX-R 600, 01 Fazer 600 (black), VFR 400 NC30 x3, 78 Honda Dream, 00 Speedfight 50

[thegubner]

[repiV]

[thegubner]

[repiV]

[MarJay]

[thegubner]

Doesn't the bikesafe training do this?

I thought there were similar things in place for that, like the advanced driver training for cars.

[MarJay]

[repiV]

Yeah, it's the overconfidence that got me too. Five months and one day after I passed my test. Trying to get my knee down in October (you know, those leaves are just as grippy as the warm summer tarmac ). Highsided or front end washout (still not sure) at 60mph.
It's a little disappointing that I managed five months of incident free trans-London commuting and then did something so stupid. And sums up the new rider problem quite well too IMO.

I got a second chance. Others aren't so lucky.