buying your first bike: POS vs pretty and new

[Triple Seven]

cliffs?

 

[Z3n]

Did you honestly read my reply? When did I ever mention to the thread originator or anyone for that matter buying or financing a super sport bike? I’m impressed with your knowledge of fees though

WHEN they are old enough to work, earn, save, acquire insurance, take the MSF course and assume the responsibility, then they too are old enough to disregard the old man's advice and get whatever they want.

What i'm saying is that kids don't have to work, earn, save, now adays. Furthermore, financial ability has NEVER equaled responsibility in any form. Credit, loans, etc. are too easy. It's a nice thought that someone has saved up 10k for a bike, but that doesn't mean that they're ready for the responsibility, the dangers inherent with riding a motorcycle, so on and so forth. To assume that fiscal responsibilty is going to extend to responsibility on a motorcycle is silly.

fixed

Oh, your clever replies, with your "Fixed"...however, i've ridden enough bikes similar to the GS500 to have a pretty good idea of what it would be like. Sure, i'm missing exactly how the throttle responds, but i've ridden enough bikes of varying HP, i've seen the dyno results for a GS500, i have a fairly reasonable idea of what the bike would feel like. Would it be the worst possible choice as a beginner bike? No. There are many worse bikes out there...but i don't feel that the advantages that it has are enough to justify the higher cost, older bike you'd end up getting, simply for a concept of having "more speed".

From http://www.totalmotorcycle.com/buyersguide/Suzuki-GS500E-GS550F.htm

Power in 1989 was 39.39@9500rpm, with torque of 24.59ft/lb's@7500rpm. Wet weight was 416lb's.

You're talking about trading about 10hp and about 7 foot pounds of torque for about 66 pounds, as well as a little bit higher seat height...if the rider was anyone but a 5 foot girl, perhaps the GS500 would be a better choice...but for the person that started this thread, the extra power is going to be negligable, the extra weight will be noticeable, and the lower seat height and the protection from the windblast will be nice bonus on the 250 as well.

Do you have an inferiority complex? I’m neither old nor elite. I served as a grunt in the military, dropped out of high school, worked my way through college, and rode beater bikes most of my life. I am a public service schlep 12 years from retirement. What’s old and elite about any of that?

12 years from retirement would put you at 53...i'd say that's old.

Riding beater bikes your entire life probably gives you the idea that "what's good enough for me is good enough for them!". I guess it's not quite elitism, but it's close enough. There's better alternatives out there now...no need to be riding a 15 year old bike, when you could be riding a 3 year old bike. Not that newer is always better, but new riders seem to appreciate not having to work on their bikes every day...that's for the more dedicated or addicted of us.

Yea I do…. the EX250 is a UJM chassis with an undersized engine. Get “any” UJM with a mid-sized engine was my point. That’s all. You seemed to be offended by this and need some line of rational logic to counter it? Jeez….

Haha...i respectfully disagree. The chassis, and feeling, from a bike like a old UJM, to a bike like a ninja 250, is significantly different. Apparently, you're not much of a performance rider, so i wouldn't expect you to understand why the 250 feels so much better in the corners than an older, heavier bike.

fixed.....

Obviously, because i've never raised children, i have no idea how beginner bikes work. Obviously. How could i have missed such a clear correlation!

I clearly don't respect your "experience" on motorcycles because you've said nothing to prove that you have experience than matters. There's a saying that says "Most people have the same year of driving experience over and over". Your own statements about motorcycles and the lack of technological progression in the last 30 years clearly shows this...I'll take the statements of a friend of mine, many years older than both of us, as well as my own experiences riding older bikes, over your statements about the lack of technical progression of motorcycles.

What IS my choice of bike? Is this how you judge other riders, by what they ride? What if I rode an R6 would that impress you that I am worthy of posting a suggestion or opinion to a first time rider? Clearly your age and lack of wisdom shows in this statement. Times have changed? How would you know? IMO the only thing that has changed about riding motorcycles from 1973 is that more people are on the road and wear helmets and protective gear nowadays and participate on race tracks as a hobby. Improvements in technology are relatively moot. I could navigate my /5 just as reasonably fit in traffic as your Z6? What’s your point about times a changin’? That you can go faster now?

Haha. You're missing the point. Your lack of understanding of how bikes have changed and evolved over the last 30 years clearly shows that you're not a rider who commonly anything close to the limits of the performance of your motorcycles. Note that this does not extend only to track use, as there are occasions where you must use the braking, acceleration, and other abilities of your motorcycle in order to get you out of situations like people merging into you, stomping on their brakes for no reason, etc. etc...and you come out and say that you'd be just as happy on an old Z1 as you would a new SS 600? Or perhaps, an SV with ABS? My point is that bikes have evolved since then. They brake, accelerate, turn, and in general, do everything better now than they did even 10 years ago, as well as offering better feel than before...and it's important that these newfound abilities are presented to a new rider in a managable way. The advances in tire technology alone are astounding...

Also, i would know because i've ridden bikes that were made back in those days. The suspension sucked, the engines were wheezy and underpowered compared to modern standards, if you had the misfortune of riding one with vintage tires...no comment needed on those.

Sure, many of them were a hoot to ride, especially with modernized suspensions, etc., but i wouldn't recommend them to beginners when there's many more managable and cheaper solutions out there.

All I said was a 250cc bike is too small to hold onto for any length of time and why not buy a bigger UJM. Yea, I said it was only good for courier gigs and MSF schools, and that was exaggerated and clearly offensive to you I apologize. Truth be told, since you threw up the “my kid” scenario; If my kid took to the freeway, I’d rather have him on a GS or EX 500 than a 250.

Yes, and it was a fun little bike I have to admit. But a small bike nonetheless that one quickly outgrows.

Your opinion, while noted, doesn't seem to be in line with the opinions of many other riders...see ninja250.com....furthermore, see excellent riders like Gary J who are happily riding the "quickly outgrown" ninja250, as well as race classes revolving around the 250.

I agree, it's not the best mount for full on freeway use...but it has a variety of advantages that a large bike doesn't have, small size, light, easy to handle, etc. etc, many of which are significant selling points for a beginner rider. You apparently feel that the ability to cruise at 90+ is more important than anything else. Hell, a ninja250 will leave most sportsters for dead on the freeway, and you don't hear anyone complaining about the lack of freeway ability of those...most cruiser style bikes don't run very well significantly above 100, not to mention the windblast...

http://sacramento.craigslist.org/mcy/285842060.html found this one within 1 minute of searching, maybe not the deal of the century but the point is, there are many.

But apparently you get kickbacks from Kawasaki so it won’t work.

Boys need not post beyond this point..... [/B]

Hmm, well, i'm in santa cruz, not sacramento...so that probably has something to do with it. Furthermore, than bike is 7 years older than the 250 that i linked, has had a "rebuild", although no paperwork, needs a new battery...no listing of the mileage...All of the things i covered earlier, in my previous post, which you apparently neglected to read.

Thus far, you still have utterly failed to come up with ANY reason as to why someone should not be buying a newer bike for the same price. Your advice doesn't hold any real weight, and you've failed repeatedly to come up with a good reason to buy an old bike with a rebuilt engine over a newer one with a more modern suspension and the ability to be upgraded if need be. I'm sorry that there's apparently a harsh awakening here as to how motorcycles have changed in the last 30 years, but the world goes on!

Edit: Oh, it's worth adding, that i would love it if any manufacters would bring over the nice i4-250's or 400's from overseas...I want a CBR400...

Then i wouldn't be stuck talking for Kawasaki, either...and there'd be a variety of beginner bikes out there, the 400 racing class would be easier to find bikes for...oh so many good things.

 

[JakesKTM]

I clearly don't respect your "experience" on motorcycles because you've said nothing to prove that you have experience than matters.

?? WTF ??? You are one bizarre motherfucker.... Go away........

 

[yella600rr]

Hi, My name is Theresa and I am one of the few married females with kids that post on this forum so if you need someone to mentor your introduction to BARF and motorcycles please PM me.

How is your motorcycle purchase going for you?

Take care,
T

for the record.. i apologize for all these NOOB posts.


so if you are not aware, i am going to take my MSF in 2 weeks and i would like to start saving for a bike. my quandary is, what type of bike should i be saving up for?

a piece of shit thing, cheap, that i ride around learning, get used to, not afraid to drop/unpretty it, running the risk of mechanical problems that i am unfamiliar with (max price: $1500)

or something pretty, relatively new/low mileage, that shouldn't have very many, if any then cheap, mechanical problems but that i am scared to ... well unpretty it (max price: $3000)



thoughts?


-kathryn

aka
hugen00b

 

[Z3n]

?? WTF ??? You are one bizarre motherfucker.... Go away........

Come back when you have something to contribute to the thread. Until then, keep your juvenile snipes to yourself.

To everyone else, i'm sorry that this degenerated into what it did, I was hoping he would come forward with some valid reasons why someone should be buying an older bike over a newer one, but i guess that was expecting too much.

 

[onlytb4ever]

you guys leave really long posts...

its almost like myspace fighting.


btw thanks theresa!