So you want a sportbike for your 1st bike....

ceo012384 · 06-18-2008, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cutty72

After track day one, I can say when track riding, starting out smaller will definatly improve your abilities more.
I found myself "making up" for my poor technique with the motor in the straights.
With a 600 or smaller one would be forced to learn better cornering to get the same lap times.

This may be true if you only gauge your progress with lap times, but that is a silly thing to do anyways. I only barely started looking at them recently, and I still don't use them much. Smoothness and lines are a million times more important than laptimes. Pictures and video are priceless tools to help you gauge your progress.

One issue is that very small displacement bikes take very different lines and don't brake as much. Learning to brake hard and trailbrake is an important skill.

A 600 is not a bad bike to learn to ride on the track.

Cutty72 · 06-18-2008, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ceo012384

This may be true if you only gauge your progress with lap times, but that is a silly thing to do anyways. I only barely started looking at them recently, and I still don't use them much. Smoothness and lines are a million times more important than laptimes. Pictures and video are priceless tools to help you gauge your progress.

One issue is that very small displacement bikes take very different lines and don't brake as much. Learning to brake hard and trailbrake is an important skill.

A 600 is not a bad bike to learn to ride on the track.

that's my point. Me learning on the 1125 is not the best. I can compensate with shear power.

Crazy · 06-18-2008, 09:47 PM

blah blah blah... been there done that (I'm still on a "beginner bike", after a 250). people are going to get what they want and can pay for in the end, the best we can do is steer them towards the gear, get them to take the MSF, and try to give them some sort of understanding/ respect of the power of their bike.

No Worries · 06-18-2008, 11:22 PM

Take a look at the horsepower/torque curves of mid-90's 600's. March, 1995 issue of Motorcyclist compared 600's and listed top torque average of 43 lb./ft. at 9,500, and horsepower around 90 at 11,500. Look at the latest 600 comparison I could find, the June, 2003 issue of Motorcyclist. Torque averages around 45 at 11,500, and horsepower averages around 105 at 13,000. The latest 600's are probably higher.

Anybody see a trend? The torque's about the same, but peaks 2,000 rpm higher on the newer bikes. Torque is what pulls you away from a stop. Torque is what newbies need. The lower in the rpm-band it occurs, the easier to ride from stop signs and around curves.

The racers are saying "what about the weight? What about the horsepower? Okay, the 1995's averaged 465 pounds, wet of course. The weights were thrown off by the heavy-487 pound Suzuki RF600R (the 600 Gixxer wasn't produced in 95). The 2003's averaged 425 pounds, thrown off by the "heavy" 445 pound 600RR. Who cares about horsepower on the street.

But even with the extra weight, those older 600's would be much easier for a newbie to learn on and enjoy, than the peaky, newer 600's. I would recommend an old F3 for a newbie, or even get one myself.

06-18-2008, 09:47 PM	#3
Crazy I'm home take me drunk Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Champaign, IL Moto: 2005 SV650s blue Posts: 430	blah blah blah... been there done that (I'm still on a "beginner bike", after a 250). people are going to get what they want and can pay for in the end, the best we can do is steer them towards the gear, get them to take the MSF, and try to give them some sort of understanding/ respect of the power of their bike. __________________ Memento mori

06-18-2008, 11:22 PM	#4
No Worries Keyboard Racer Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Mile High City Moto: Old Superbikes Posts: 1,016	Take a look at the horsepower/torque curves of mid-90's 600's. March, 1995 issue of Motorcyclist compared 600's and listed top torque average of 43 lb./ft. at 9,500, and horsepower around 90 at 11,500. Look at the latest 600 comparison I could find, the June, 2003 issue of Motorcyclist. Torque averages around 45 at 11,500, and horsepower averages around 105 at 13,000. The latest 600's are probably higher. Anybody see a trend? The torque's about the same, but peaks 2,000 rpm higher on the newer bikes. Torque is what pulls you away from a stop. Torque is what newbies need. The lower in the rpm-band it occurs, the easier to ride from stop signs and around curves. The racers are saying "what about the weight? What about the horsepower? Okay, the 1995's averaged 465 pounds, wet of course. The weights were thrown off by the heavy-487 pound Suzuki RF600R (the 600 Gixxer wasn't produced in 95). The 2003's averaged 425 pounds, thrown off by the "heavy" 445 pound 600RR. Who cares about horsepower on the street. But even with the extra weight, those older 600's would be much easier for a newbie to learn on and enjoy, than the peaky, newer 600's. I would recommend an old F3 for a newbie, or even get one myself.