off idle

[Guest]

I am new to the list and thought I would throw out this question. If you were going to choose a (mostly) commuter bike from the following choices what would it be? A KLR 650, Buell Blast, Harley 883 or a Ninja 500. I am also looking at the new Kawasaki "retro" W650 and am very interested in the "soon to be released" Triumph Bonneville. Out of the few bikes I have had I really enjoyed tooling around on a Honda XL600 so I am a bit familiar with thumpers. I guess my only reservation with the KLR is wehat it would be like on, say, a weekend trip to Tahoe or up the coast. Seems like the others mentioned might be better at freeeway speeds but correct me if I am wrong. Thanx in advance, Patrick McKee pmckee@... ====================================== Excelsior Services, Inc. http://www.baypi.com 4200 Park Boulevard, #200 Oakland, CA 94602 Toll-Free (877) 235-2798 California Private Investigator-- #19123 Covert Surveillance Equipment- Rental, Sales, Service Process Service ======================================

[Ted Palmer]

Patrick McKee wrote:

> If you were going to choose a (mostly) commuter bike from the following > choices what would it be? A KLR 650, Buell Blast, Harley 883 or a Ninja > 500. I am also looking at the new Kawasaki "retro" W650 and am very > interested in the "soon to be released" Triumph Bonneville.

All very different bikes with their own individual appeal. If you expect that you won't ever need any off-sealed-road ability, then a dedicated road bike might be better. Road bikes generally have better brakes, have stickier tyres available and aerodynamics slightly better suited to highway speeds. Mister_T

[jirvine@nmsu.edu]

At 08:38 PM 10/7/00 -0700, Patrick McKee wrote:

>I am new to the list and thought I would throw out this question. > >If you were going to choose a (mostly) commuter bike from the following >choices what would it be? A KLR 650, Buell Blast, Harley 883 or a Ninja >500. I am also looking at the new Kawasaki "retro" W650 and am very >interested in the "soon to be released" Triumph Bonneville.

I guess it depend somewhat on the type and length of commute. A commuter should be economical, require little maintenance, and be rock solid in reliability. That would steer me away from a Harley/Buell. It also needs some power at a useable RPM, the KLR has enough. I don't like using a bike that I have a lot of money into if I'll be wracking up a lot of miles doing the commute. I've been doing 25 a day on the KLR at speeds from zero to 75. It works well. One day a week I use the XX just to feel real horsepower (-: JI NM

[Steve Davis]

I've owned both; they are rock solid and some of the most maintenance free motorcycles I've ever owned. Still, a KLR or F650 is probably better in the urban environment; lighter with tighter turning radius. sd ----------

>From: jirvine@... >To: Patrick McKee , DSN_klr650@egroups.com >Subject: Re: [DSN_klr650] Commuter Bikes >Date: Sun, Oct 8, 2000, 7:27 AM > > A commuter > should be economical, require little maintenance, and be rock solid in > reliability. That would steer me away from a Harley/Buell.

[Dale Johnson]

I use my Y2K KLR to commute.. I commute 150 miles a day.. I have had my KLR since March and have put almost 17000 miles on it. I love it. Not only do I commute on it but I also get to take it off-road. (Thanks Cal-Posse I had a great time yesterday.) Best of both worlds Dale

[Joe Smith]

> >If you were going to choose a (mostly) commuter bike from the following > >choices what would it be? A KLR 650, Buell Blast, Harley 883 or a Ninja > >500. I am also looking at the new Kawasaki "retro" W650 and am very > >interested in the "soon to be released" Triumph Bonneville.

Theres a lot of variables in what people call a commute but assuming about twenty miles each way in all weather except snow I think I would say the Harley 883. Why? 1. HD myth to the contrary (mostly perpetuated by people who have never owned one) I have found the ones I owned to be about as reliable as anything else. 2. The Sportster with belt drive, hydraulic valves, maintenance free battery is low maintenance and what it does need is either easily done at home or cheap to have done. 3. A wide range of accessory wind screens as well as luggage racks and saddle bags abound for the 883. 4. Sportsters get excellent fuel economy, mine usually ran between 50 and 60 mpg. 5. Finally, the biggest single reason is resale value. Depreciation is a huge cost of operating motorcycles and Sportsters depreciate less than anything else you mentioned. This, more than any other factor, would sway the decision to the Sportster. Now of course, if some of the machines could be purchased in perfect condition used, for a substantial reduction in price, this could help offset the depreciation. The other bikes you mention would probably be satisfactory. I am not especially impressed with the Blast and don't believe it would sell well. The Kawasaki W650 would probably be very good except that there is not much aftermarket around it yet and unless you get one highly disounted, $6495 is about $1500 too much for it, especially when Suzuki sells their awesome SV650 for $5395. The Ninja 500 is a nice bike if you have good parking conditions, I would not like to think about the expensive fairing damage if it gets knocked over while parked on the street. I want to like the new Bonneville but truthfully, I'm not sure Kawasaki didn't out English the English with their W650, the styling just isn't quite right. Another fine commuter, if you can find one, is the Honda PC800. I can't stand the idea of owning it personally but I do admit to its practicality in light of the protection the fairing and windscreen offers and the lockable luggage space, its just not very pretty to me. Joe S 96 KLR650 96 GL1500SE 99 DR350SE 99 900 Monster Joe S 96 KLR650

[Christopher Forrest Elledge]

===Orig Mess=== From: Patrick McKee If you were going to choose a (mostly) commuter bike from the following choices what would it be? A KLR 650, Buell Blast, Harley 883 or a Ninja 500. ===End Mess=== I will only comment [here] on what I know; not rumors and the like: Have you seen / ridden the Blast? I would not recommend it unless you are very small in frame and weight. It is a very small, weak bike. Every model of every Buell ever produced has been recalled for something or other; and the somethings are usually for major component / functions. I owned a Ninja 500 before they had those Ninja stickers. They were and still are EX500s. The EX shares pretty much nothing in common mechanically with the bigger Ninjas. I thought it made a fine commuter with [like the others you mention] not a whole lot of weather protection. EXs are easy to work on, and Kaw has been cranking them out for years, so parts and reliability are proven. The intended seating position is relativly comfortable; however my 6'4" frame was way too leggy for the bike. Good luck; hope this helps. Chris Elledge Roanoke VA __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free! http://photos.yahoo.com/

[Dreas Nielsen]

> If you were going to choose a (mostly) commuter bike from the following > choices what would it be? A KLR 650, Buell Blast, Harley 883 or a Ninja > 500. I am also looking at the new Kawasaki "retro" W650 and am very > interested in the "soon to be released" Triumph Bonneville. > > Seems like the others mentioned might be better at freeeway > speeds but correct me if I am wrong. >> > Patrick McKee

I commute on the KLR, a route that includes about 15 miles of highway at 65-80 mph (true). I have never ridden any of your other candidates, but can tell you that the KLR is happy to run at those speeds for hours on end. Because of its windage and light weight, however, the KLR is best kept out of the wake of big trucks when at speed on the highway. I think a Triumph Tiger might actually be a better commuter bike for highway running, because it is heavier and has a lot more power, but at twice the price it is nothing like twice the bike. And in town or the twisties, it's greater weight and lower cornering clearance would reduce the fun factor. Dreas

[Mark]

At 8:38 PM -0700 10/7/00, Patrick McKee wrote:

>I am also looking at the new Kawasaki "retro" W650

What's the point? $6500 for a new old-tech bike is nuts. If you want a bike like that, you'd be better off getting a pristine '77 KZ650 for $1500 and use the cash you saved for a new KLR650. Mark B2 A2

[thesquasher@hotmail.com]

If you can get one , the best bang for the buck commuter bike would be the Suzuki SV650. You may also want to look at the Suzuki GS500 or the Kawasaki 750 naked strret bike. I like the KLR but think from your four choices below the Ninja 500 would be a good choice (commuter only). The Harley 883 cost too much and vibrates more than the KLR. Both the KLR and Buell blast are single cylinder thumpers. But I think the Buell is only 500cc and costs more $$$. I think the W650 is too much $$$ for what you get. To me the KLR sits up too high to really zip through traffic (I know alot of people are going to disagree with that). I don't know anything about the Triumph.

--- In DSN_klr650@egroups.com, Patrick McKee wrote: > I am new to the list and thought I would throw out this question. > > If you were going to choose a (mostly) commuter bike from the following > choices what would it be? A KLR 650, Buell Blast, Harley 883 or a Ninja > 500. I am also looking at the new Kawasaki "retro" W650 and am very > interested in the "soon to be released" Triumph Bonneville. > > > > Thanx in advance, >