Page 1 of 2
commuter bikes
Posted: Sat Oct 07, 2000 10:39 pm
by 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
======================================
commuter bikes
Posted: Sat Oct 07, 2000 11:15 pm
by 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
commuter bikes
Posted: Sun Oct 08, 2000 8:29 am
by 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
commuter bikes
Posted: Sun Oct 08, 2000 11:02 am
by 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.
commuter bikes
Posted: Sun Oct 08, 2000 12:22 pm
by 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
commuter bikes
Posted: Sun Oct 08, 2000 12:47 pm
by 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
commuter bikes
Posted: Sun Oct 08, 2000 1:55 pm
by 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/
commuter bikes
Posted: Sun Oct 08, 2000 3:16 pm
by 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
commuter bikes
Posted: Sun Oct 08, 2000 3:26 pm
by 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
commuter bikes
Posted: Sun Oct 08, 2000 7:12 pm
by 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,
>