VStrom vs SV-S

Discussion in 'Bay Area Bikers' started by Nicholas C. Weaver, Apr 7, 2004.

  1. The Demo Ride Junkie Rides Again..

    This time, on a friend's SV-650-s. A short trip, down public streets,
    on the freeway, a few twisted onramps...

    Boy is this bike different from Stephanie's V-Strom 650....

    The engine feels very similar, the "retuning for low end" on the
    Vstrom doesn't seem to make any difference, just a 500 RPM lower
    redline and therefore a little more off the top, where you use it the
    least. This makes me think the retuning was actually correct, as the
    VStrom is pushing an extra 65 lbs (417 lbs dry vs 368 lbs, plus an
    extra 16 lbs of excess gasoline), but doesn't feel any weaker at a
    given low RPM.

    But there is where the similarities end.



    The SV-S is very compact, and the ergos are actually somewhat
    extreme. This is a full sportbike seating position: high pegs, low
    bars, clip-ons below the tripple clamp. And the SV-S is a sportbike.
    No question about it.

    The V-strom however is a tall flying-couch time: Wide bars, tall
    seat, tall pegs (but the seat is so high that the pegs don't matter).


    On the road, the V-Strom engine mounting makes it much smoother. The
    SV is rather buzzy, the mirrors blurring into unrecognition at 7k
    RPM. The V-Strom has almost none of the high-frequency vibration, and
    what there is only goes into the seat, not the bars.

    The V-Strom also has much better wind protection, although there is a
    bit more turbulance. As a freeway/commuter, teh Vstrom is vastly
    superior.


    I didn't really get a chance to push the SV on turning, but it seemed
    very good on ye-bog-standard LA curving onramp.



    My personal verdict: The SV-s is a real nice, real world sportbike:
    as fast as anything in the real world. I understand why they sell em
    by the boatload.

    The V-Strom is a better general bike. It gives up some in the
    twisties (not as much as you'd think, because of the 2x leverage on
    the bars), in echange for much better comfort, wind protection,
    distance ability (1up or 2up), and convenience (remote preload, 5.8
    gallon gas tank, etc).

    And it is amazing how two VERY DIFFERENT bikes can be made with the
    same engine. I'm just waiting for suzuki to do a 650 mini-power
    cruiser with that engine.
     
    Nicholas C. Weaver, Apr 7, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. But when you are dealing with mini-cruisers (650 size), it would be
    really nice to have ~70hp instead of ~40hp.

    Anyway, alot of the mini-japanese cruisers aren't single pin, but
    offset pin anyway, for vibration reasons.
     
    Nicholas C. Weaver, Apr 7, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 15:21:23 +0000 (UTC),
    Now you know why Europe is choked with dualsports and trailies.
     
    Demetrius XXIV and the Gladiatores, Apr 7, 2004
    #3
  4. Oh yes. I have so fallen into the cult of the Giant Trailie. Who
    cares if every single one is either Ugly, Pugly, or Fugly?

    Given a choice between my VFR (y2k) and my GF's V-Strom 650, I'd
    select the Vstrom in a hot second. Its just such a better all-round
    bike.

    And I'm definatly going to demo the Capo-Nord at the Sears Point
    races.
     
    Nicholas C. Weaver, Apr 7, 2004
    #4
  5. None of these cruisers take advantage of the modern, sportbike twins.

    I'd love to see a cruiser based on either the RC51, TL1000, or SV650
    engine, given the more upright "retro" riding position of the
    sportster/Bonneville/etc.
     
    Nicholas C. Weaver, Apr 8, 2004
    #5
  6. Actually, you just proved my point. The RC51 wakes up at <3k RPM
    (which isn't very far off idle), producing >80% of the peak torque,
    and stays strong for the entire 10k revv range. The peak torque of 72
    ft/lbs.

    Compare this to the Road Glide which is only good from 1.2k to 5.5k,
    roughly the same peak torque and shape (actually, LESS flat), and
    craps out of power so much earlier.

    Just to add insult to injury, the RC51 uses only 2/3rds the
    displacement!

    If you gear it low, especially first gear (say have first gear top out
    at ~30-35 MPH, 6th top out at ~130 MPH), you will rip the poor
    cruiser-rider's ARM off if he dares open the thing around town,
    smoking a huge line of rubber down the road.

    And the weight add doesn't need to be that much: you can use the
    engine as a stressed member, even in a boring cradel-frame, as the 90
    degree twin is well balanced. You could proabbly top-out the weight
    at ~500 lbs if you did it right as well. Such a beastie could eat
    V-Rods for breakfast.
     
    Nicholas C. Weaver, Apr 8, 2004
    #6
  7. On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 18:26:05 +0000 (UTC),
    They have much better looking ones in Europe. Kinda like they took the
    NX, ran with it and never looked back.
     
    Demetrius XXIV and the Gladiatores, Apr 9, 2004
    #7
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.