It all depends, Bro. I have to go with a big honkin' dualsport type bike. I think the low speed skills will develop faster from them (this is assuming a fella doesn't already have a pure dirt bike, too) and confidence in sliding or minimal traction situations is boosted.
I believe the panic reflex is the most dangerous part of motorcycling and anything that can be done to get a rider used to pushing past that to trusting his bike to follow his inputs, even past his comfort zone, is critical to collision and injury avoidance.
I gotta go with the KLR650, BMW F650 in various iterations, BMW 800 GS and S, DRZ400s and SM, KTM 640Adv... You get the picture.
I like - and will give it careful consideration. I'll be perusing the Iwanta ads this evening.
The height of the dual sports is a limiting factor.... though there is something to be said for dropping a bike over and over again without costing any money.
Given that... a DR350 should well be considered.
I was thinking about the 250...way too small for me. Maybe I'll check the 500. I don't care to get into the 1000 class ever anyway. The amount of damage I did to myself on skateboards and bicycles makes me realize that I would probably kill myself with too much power.
dr350 does indeed merit consideration, Nate.
craigslist.org, also, porcus.
My first bike was Bultaco Matador.
Certainly not what Porcus is in the market for, but I loved that bike...
My first bike was a Honda CL 360. The second was a Yamaha 400. When I started riding anything over 250 cc was a "big" bike.
I kinda like the idea of getting one of these...
http://www.vostokmotors.com/Imag...ont-Kiev-
CU.JPG
Mainly because I'm a military buff, a Russophile, and I'd be the only guy in town (hell, maybe the state) with one. It's a copy of the German WWII bike. And as for the EOTWAWKI scenario I'm guessing there's no electronics on board sophisticated enough to be vulnerable to EMP.
I had a Yamaha 80 when I was a kid. The clutch didn't work so you had to shift when the rpms were right. It also didn't have a kick starter so I had to push start it. Oh, one last thing, the shocks were worn out so it bottomed out a lot.
Dad bought it for $75 and we sold it for $75. I got several years of good riding out of that thing.
I bought a used 400cc bike, probably a Honda, when I lived in Monterey. I really couldn't afford it at the time and had buyer's remorse big time. I just gave it back to the dealership.
Only had it for a few days. It was a lot of fun though.
I just don't have the same wanderlust or need for speed that I did when I was younger. I've always been risk averse but even more so now.
If I ever bought a bike it would be for purely practical purposes. I'd want the most bullet proof, lowest maintenance, and easiest to ride hunk of metal I could find.
I love my Ninja 250...'nough said.
For a chick without experience, I wouldn't recommend anything higher than a 500cc bike for starting out.
It all depends, Bro. I have to go with a big honkin' dualsport type bike. I think the low speed skills will develop faster from them (this is assuming a fella doesn't already have a pure dirt bike, too) and confidence in sliding or minimal traction situations is boosted.
I believe the panic reflex is the most dangerous part of motorcycling and anything that can be done to get a rider used to pushing past that to trusting his bike to follow his inputs, even past his comfort zone, is critical to collision and injury avoidance.
I gotta go with the KLR650, BMW F650 in various iterations, BMW 800 GS and S, DRZ400s and SM, KTM 640Adv... You get the picture.
Damnit. Delete that please.
AP,
Your lookin' at BMW, Goldwing, or Kawasaki Concours.
My first bike was a Yamaha 100cc 2 cycle. I call it my injury bike.
I know that's not the question, but I must keep my reputation.
My first was a Yamaha DT180 2smoke.
Having never ridden the Ninja 500, but having had some saddle time on an older Ninja 750... There is NO FREAKING WAY I'd recommend a Ninja as a first bike. You're nuts. That thing will get you killed.
First bikes should be whatever you call a normal street bike (not a cruiser, not a crotch-rocket, not a touring bike). A Honda Nighthawk kind of bike (CB450, CB500, etc), something around 500cc or less. They handle well, you can pick them up when you drop them, they're cheap, they have a low center of gravity, a low seat height, and they don't have twitchy steering. Any bike over 200cc will have enough power to get out of it's own way (top speed of probably around 80mph), and you don't want to ride with a passenger for the first few years anyway.
The problem with crotch-rockets is that those short-wheelbase bikes tend to be twitchy at low speeds, and they have a higher center of gravity than you really want (the engines tend to sit higher to give better cornering clearance). Beginners are really bad about dropping their bikes over at stop signs, crotch-rockets are a bad bike to do that to.
Cruisers have the wrong seating position for beginners. You want a more aggressive stance, but not as aggressive as the sport bikes. With a cruiser you feel like you're just hanging on to the bike rather than really getting the "magic carpet" effect.
Dirt bikes are nice to learn on, provided you're young enough to take a few spills. Dirt bikes tend to be VERY light and easy to handle. Those are the characteristics you want in a street bike. The problem with dirt bikes is that you need a ladder to get on the dang things.
Bill
The 500 is not a sportbike by any standard.
Its a staple at MSF courses all over the world.
I learned to ride on a Honda 929. It weighs 370 pounds and dyno'd over 160 horses.
The difference in modern bikes and the bikes that terrified you in your youth is smooth predictable power delivery.
The 929 never did anything I didn't ask it to do... there were never suprises.
The 500 is the same way... except with about 1/3 the horse power.
Don't tell me Kawa is diluting the Ninja name! They're gonna drop some plastic and decals on a Rebel and call it a Ninja?! Dang. At least when Honda built a mini-bike they gave it it's own brand. The one I rode was a freaking scalpel.
Ok, I looked at a photo of a ZX10R (an actual Ninja).
http://www.baysideperformance.co...s/boz/07-
R1.jpg
and compared it to this new "Ninja"
http://www.ninja500r.info/pics/
n...ja500grey01.jpg
Look at the ratio of; seat-to-handlebar-to-foot pegs, and the fork angle.
The New and Improved "Ninja" has handlebars higher than the seat, and foot pegs forward of the seat. This gives a more up-right seating posture. The ZX10R has the front forts angled more vertical, which makes it twitcher at lower speeds, and not as stable at high speeds.
Looking at the engine, the ZX10R motor seems to be angled way more forward, this is probably an attempt at moving the center of gravity down while keeping the cornering clearance, the "Ninja" has a normal upright motor, with a massive crankcase sticking right out there waiting to scrape the pavement.
Ok, the little "Ninja" is probably a decent beginner bike. I can't imagine what Kawa was thinking to do this to such an iconic brand name.
Oh, check this out;
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/...ds-say-
MPs.html
Scratch Britian off the list of places to live.
DJ, you getting any riding in lately?
Nate: a lot of the guys on the Ninja250.org site seem to think the 500's extra expense over the 250 just isn't worth it. Take that with a grain of salt, but it's something to think about. I'd definitely test ride both before buying.
Bill, the Ninja 250 dissects curves just fine. It's not a power monster by any means, but it's hardly embarrassing to have one. I have guys on all sorts of bikes look shocked when I tell them it's the 250. They usually guess 600.
My Ninjette sure doesn't have the power of a ZX6, but it cuts up the twisties just by thinking about it. It's one agile bike.
I'm about due to get new tires and I cannot wait to see how much more I can get out of her. Everyone on the web seems to say the 250's stock tires suck. They seem decent to me. With stickier tires... I can't wait to hit the southern Indiana hills again.
That said, I cannot wait to get a bigger bike for touring.
Bill.. the 500 was originally designated the EX500.
So it wasn't considered a "ninja" until several years ago.
Its still not designated ZX... which is the real ninja moniker.
The 500 is a lot more bike than the 250... and used... they go for very similar money.
There's a lot going on with the engine angle and position, Bill. There has been a trend toward mass centralization of late and tweaking of front/rear weight proportion is being addressed to increase one effeect or another.
I have to disagree about learning on a true "standard". I would go one extreme or the other, for they are two different riding skill sets. What one learns on a cruiser is not going to translate on a sportbike and a fella will arrive at a sportbike with some very bad habits to break from a cruiser or even a standard. The problem being that learning on a standard will give the illusion that a sportbike isn't that different and some of those habits will be applied to bad effect. Then again, if all a fella is going to do is keep it between the lines, keep it upright, allow safe following distance, and observe the local speed limit then it's not really that big a skill set or 3/4 of the old fat fuckers wouldn't make it to hooters on Friday night.
What most folks consider a "sport bike" fork angle is not all that steep, Bill. Pull the plastic off one and take a peek at the "Sport touring" models. They look positively raked without the fairings. Some of the pure sport bikes have steep angles, but they are still the fastest bikes on the planet and rock solid at very high speed. Granted the original ZX10R needed a steering dampener in the worst way....
There are bikes that are pure firebreathers and lack the throttle sophistication Nathan alludes to, but they are known quantities and easily avoided if that's your bent.
Even the 2007 CBR 1000rr... as pure a fire breather as you'll find... still has awesome throttle control.
Same goes for the new zx10r and gsxr1000.
The days of witches brooms are long gone.
My first, also my current, bike is a '04 Suzuki GS500. It's a comparable bike to the Ninja, but the Ninja is a slightly better bike. The GS500 hasn't been updated since the late 80's other than to add fairings to it, which seems like a stupid move for a beginner bike, but it increased sales since it looks cooler now. At least until you drop it and crack the fairing.
I replaced the stock fork springs with some progressive springs which improved the ride quality greatly. The stock springs were a joke, they were about a foot long with a huge spacer taking up the rest of the room.
This is good info, because I'm keeping my eyes open for my first bike.
I have a few stupid newbie question for y'all:
1. We have a helmet law. Any advice on what kind? Full face, or not? What other protection is a good idea? (I always want to laugh the Harley types with their ass-less chaps)
2. Stopping. Do bikes generally brake better or worse than a car in an emergency?
Thanks
1) Full face helmet... or a modular flip up. Either way... you want a chin bar. As for other gear... You need all of it. Boots... Gloves... Jacket... Pants. All should be armored. I like hard armor... as it slides better. Sliding is good. When you start flipping... bones start breaking.
2) This depends on the bike. My old CM400 stopped like a semi truck. The CBR 1000f on the other hand would out break a lot of cars. It should be pointed out though that this is a matter of some debate.
Oh... on specific brands of helmets... Shoei... Arai... those are the rockstar helmets. HBC and KBC are excellent helmets for much less money.
JAC and I both very much like KBC's flip ups.
Two cents: My HJC flip-up is hellaciously loud at speed.
Definitely full-face, maybe flip-up - I never tried flip-ups. And the lighter weight the better, most serious injuries in crashes (not directly caused by impact) are neck injuries caused/exacerbated by the added weight of the helmet. Not that I'm a no-helmet fanatic, but I agree with some of their points. This weight thing, by the way, is the rational for the little half-helmets. A full-face helmet weighs about 3 pounds, an open face helmet weighs around 2.75 pounds, and a brain bucket weighs around 2.25 pounds. I don't think the weight savings is anywhere near a good trade-off. I've seen a few open-face helmets with built-in full-face shields, I don't see that these offer any advantages over the full-face helmets, maybe better ventilation, but I don't know about that.
The most common risk is flying debris; rocks kicked up by tires, bugs, rain, etc. You WILL have this stuff hit your face on a regular basis. An open face helmet with sunglasses is not enough protection, unless you have a full windscreen (maybe). Motorcycle visors are tougher than sunglasses, and do a better job of keeping lightweight stuff from swirling around your glasses and getting in your eye.
If you're riding in the rain, the rain will blow off a full-face helmet WAY better than it blows off glasses.
Those little vent things in helmets work really well.
Helmets are a great deal lighter. Actually... when one considers the advancement in gear over the last decade... its truely amazing.
We regularly have people walking away from 100+ mph accidents.
Bill,
You've been talking to cruiser idiots.
I don't believe for a second that there is any correlation between an increased incidence of neck injuries and the use of full face helmets. There is, however, an inverse correlation between crushed jaws, ground off noses, missing teeth and full face helmets. We call those asinine half helmets "brain buckets" for a reason.
Full face helmets are worn in competition for a reason. Racers fall down. A lot. They get back up and go again.
Fat cruiser fags with brain buckets fall off and die, eat through a straw for 6 months, or live to shit themselves the rest of their pathetic lives.
Seriously, Bill, the thought processes of your average chrome polisher borders on clinical retardation.
JAC isn't very opinionated on the matter.
http://jeff.dean.home.att.net/sw...net/
swisher.htm
This is a pic graphing impact sites on motorcycle accidents.
MM,
No, I suck. My bike hasn't made the move to TN yet.
it is telling that wearing a helmet is only reported to be able to have saved 40% of those killed or crippled.
Which is why a helmet is not enough.
ATGAT. ATGAT. A thousand times ATGAT.
I'm a fairly risk averse person. It's why I've only broken three bones in my life. I don't do something unless I'm willing to accept the consequences.
In all the riding I've done, motorcycle and bicycle, the most often seen injury was road rash. I've got scar tissue in some pretty weird places, meaning not just my elbows and knees. I've skinned the top of a foot because I was riding a bike with flip-flops on. Luckily it was low speed.
Falling off the back of the seat while laying the motorbike down will rip up the back of your thigh pretty good from the spinning tire and then jam gravel in it once you reach the road.
My knees and elbows are all scar tissue. One scrape was bad enough that if I bent my knee at all it would crack the scab.
If I ever get a motorcycle I will get full road rash protection, specially gauntlets. Your first impulse when going down is to put your hands out to help break the fall. I hate skinned up palms.
What are skid plates made of anyway? Delrin? Or something harder?
Skid Plates, AP?
I take it you mean whatever keeps your hide on while sliding down 30 grit road surfaces:
There are several materials for abrasion resistance; everything from cordura to kevlar to different leathers with kangaroo hide being the best. There are some garments made with hard plastic "elbow cup" type outer applications, but I don't see many. I have a tested (personally) and effective mesh riding jacket that did a fine job during a getoff at roughly 45mph that sees summer duty.
Under the outer shell of a jacket or pant is usually some sort of device to cushion and/or distribute shock; a pad of some kind. These come in two basic forms thick and soft, or thin and soft with a harder outer layer.
It all works well, and so long as you don't get squished by a vehicle, smash into a tree, or fall off a cliff you have a good chance to be reasonably unhurt.
Actually the armor is for impact. The skid protection comes from the material the gear is made of. A quality cortex suit will prevent road rash... everywhere.
As for feet... motorcycle specific boots are an absolute must.
Riding in flip flops?
Seriously?
The skid plates are probably nylon. Delrin is reasonably hard, but not all that hard, it's just easy to machine and very dimensionally stable - and very expensive. Any of the polycarbs or acrylics are harder than Delrin, and of course the phenolics are harder yet, but they'd be way too brittle for this application.
Personally, if I were designing skid plates, I'd start with nylon for cost, with fiberglass or one of the composite materials (Kevlar, et al) as reinforcement bands. The problem is that the thing has to take a shock first, the skidding is secondary. Abrasion resistance is kinda tough, you don't want a material that galls badly, and there's always a temperature problem. You can embed things like Teflon or glass fibers in some plastics to reduce galling and make the things more abrasive resistant, but all this adds cost. I'm thinking you're gonna end up with nylon or ABS.
I have a Nolan flip-up, it's nice since I wear glasses, I can put the helmet on without the chinbar catching the glasses and jamming them into my nose. I've tried putting my glasses on after I have the helmet on, but it's a pain trying to get the ear pieces between the foam and my ear.
It also has a wider field of view than my wife's full face KBC, for instance.
And mine is pretty loud too. It's not bad at city speeds, but at highway speeds it gets annoying.
This is a great discussion. I'm convinced that whatever bike I get, I can't skimp on gear.
You're better off skimping on the bike than skimping on gear. Good gear will probably last several bikes. And a nice bike won't help you in a fall.
The hard armor in my gear is ABS. I'm not sure JAC is as impressed with the hard armor as I am... most of his stuff has padding alone.
On helmets... highway noise doesn't bother us much... because if we're droning down an interstate we've got an MP3 player going.
I'm about to get a new flip up.. I've narrowed it down to the KBC or the Nolan.
I was riding a bicycle when I was wearing the flip flops. I was going so slow I literally fell over while still on the bike, I hit a speed bump in a parking lot, and the foot didn't get off the pedal fast enough to stop the fall. It's just a strange skin scrape story. I imagine it looked suitably funny, almost Pytonesque.
Good advice. It will factor in to whatever decisions I make.
RE: "Riding in flip flops?"
I see it all the time. Young men in wife beaters and cut-offs...going like a bat out of hell and weaving in and out of traffic.
I don't object to this kind of behavior in the least. Your life, your choice.
There's a substantial 'good riddence' factor to consider as well. I wonder if its substantial enough to justify starting a 'Free Bikes for Wiggers' campaign. It might pay for itself by reducing entitlement program enrollments...assuming the cycle recipients haven't procreated yet.
Glad to see this post Nate. I've been thinking about learning to ride a motorcycle for several years now, and this is great stuff to know.
Assuming I don't want a Ninja 500 for whatever reason, what would be the most important factors to consider for a first bike?
Glad to see this post Nate. I've been thinking about learning to ride a motorcycle for several years now, and this is great stuff to know.
Assuming I don't want a Ninja 500 for whatever reason, what would be the most important factors to consider for a first bike?
ZP,
Smooth power delivery, good brakes, light steering, comfortable riding position, low (for you) seat height, toward the low end of the scale in weight class (the better to pick it back up), easy mount and dismount, hydraulic clutch, wind protection, low maintenance.
The manufacturers make "starter bikes" and advertise them as such. Read up on the eligible candidates and pick the one that makes you want to ride across the country.
If I was buying a street only starter bike to play on I would get an SV650, EX500 or 250. To travel an older sport touring bike would work; a Coucours, ST1100, FJR, Bandit. Stay away fromm the thoroughbred sportbikes, you cannot imagine the acceleration they can unleash and therefore cannot prepare for it. Best to work up to them. Something along those lines. If you just have to play cruiser fag ALL cruisers are starter bikes, but the Shadow 750 is the best handling one I have ridden to date.
I have a 35 mile commute (one way) and am considering a motorcycle for pleasure and to save on gas. I need to carry a briefcase or backpack (laptop and some files), but would rather it ride on the bike, not me.
Never ridden before. 6'1" 200lbs.
Is the Ninja 500 a good choice to consider? Commute is about 50% rural freeway, 50% city.
There's loads of luggage options for bikes; saddle bags (hard and soft) tank bags, little cooler looking things that sit above the brake light, etc. I personally like hard luggage - I've used two matching Pelican cases bungee-corded to the bike, that worked best for water-proofness, ease of use, and cost.
None of the soft luggage is waterproof enough for a bike (IMHO), and the hard luggage is debatable. Pelican cases do not leak. And I've never liked the way the soft luggage mounts, it pretty much just lays across the seat with a few small straps to hold it approximately in place - they're very prone to slippage. Decent hard saddlebags are a few hundred bucks - you can sink $500 into the bags and getting a decent mount job.
Re the "Ninja" for someone 200 lbs. I go about 200 and I've been on many older, smaller bikes (CB200, XR250, etc) - never a problem, plenty of power. And I've logged days and days on a CB550 and CX500.
500cc used to be considered a normal size for a bike, the 750 was viewed as the "V8" of the bike world.
Dave,
There are lots of options for carrying your stuff. For a laptop I would go with a backpack or mrssenger bag case, or if it small enough into a hard case type tailpack. JC Whitney has univeral tail packs that look like GIVI. Cheap and good and quick release.
Aerostich makes good stuff and is a good place to start. Best to buy a used bike with hard bags already on it. Let the other guy spend all that money - it won't increase the bikes value much.
Bill, It ain't 1975 anymore. Nate and I have logged thousands of miles with soft bags. They have more attachment points than you can use, and they come with rain covers. You DO need some sort of rack unless the bike is already set up for them. Those pelican cases are the shit, but they need to be mounted not bungeed. You Dork, I guess you had a milk crate strapped to the back of the CX??
The CX is the onee with the Guzzi type motor isn't it?
I love those guzzi twins...
yes... I know I should be embarassed... but they look freakin' cool.
Yeah, side-saddle twin, integrated fairing, cool bike!
And what was wrong with my milk crate?
Absolutly nuthin'.
Milk crates are cool! Don't let JAC fool you... he has a KLR and would never dream of leaving the house without zip ties!
I'll tell ya... if you have a backrest or a sissy bar... a bag back there is a great option. They slide ride on... ride perfectly... and most have hidden backpack straps on them... so when ya get to work... you just snatch it off and throw it over your shoulder.
I'm considering a setup like that for touring on the Vulcan.
Nate, Why is it important to have motorcycle specific boots?
Ankles and metatarsals don't heal right, Claymore. Best not to phuck them up in the first place.
Granted we can't walk around all the time in motocross boots, but there are some good boots that will limit ankle flexion a goodly amount thereby giving you an increased chance of escaping injury.
A lot of fellas wear "packer" type lace up boots (similar to old army boots). Then there are these: http://www.aerostich.com/catalog...ts-p-
16559.html
It's a somewhat common problem to get your leg stuck under the bike during a skid. You REALLY REALLLLY do not want to do this wearing flip-flops. Most motorcycle boots are seriously reinforced around the ankle. The problem with these kinds are that they're a real pain to walk around in for more than a few hundred yards.
Normal "work boot" and cowboy type boots generally don't have thick material on the uppers, and they can have either slick bottoms (cowboy boots) or not have a pronounced heel (many work boots). The pronounced heel makes it easier to keep your feet on the pegs, the grippy bottom helps when you hold the bike up with one leg on wet pavement at a stop sign.
I strongly recommend the Icon Field Armor boots. Take a good look at them... then compare them to the regular work boots you lace on.
Its a no brainer.
Let's talk budget for a second:
Figure 200 bucks or so for a helmet... you may get a better deal... but we're ball parking.
About 100 or so for good boots...
Good jacket? 150 or so...
Pants? another 100 or so...
Gloves? eh... anywhere from 35 to 75 bucks.
You should be geared up well for under 700 bucks.
On the other hand... you could easily spend that on a suit alone. First gear makes good stuff... check them out if money is a serious concern.
Dude the Icons look OK, but once a company starts makin' poser-wear I think it wise to steer clear.
In person examination might convince me otherwise, but guilty until proven innocent.
Hey, Bill
Eat your heart out:
http://lexington.craigslist.org/.../
699734244.html
I've examined the boots in question. I don't blame you for being skepital though.
1,500 bucks. Damn. That's a good deal. I don't know what he means by "too big", unless he weighs 300 pounds. The CX series was a really nice bike; shaft drive, water cooled, and they were considered pretty reliable even by Honda standards - a Hardly rider wouldn't know what to do with a CX. As a testimony to the reliability, one of the big complaints about the bike is that the cam chain only lasts 50,000 miles - this is viewed as a weakness.
That sounds like a pretty typical honda type complaint.
Similarly the BMW's aren't considered really broken in until they hit 50k... hell there are guys still riding around on late 90s 1000GS's... because the fancy new 1150s are still "unproven".... probably because there are only a few thousand of them with a 300,000 miles on them.
This has all been good info. I too have been looking into getting my first bike. I have looked at reviews on several and found the one on the entry-level bike from Buell to be the most intriguing. I am mostly looking at it from a commute type angle, so I probably will not be looking into going bigger in the future. I just need something to get be to and from work, easy on the gas, and not too expensive on the bank account.
I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on that bike and Buell in general. I know Nate has posted a pic of one of their sport bikes in the past and that is when I found out about the Buell Blast.
I've never ridden a buell blast... But I can tell you all buells handle extremely well. I do believe test rides are available. I would love to hear what you think after riding one.
Seems like a lot of folks don't stick with the blast long, but that may be because the bought with the intention of moving on. I have heard at least one very accomplished rider (track instructor) complement the handling. You might run into some issues with dealer service as a lot of hardley dealers are no carrying the buell line anymore.
Keep in mind it is more fun to ride a slow bike fast than a fast bike slow.
Buell Blast... a 500cc thumper.... I hope you have a short commute. I personally found a water-cooled two cylinder to have just a tad too much buzz at some RPM's, at least for multi-hour trips, but I never noticed it just tooling around town.
Here's a rather painful review;
http://www.popularmechanics.com/...rs/
1268541.html
Clutch feel and operation along with the brakes are excellent. The five-speed transmission, however, is less than stellar. We found false "neutrals" between every gear, and instead of "snicking" into First at a stop, there's much fanfare emanating from the gearbox with the sound of gears skipping over each other until they calm down and engage.
Did you say Harley makes this? Shocked. I'm Shocked.
Vibration? We thought you'd never ask. It's most noticeable at a standstill but acceptable at cruise. While it will run all day at 70 to 75 mph, megamile touring is not the Blast's long suit. Even after our daily commute of 25 or so miles one way, it took several minutes for us to become reacquainted with certain parts of our anatomy.
I thought it had a rotax mill. Guess rotax should have spec'd the transmission......
I thought HD did the drive train and Buell did everything else.
Dang it, I got to poking around on the Pop Mech website and came across this;
Must-Have Motorcycle Accessories
http://www.popularmechanics.com/...to/
4235875.html
http://www.bikez.com/
motorcycles..._400_t_1981.php
1981 Honda CM400. Great first bike. Freeway and logging roads, downtown and in the boonies. Frigid mountain passes, mega downpours and windy, windy country. A bit sluggish at passing speeds with a passenger, but we got by fine. Good times.
Only thing I did was add a much louder horn and a flashing brake light for city driving. Reliable, inexpensive and I didn't worry too much about it when it was parked on the curb at night.
HA!
That's Nates first bike, JRL!
Rock on! Nate, I shall raise my next glass of vino to your health. And, dude, as soon as the IRS gets me my pistol ownership stimulus check and I get my hands on that M40-A1 I may very well be lifting another in your honor.
My first bike was a 74 Honda XL70, which I got when I was about 12 or 13. I was looking for pics of it and found these on YouTube;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w...h?
v=wpyHxcPdUGI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q...h?
v=QNCwyd578bs
It was a great first bike. My first street bike was a 75 Honda CB200, which I got when I was 15.
http://www.motorbike-search-
engi...honda_cb200.jpg (mine had drum brakes front and rear)
My first bike is a Kawasaki Vulcan 900 Classic LT. Just got it a few weeks ago actually. Looking forward to a long summer of riding it.
oh, enough of this bike talk. I'm on Red Bull now for the first time ever. Thank Jamie.
Now, is time to introduce Nate to Skillet.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=wgiJkrAL9K4
here..enjoy.
y'all can have skillet too..for breakfast..with eggs and turkey sausage.
but not regular sausage..that's not kosher. No sirree..but I had a regular sausage with pancakes earlier! But I was being served, dammit!
Lotsa great stuff here. Thanks one and all. I'll throw in one last question.
For someone who's never ridden a motorcycle before (i.e. me), would it be best to take some sort of instructional course first, or get the bike and just learn with it?
If the course, can you recommend any?
MSF course, ZP. They will help you achieve the right level of paranoia and confidence in you machine.
That's Motorcycle Safety Foundation. Most dealers have information about local classes.
I'm 6'5". If I sat on a dinky little 500, I'd look like a monkey humping a coconut.
Thanks everybody,
I will look into a course even before I actually buy one. I want to know what I am doing before I test ride.
kind of like driving a car. Besides here in TX if you take a course you can bypass the driving test in getting your license.
Eaglewood, I live in TX also and recommend the MSF Course. I took it less then 2 months ago at the local community college. I hadn't even decided to get a bike until after I passed the class. I had little experience with motorcycles before the class and it helped me quite a bit. Also you can get lowered insurance rates after taking the class once you do get a bike.
Commenting by HaloScan
