Sleeper bikes | GTAMotorcycle.com

Sleeper bikes

bigpoppa

bigpoppa

Well-known member
Forum Sponsor
Any of you guys ever buy a bike that surprised you? Something that didnt seem all that on paper, maybe it didnt make the most power or wasnt the lightest but you ended up buying it and loving it?

Which bike was it?
 
I have a sleeper SP125. Just can't wake it up.
 
bigpoppa said:
Any of you guys ever buy a bike that surprised you? Something that didnt seem all that on paper, maybe it didnt make the most power or wasnt the lightest but you ended up buying it and loving it?

Which bike was it?
Click to expand...
My 1987 Honda CBR600 - it had no business (on paper) being as good as it was.
Another one that got away...
 
My old 2006 Honda CBR 600RR. I've ridden 600cc bikes from all the major jap brands but this Honda blew me away. Tons of power, amazing weight to power ratio, and was able to tear up any corner with so much confidence. Never had a single tire slip, and I loved the undertail exhaust setup.
 
Yamaha Radian. I had no idea what I was getting into when I bought it... so much fun. I can never own one again though, it's like a folded giraffe riding around on a tricycle - I don't think I would physically put up with that as well today
 
Power is a funny thing. My old Hawk GT made almost no power on paper, but it sure felt fun to ride. (Did 200 indicated, probably closer to 170-180 true speed, but I couldn't tell the difference). A buddy's Yamaha Seca II (awful bike) had very similar dyno numbers, but felt about as powerful as a damp dishrag. I can't articulate why, except the Hawk always felt ready to go, where the Seca always seemed to need a bit to catch up with throttle inputs. The noise changed, but there was always a lag to the oomph coming in.

On the other end of the scale, I'd love to have an axle dyno that told me how much power I actually use on the street with the Tuono. I'd be honestly surprised if I exceed 100-120 hp more than a few times per ride.

As for weight, I think that matters more for some than others. If you don't do quick transitions or drop a bike fast into corner entry, you'll rarely notice weight on the move. At least not in a way that a few suspension mods couldn't fix (shimming shock, for example). Then it becomes more about slow-speed handling and paddling around parking spots. For those, carrying weight low is as important as total weight, so heavy bikes can feel manageable, and medium bikes can feel heavy.

At least until you park nose down on a hill and need to push the bike back uphill to get turned around...
 
i loved my suzuki tu250x. this was my 2nd bike ever. it definitely has no power (something like 15hp lol). single 250. wide open throttle gets you to like 120km/h max. but it was one of those bikes where i'd always turn around to look at it again before walking off. i had a blast riding around ontario with it for a while.

tu250x.jpg
 
My 05 Electra glide was a surprise, the balance of the bike is very nimble for a full fledged touring bike
 
TK4 said:
My 1987 Honda CBR600 - it had no business (on paper) being as good as it was.
Another one that got away...
Click to expand...
A friend had one of these (Hornet). Not many plain Jane bikes have surprised me, that one did.
 
My old 98 Kawasaki ZX7, even though it was a bit on the heavier side, was really fun bike to ride with more than enough power.
 
Priller said:
Power is a funny thing. My old Hawk GT made almost no power on paper, but it sure felt fun to ride. (Did 200 indicated, probably closer to 170-180 true speed, but I couldn't tell the difference). A buddy's Yamaha Seca II (awful bike) had very similar dyno numbers, but felt about as powerful as a damp dishrag. I can't articulate why, except the Hawk always felt ready to go, where the Seca always seemed to need a bit to catch up with throttle inputs. The noise changed, but there was always a lag to the oomph coming in.

On the other end of the scale, I'd love to have an axle dyno that told me how much power I actually use on the street with the Tuono. I'd be honestly surprised if I exceed 100-120 hp more than a few times per ride.

As for weight, I think that matters more for some than others. If you don't do quick transitions or drop a bike fast into corner entry, you'll rarely notice weight on the move. At least not in a way that a few suspension mods couldn't fix (shimming shock, for example). Then it becomes more about slow-speed handling and paddling around parking spots. For those, carrying weight low is as important as total weight, so heavy bikes can feel manageable, and medium bikes can feel heavy.

At least until you park nose down on a hill and need to push the bike back uphill to get turned around...
Click to expand...
should be fairly simple to calculate, look at a stock dyno chart ( i assume your bike is stock), then pay attention to what rev range you typically use.
 
I expected my 82 RD350LC to be good but it was better.
 
My old vtr1000f.

100hp, 70 ft lbs. Flat torque curve. Didn't feel a rush of power, just pulled like a train.

Had springs and valving up front, and an ohlins shock.
14L tank was too small. 48mm throttle bodies were the largest Honda ever put on a street bike... drank fuel. I was looking for fuel at 100-120k, and walking by 160.

Its looks were an aquired taste.

100hp is the sweet spot for useable streetbike power.

Embarrassed some $$$ bmw owners (their words, not mine) at a bmw invite only trackday at Mosport RDT with it on sport touring tires... on my ugly clapped out 90,000km $2,000.00 beater.

It owed me nothing. Should have fixed it and kept riding it, but I wanted something brand new.

Insurance on it was b.s. for a nearly 20 year old bike.

Should have kept it.


Sent from my SM-G903W using Tapatalk
 
h
matt365 said:
My old vtr1000f.

100hp, 70 ft lbs. Flat torque curve. Didn't feel a rush of power, just pulled like a train.

Had springs and valving up front, and an ohlins shock.
14L tank was too small. 48mm throttle bodies were the largest Honda ever put on a street bike... drank fuel. I was looking for fuel at 100-120k, and walking by 160.

Its looks were an aquired taste.

100hp is the sweet spot for useable streetbike power.

Embarrassed some $$$ bmw owners (their words, not mine) at a bmw invite only trackday at Mosport RDT with it on sport touring tires... on my ugly clapped out 90,000km $2,000.00 beater.

It owed me nothing. Should have fixed it and kept riding it, but I wanted something brand new.

Insurance on it was b.s. for a nearly 20 year old bike.

Should have kept it.


Sent from my SM-G903W using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
honda needs to get back to making v shaped engine street bikes again
 
'98 Honda vtr1000f
1a9d76b6279605fc4774fd798ffb6b87.jpg


Sent from my SM-G903W using Tapatalk
 
I’ve only had 2 bikes that were more than I expected, both bikes scared me. An IT 400, unrideable, and a 74 H2 that was a handful and required 100% attention whoever I twisted the throttle.

cant say I loved either, would like to own both today.
 
bigpoppa said:
Something that didnt seem all that on paper, maybe it didnt make the most power or wasnt the lightest but you ended up buying it and loving it?
Click to expand...

Yes! My Guzzi V85. I don't want to sound like a fan boy, but so much greater than the the sum of its parts. Fantastic!
 
Evoex said:
should be fairly simple to calculate, look at a stock dyno chart ( i assume your bike is stock), then pay attention to what rev range you typically use.
Click to expand...
Not so simple at all, I don't think. A dyno run typically only measures full throttle power as it passes through that rpm from low to the limiter. Part throttle is complex enough, but then add time to full, lower part throttle to higher part throttle but not max, speed on the road, and the various ECU changes to the output and it'll be a long way from a normal graph. I try to ride with as steady a throttle as possible, and minimise anything more than light trail braking on twisty public roads, similar to the Pace concept. Without the WOT factor, power to the wheel is much harder to measure. Most of my throttle is on corner exit and I usually let off once on a straight, so it's rarely wide open.

It's all a bit academic, but explains why some bikes feel faster or slower than the peak hp number suggests they should...

Gearing also plays a huge part in 'butt feel', but doesn't show on a dyno. Bike magazine used to do thrust curves for each gear alongside the usual dyno curves, and it definitely was a more useful metric for road riding, but I think it's relatively complex to calculate and most folks are only looking at peak hp and how flat the torque curve is anyway, so they stopping printing it.
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom