# Which 1st motorbike?



## Dave_225Roadster (Mar 22, 2006)

I'm planning on taking my motorbike test (direct access) in April and want to get a bike soon after, but I have no idea what to get!

I'm totally new to bikes, so any advice on making the switch, suggestions for a good starter bike and an idea of general running costs would be appreciated.

I'm thinking probably around a 500cc, but in not in too high an insurance group. It will be for mainly for having fun on, with the occasional commute at weekends.

Cheers

Dave


----------



## jonah (Aug 17, 2002)

Hornet , Bandit 600, CBR 600 all are very good bikes for strting out on depending what you want.
I did the same as you and bought a CBR600 was a great bike and alot of fun.


----------



## mav696 (May 21, 2006)

Depends on what you want from it? Style? Comfort? Speed?


----------



## Blade_76 (Aug 11, 2004)

CBR600 all the way :wink:

Best all round bike, has been for years.


----------



## scavenger (Jun 25, 2002)

Depends how big/heavy you are and whether you want a touring or a more sports orientated bike.

I bought a Honda Fireblade as my first bike and learned on that. It was a very easy bike to ride.

If I were to buy now, I would be looking at Yamaha FZ1, Triumph Speed Triple or even a run-out Yamaha R1. The new R1 is out so you should get a cracking deal on last years model. I have an R1 and can't praise them highly enough.

You can kill yourself on anything, it's your throttle control and brain that help you learn how to ride. :wink:

Startup clothing will cost you roughly Â£1k. Don't skimp on cheap gear; your skin and head are quite important. Start with leather trousers, a good paddock jacket with armor, good boots and gloves. Look to spend Â£300/Â£400 on a helmet - you wont go far wrong with an Arai. Sidi Vertigo boots are good and sturdy.

You can progress to a full set of leathers in the future. You need a one piece/two piece that zip together leathers for track days.

As a "new" biker insurance will likely cost you Â£1k.

Rear tyres last about 3000 miles on a sports bike, and are approx Â£150. Fronts are around Â£120 and last abit longer, though I tend to get front and rear changed together as the front can square off and the bike doesn't tip in nicely to bends.

Best of luck, just go steady and try to learn to ride safely before going mental. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]


----------



## Dave_225Roadster (Mar 22, 2006)

CBR600 sounds good - a friend's got one as well and recommmends it, although he thinks it might be a bit much for my first bike.

I'm 6'2" and about 15 stone and I'd prefer a more comfortable style, so I think a touring would be better suited.

Two mates are asking for tickets to my funeral already.

Anybody know where's a good place to go for leathers + bike in the Manchester/Bolton area?

Dave


----------



## scavenger (Jun 25, 2002)

Dave_225Roadster said:


> CBR600 sounds good - a friend's got one as well and recommmends it, although he thinks it might be a bit much for my first bike.


 :lol: :lol: :lol:

What nonsense.

My opinion, though not worth much, is you are too big for a 600. You will be thrashing the tits off it and will probably get leg cramps due to peg/tank position after an hour in the saddle.

Take a look at a Honda VFR800 as an all rounder.


----------



## mav696 (May 21, 2006)

scavenger said:


> Dave_225Roadster said:
> 
> 
> > CBR600 sounds good - a friend's got one as well and recommmends it, although he thinks it might be a bit much for my first bike.
> ...


I think I would second the VFR800, possibly the V-Tech


----------



## Gizmo750 (Sep 16, 2004)

It really does depend on what you are looking for though.

How about a big trails type bike? Should suit your frame and they are a lot of fun. Or are you more a cruiser type of chap (i.e. Harley style)?

If its a sports bike you want then the CBR / VFR / Bandit / SV650 are all very good indeed.

Left of field though - how about an 883 Harley Sportster?


----------



## ag (Sep 12, 2002)

Z750 is fast enough with good handling. Reasonable priced insurance. Obviously not as quick as a sports 600, but easier to ride at speeds below 45mph. Very little wind protection means that speeds are kept down to below 100 most of the time.


----------



## SVStu (Dec 11, 2006)

My first and only bike is an SV650s, great bike for me and still makes me smile some 7 years on. Looking at your vital stats the thou might be a better choice for you. Twins are completley different in character to in line 4's so see if you can blag a ride before you buy.


----------



## Blade_76 (Aug 11, 2004)

*Scavenger* - Jesus, your a brave man getting a Blade as a first bike!!!!

I have been riding bikes since I was 16, bought my first blade on my 21st birthday and not changed from the blade (only to newer one).

*Dave* - I'd still go with the CBR 600 if I were you, but if its not what you fancy, then I would recommend a scrambler to learn on. Simply because they are easier to control (fantastic for the turn in the road in a test), if you do have the unfortunate thing happen and come off, it wouldn't cost much to repair (no fairing, they are tougher than sports bikes).

Having said that, your best bet is to get down to your local stealer and sit on a few bikes, see how they feel. I think you will find alot of the new sports bikes are getting smaller and smaller. One of the reasons I am still on a 98' Blade.


----------



## kenny ken (Oct 22, 2006)

Dave_225Roadster said:


> CBR600 sounds good - a friend's got one as well and recommmends it, although he thinks it might be a bit much for my first bike.
> 
> I'm 6'2" and about 15 stone and I'd prefer a more comfortable style, so I think a touring would be better suited.


Try looking at a Yamaha Thundercat. 600cc so you shouldn't get bored with it anytime soon, were Yamaha's sport's 600 when first launched but got overshadowed by the CBR600. They're also slightly bigger than the other 600 so should suit your size frame, strong engine and fantastic brakes. Cheap as well!!

This was my old one, was also my first bike. TPFT Â£545


----------



## slg (May 6, 2005)

kenny ken said:


> Dave_225Roadster said:
> 
> 
> > CBR600 sounds good - a friend's got one as well and recommmends it, although he thinks it might be a bit much for my first bike.
> ...


That was my first bike aswell, kept it for 9 months & 12k miles - then got the R1 :twisted:

Agree with the comments above about the Cat - great bike, good mid range aswell.


----------



## mac's TT (May 13, 2006)

my 1st bike was a honda cb 125 

Passed test and got a Kawasaki zzr 600 (nicked after 4 months)

Then a Kawasaki ZXR 750 J2(gitane blue) lovely bike.

Then 2 kids, thus TT. No more bikes 

Try a few out at the dealers, then import if you want to save Â£Â£Â£'s

Honda blackbird/blade would be my choice now

I wanted a Honda VFR (lovely bike)

Trip down memory lane


----------



## fastasflip (May 13, 2003)

> Dave - I'd still go with the CBR 600 if I were you, but if its not what you fancy, then I would recommend a scrambler to learn on. Simply because they are easier to control (fantastic for the turn in the road in a test), if you do have the unfortunate thing happen and come off, it wouldn't cost much to repair (no fairing, they are tougher than sports bikes).


KTM Supermoto [smiley=cheers.gif]


----------



## gcp (Aug 8, 2002)

I had a CBR 600 for a year or so and I'm 6' 4", may look a bit daft but never felt that way riding it.

SV650 unfaired are good fun, and cheap to run/insure.

Get some insurance quotes before going choosing.


----------



## Gizmo999 (Jan 28, 2007)

bmw f650, boring but you can learn to ride then move up to a more sporty bike plus they hold their value so its easy to sell on without taking a big hit. it'll give you time to look around and decide what will be best for you.


----------



## Dave_225Roadster (Mar 22, 2006)

Thanks all for the advice!

From the suggestions the following look very good to me.

CBR 600 
VFR 800
Thundercat

As I've never even been on the road on a bike, it's purely based on looks.

I think I need to get myself to a bike dealers and try sitting on a few. Is that the correct etiquette in a bike showroom? Just climb on and see how it feels? Or better to go and chat with the (dreaded) salesman first?

Forgive my mechanical ignorance, but what are 'twins and in line 4s'?


----------



## Gizmo999 (Jan 28, 2007)

go do you CBT and direct access then decide on the bike. my GF had an RS125 before her DA where she rode a BM F650, after passing her test she hated the sporty position of the RS and is much happier on the F650 trail bike, she'll probably end up on a sports bike again but since passing her test in June she's ridden to the far north of Scotland/Cape Wrath area, weekends in Oban and now has done about 4000 miles. she wouldn't have done it on a sport bike.

il4 is in line 4 cylinder bike, thundercat, R6, R1 gxr
twins 2 cylinder bike, v twin cylinders in a vee, SV 650, Ducati

typically vee wins are easier to ride and rev lower with better low down torque, the sv 650 is a great starter bike because of this, usually narrower than an il4 as well


----------



## ag (Sep 12, 2002)

The engine character of a motorcycle has a far greater bearing on its feel and subsequently the enjoyment you get from it than with a car.

Motorcycles are available with one, two, three or four cylinders. I don't believe that there are still any commercially available fives, six or eights.

_Generally_ the more valves there are, the more you need to rev it and the more power it makes for a given engine displacement. More cylinders have more valves, therefore more revs and more power. A 600cc Single will be slower than a 600cc Four of the same generation.

Without trying to be condescending, if you are asking questions of this nature, I suggest you start with a bit of training and see if you like it first, before considering purchasing a motorcycle. Once the bug has bitten you will be reading four motorcycling magazines a month and will soon get used to the lingo.

Back on topic, as a first motorcycle almost anything will do. Even a relative novice could ride a Fireblade on a dry day for fun with few problems. On a cold damp day, when you're in a hurry and wearing ten layers of clothing and someone pulls out in front of you, you'll wish you had a bike with ABS, heated handlebar grips and an upright seating position.

Good luck.


----------



## Blade_76 (Aug 11, 2004)

ag said:


> Back on topic, as a first motorcycle almost anything will do. Even a relative novice could ride a Fireblade on a dry day for fun with few problems. On a cold damp day, when you're in a hurry and wearing ten layers of clothing and someone pulls out in front of you, you'll wish you had a bike with ABS, heated handlebar grips and an upright seating position.


I totally disagree with that... A Fireblade, R1, GSXR would bite a novice on the a*se and rather hard too! Would you recommend a new driver jump straight into a Ferrai?

I had a work colleague (born again biker) who bought a CBR600, did advanced lessons etc.. Felt he was good enough to jump onto a Blade after 6 months, within a couple of months of buying the bike, he was tragically killed on it. They are not toys...

Where as a 600 is slightly more forgiving... BUT, most new 600's now, are like the earlier Blades and R1's, in terms of power to weight, if not probably better I imagine.

I would defo go down the local dealer, sit on a few bikes and see how they feel to you. Being quite tall, you might find sports bikes are too far over and put alot of pressure on your wrists and can cause back ache.

Got to ask, are you going to be a power ranger in matching leathers? :lol:


----------



## Dave_225Roadster (Mar 22, 2006)

:? So the Power Ranger look is frowned upon? lol I hadn't really got as far as considering what colour leathers yet. Who would take a 6'2" guy dressed in yellow leather seriously?

As mentioned, I DO need to get on my CBT and see how everything feels, etc. I may even totally hate the experience! I doubt it though.

I've been picking up Ride Magazine for a couple of months now, but it's still a foreign language to me. But so were MAFs, ESP, Coilovers and Wakbox 18 months ago!

I'll be taking the CBT in about 4 weeks when I get some time off work.

Cheers for all the comments.

Dave


----------



## scavenger (Jun 25, 2002)

Blade_76 said:


> I totally disagree with that... A Fireblade, R1, GSXR would bite a novice on the a*se and rather hard too! Would you recommend a new driver jump straight into a Ferrai?


You see, I disagree with that. I passed my test and bought a Fireblade 10+ years ago. I passed my driving test and bought a MkII Escort RS2000 20+ years ago.

It all comes down to self control, an understanding of your own abilities and an awareness of what is going on around you.

The first time Dave_225 goes too fast into a bend he will pull the front brake, sit the bike up and no doubtedly run wide. This will happen regardless of what bike he is riding. Only in time will he learn that the bike will lean twice as far as he thought it would and gentle application of the rear brake will pull the bike down into the bend and knock off a few mph in a controlled manner.

A bigger bike will provide more stability at lower speeds for a guy his size. It will also scare the crap out of him and he will hopefully learn that what is in his right hand is not an on/off switch. In addition, he would be riding a bike with some grunt to get past his first myopic car driver incident when they are totally oblivious of his presence and go for the favoured side swipe maneouvre :evil:

It is all a learning experience. I totally agree that if you have no self control you will crash, but I have to disagree that buying a bigger bike is a wrong decision.



Blade_76 said:


> Where as a 600 is slightly more forgiving... BUT, most new 600's now, are like the earlier Blades and R1's, in terms of power to weight, if not probably better I imagine.


100% correct. My brother has a Virgin Yamaha R6 Cup bike from 2 seasons ago. I am giving away 5 stone to him but his 600 can sit on the tail of my R1 at 170...

Dave,

Turn up at a dealer and sit on all the bikes, they are generally fine with it. Useful to take a mate to hold the bike upright from the front so you can get both feet on the pegs and see if you fit :wink:


----------



## Gizmo750 (Sep 16, 2004)

Dave_225Roadster said:


> Who would take a 6'2" guy dressed in yellow leather seriously?


Now where is Mr TTotal when you need him! :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Gizmo999 (Jan 28, 2007)

scavenger said:


> You see, I disagree with that. I passed my test and bought a Fireblade 10+ years ago. I passed my driving test and bought a MkII Escort RS2000 20+ years ago.
> 
> It all comes down to self control, an understanding of your own abilities and an awareness of what is going on around you.


drr, i spend a load of time as the motorcycle representative on Cumbria's CRASH ( accident reduction scheme) every Spring we approach the culling season where riders get bikes that are too quick for them and end up dead because of it  A modern Blade/Gxr is equivalent to a race prepp'ed WSBk of 4 years ago and needs a degree of skill to ride once that throttle gets twisted. Riders need to start on machines where they can make mistakes at speeds they can cope with, a blade isn't it. big bar/high seat position lots of control with lower revving tractable engines gives you the split seconds needed when you make a mistake and you will no matter how much control you think you have. its this attitude that we're now working to try and change because we've tried just about everything else and if we don't solve it our favourite roads are being double whited and get 50 limits  the magazines and dealers push the new sport bikes as easy to ride, they are up to a point but once its exceeded your looking at organ donotaing.... sorry, thats harsh but its the way it is .

if you are interested the KSI's are loaded onto one of my personal websites










shows bike size involved in accidents

the full pdf is here http://www.ducati-upnorth.com/images/cu ... tstats.pdf

read it and make your own mind up about what size bike and contributory factors are applicable to you.

sorry, rant over, its a subject that i do care about and maybe not the way to join in on a new forum, doh


----------



## Blade_76 (Aug 11, 2004)

Very interesting read...

I think that there should be restrictions for new drivers/riders, not allowing over a certain bhp... Harsh some might think, but when you drive and ride, you are in charge of something that can kill, be it you or someone else...

I started riding bikes from 16, stepping up via 50cc, 125cc, 250cc, 600cc and then 900cc. I have ridden blades since I was 21 and still sometimes the rear end can slide and catch me out, or the worst of all coming across diesel in the road!

Not sure on the latest statistic, but at one point I believe over 90% of motorcycle accidents were caused by cars...


----------



## Blade_76 (Aug 11, 2004)

Dave_225Roadster said:


> :? So the Power Ranger look is frowned upon? lol I hadn't really got as far as considering what colour leathers yet. Who would take a 6'2" guy dressed in yellow leather seriously?


Never done the power ranger thing, think its pretty sad to be honest... Also, what if you sell your bike? You need to buy new gear or be restricted to buying on in colours to match your leathers.

On the other hand, make sure you buy all the correct gear... Dont be like some idiots you see in t-shirts and shorts... I would never go out on my bike without my lid, gloves, jacket and boots.


----------



## Gizmo999 (Jan 28, 2007)

Blade_76 said:


> Very interesting read...
> 
> Not sure on the latest statistic, but at one point I believe over 90% of motorcycle accidents were caused by cars...


i used to think that until i got involved in this project, in Cumbria on the good biking/driving roads like the 686 Hartside its the other way round, almost every accident is riders own fault  what the stats can't show is whether the bike had to avoid another vehicle over the white line in the opposite direction. town/cities may be different but the speeds involved will be lower and i'd think less chance of dying 

as part of the project i had to look at where white lines would be placed based on accident locations, only 1 out of about 30 involved another vehicle most of the rest were running wide mid corner or a succession of corners entered too quickly and by the 2nd or 3rd corner rider had lost control trying to scrub speed. thats the real problem with the supersport bikes, you can get in way too quick and struggle to get it out.

its only the UK that has the big sportbike marketing image, most of europe is more trail/wide bar bike and with the success of the Ewan/Charlie show it is starting to happen here, GS 12 and 650 now have a lot better "image" and are more suited to newcomers to biking whilst still looking cool. no power ranger suit needed, pretend you are about to ride around the world instead


----------



## Speed Racer (May 21, 2006)

Blade_76 said:


> Very interesting read...
> 
> I think that there should be restrictions for new drivers/riders, not allowing over a certain bhp... Harsh some might think, but when you drive and ride, you are in charge of something that can kill, be it you or someone else...
> 
> ...


I've been riding on the street since I was 16 (1978). My first street bike was a 1975 H2 750. That bike to this day will scare the crap out of most modern bike riders. Ultimately, it's a wonder I'm alive to this day. Modern bikes today are so tame, even though fast. They also brake and handle well, which is good for beginners as long as they don't panic. Problem for beginners isn't their abilily at normal speeds. What they can't do well is ride very slowly cause they don't understand the weight transfer dynamics, and they sure won't know what to do if they get into a jam. Buying a R1 as a first bike is retarded. Like I would let a beginner ride my Ducati. Yeah, right. Stick to something you can handle, or stay off of 'em.


----------



## R6B TT (Feb 25, 2003)

Have to say I agree with most of the posts, but IMO passing your CBT and jumping straight onto a 600 or bigger is mental.

I learned the old way - 50cc, 125cc, 200cc, 500, 550. Then a break as my best mates little brother got killed on his Yamaha RD400.

I bought a Suzuki Bandit 400 second hand from a mate - it was more powerful than anything I'd owned or ridden before and was a nice lead back into biking, also without Â£0000s of plastic to replace if I dropped it.

If I were you, I'd probably look at a supermoto, KTM, CCM or similar to start with and learn the ropes on that. Then decide which direction you want to go in. The BMW F650 mentioned earlier would be a good choice too.


----------



## fastasflip (May 13, 2003)

Surely it's down to the individual Dave looks like a pretty sensible dude and would know the possible consequences of winding a R1 up to full chat with little or no experience. I would say apart from engine characteristics no modern day bike is any harder to ride than the next. In some cases the bigger the bike the easier they are to ride.

If Dave is as sensible as he looks I would get whatever bike he wants and if itâ€™s an R1 or GSXR so be it. Itâ€™s all about rider attitude and hazard perception.


----------



## ag (Sep 12, 2002)

Nearly all motorcycles of 500cc or more can better 100mph. Driver skill, circumstances, miles per year and experience (though not always in the way you think) will have a greater effect on the likelihood of an accident than purely capacity. Indeed it could well be argued that in riding a machine that you "respect" you are less likely to crash than on a machine that you feel you have mastered. I believe that the majority of motorcycle accidents are caused by over-confident riders in decent weather, on their own or with a small group on country roads. Over-confidence takes hold and BAM. You're dead. A 600, broadly speaking, is as fast as 1000.

If it is safety you are after, remove the fairing to slow the top speed down and go back to drum brakes, that will teach people to anticipate rather than react.

I go back to my first post on the subject, ideal first bike: Kawasaki Z750. 
Not too fast, Big 'bars, proper riding position, not too heavy and easy to ride. But it ain't no tourer.


----------



## scavenger (Jun 25, 2002)

Couldn't agree more ag, apart from the drum brakes bit :wink:

Gizmo999. Bikes are not too quick for the rider, it could be the rider who is riding too fast and beyond their own ability. Accidents are not always attributable to the rider/driver going too fast, however, how many times do we hear that line just for justification of cameras and reduced speed limits?

Do you ride a bike Gizmo999? If so, what size/type?

The stats you have provided are incomplete to be of any use. They are a collection of numbers and I fail to see what they prove?

You don't show the number of bikes in each category, roads where the accidents occurred, day/night, conditions, car accidents in same location, actual speed at impact.

What about other factors, a bird flying at the rider/wasp in a helmet/oncoming car in middle of road yada yada yada.

I am sure a number of bikers die every year by exceeding their own abilities, but that does not necessarily mean they were riding too fast nor the bike they were riding was too large in capacity.


----------



## ag (Sep 12, 2002)

It's the same as with cars. It is not speed per se that is the killer, it is the inappropriate use of speed. Faster motorcyces can take you to inappropriate speeds more quickly and more frequently, but it is the rider holding the throttle that dictates the rhythm.

Once you get to bikes over 500cc the performance is on such another level that car drivers cannot comprehend the forces at work. As a mate of mine said after being taken for a spirited run round a test track in an F40 when we both worked at the Michelin headquarters, "Yeah, the acceleration was good, but it's no GS Thou!"


----------



## Gizmo999 (Jan 28, 2007)

I agree you can make what you want from stats as they don't include every possible explanation BUT based upon local knowledge of a 10 mile stretch of road and the standard of riding I see, the place the accidents occurred and number of vehicles involved its "reasonable" to assume that in a large number of cases rider error was probably the cause of the crash.

Any crash is caused by riding too fast for the conditions, you may not be over the speed limit but the crash is because you didn't have time to react or anticipate and slow down for a hazard. Obviously its not practicable to ride around at stupidly low speeds so we all ride quicker than that, then it just becomes a percentage based on the number of times it goes wrong and whether you have time ( or the ability) to react to correct it and the experience to make the right decision, brake, shut off steerer whatever, newer riders tend to lack that experience.

You may have limits you feel comfortable with but the big problem with bikes is the assumption that the new bikes are easy to ride and new riders get pushed to buy sumit thats way too powerful when it does get out of control. there is nothing wrong with buying a smaller bike learning to ride it then moving up.

Its all to easy to blame other factors but having seen the data, been involved in trying to reduce casualties my perspective has changed, it isn't just one thing or another , there are many factors but bike size, power output and rider experience are a major factor in the equation ( along with road design, road surface and other traffic) . I'm certain that making new riders aware of the options open to them and getting them on the right bike initially and gaining experience before moving upwards will reduce causalities long term.

I've got a Ducati 999S , Ducati multistrada S , Laverda 500 monty classic , the TT I bought last week is the first car I've owned for over 15 years!!, do about 15K a year on bikes and spend most of my time on 2 wheels cos I work for a mountain bike company  and you?



scavenger said:


> Couldn't agree more ag, apart from the drum brakes bit :wink:
> 
> Gizmo999. Bikes are not too quick for the rider, it could be the rider who is riding too fast and beyond their own ability. Accidents are not always attributable to the rider/driver going too fast, however, how many times do we hear that line just for justification of cameras and reduced speed limits?
> 
> ...


----------



## scavenger (Jun 25, 2002)

Gizmo999 said:


> and the standard of riding I see, the place the accidents occurred and number of vehicles involved its "reasonable" to assume that in a large number of cases rider error was probably the cause of the crash.


So you agree its nothing to do with capacity of bike then but rider error :wink:



Gizmo999 said:


> I've got a Ducati 999S , Ducati multistrada S , Laverda 500 monty classic, and you?


Yamaha R1 for quick rides and track days. 1200 Bandit with straight Renthol bars for wheelies :twisted:


----------

