New bike advice wanted

**Fergus** · 10th February 2013, 11:55

Thanks for the advice everyone. Some good food for thought.

**Akzle** · 10th February 2013, 18:51

Originally Posted by Danzano

so always thought maybe the bigger bikes always felt better because they had more weight to make up for my lack of.

if your bike feels heavy you're going too slow

(or you've somehow mistaken a harley ferguson for a motorcycle)

**TheTengTheory** · 22nd February 2013, 12:25

Originally Posted by Akzle

if your bike feels heavy you're going too slow

(or you've somehow mistaken a harley ferguson for a motorcycle)

or you had one too many pies for breakfast

**GrayWolf** · 23rd February 2013, 08:38

Originally Posted by Fergus

So all these bikes are shit?

Increasing my budget would mean waiting for my next internship next summer or selling some or my guitar gear...Not going to happen

no they arent all necessarily shit, the possible fact for a low price bike of ANY cc rating is the likely lack of proper maintenance, coupled with the fact that MOST 250's are thrashed to fuck by a series of 'enthusiastic' owners along with said low maintenance schedule..... high performance 250's and regardless of people here saying 250's are gutless and slow, they are NOT, to reach the performance levels the 250 sprotties can reach they are actually highly tuned engines, and because of that, are FRAGILE high revving in need of a good maintenance regime.. it's a testament to the engineering of modern engines that they withstand that amazing amount of abuse they get..... But an old, high milage, poorly looked after bike (250 class) is a GRENADE with the pin partly pulled out.

Originally Posted by tigertim20

all of them? no, but hard to say which are good without seeing them in the flesh and giving them a going over, but my personal experience is that buying a $2k bike means spending the balance of the $4k over the next 6 months keeping it roadworthy.

My comment was really more to point out that there is a huge amount of other options out there at a slightly higher price bracket, and IMO, its worth looking at those as well

I frequently disagree with Tim, but in this case?? I agree 150% with what he is saying........ if you are going to buy a 'cheapy' at the risk of being slow, boring etc... a GN 250, Scorpio 250, or an SR250 (there are also dual purpose bikes with the same engines in them) will be more reliable for the money, FAR FAR cheaper to run, fuel/ tyres/brake pads etc... are a LOT cheaper to service and if you bin it, or it does blow up? S/hand bits are around in the thousands and CHEAP

Originally Posted by Danzano

Around town commute then hell yeah 250 any serious riding long trips or more than 2hours on the motorway you want something bigger

I had 250's they did the trick but at motorway speeds they could get blown around a bit and now I'm getting back into riding my first thought was no 250 for me due to long motorway trips I want something that sits at the speed comfortably for long times

Also suspension and other things have seemed better on all the bigger bikes I've ever been on but maybe that could just be me

Everyone is different but I suggest at least trying something a little bigger even if you end up preferring the smaller bike

Danz One X

Danzo is right, about variety of suspension etc and while my days of 250 ownership are Ummmmmm yeh that long ago, the 'high performance' 250's of then were no faster than what are called slow/gutless today.... My last 250 (legal one) was a Yamaha RD250E-dx top speed around 150kph,,, yes that was a FAST 250 in the 70's. I actually racked up 20,000 miles in little over a year on that bike, a lot of which was on UK 'A' class roads which have a speed limit of 60mph (100kph) in the main, with some sections at 70mph (110km's)..... a ginny scorpio etc agreed will struggle a bit to stay there, its almost at their upper reaches for top end (130kph ish).... anything that has a top end of 150k's or over will comfortably maintain 100kph.... Caveat emptor, head winds are not a 'low power' bikes friend.. where even sport 250's suffer is they have low torque figures and that's when headwinds have a major effect.
ANY bike can be affected by crosswinds, design and shape have as much to do with it as weight... I own a ZZR1100 it weighs in at around 260kg wet,,,,, it's a sailboat in crosswinds.... my MT-01? is high saddle height, sports oriented for axle to axle length, and yet I suffer far less from cross wind effect than the ZZR or a friend does on his GS1400, which is a BIG bike as well.

There's too much bullshit spouted about 250's being slow/gutless/underpowered....... yet you'll see others post about how bloody quick, fantastic handling etc those same bikes are........... the LAM"s law allows you to ride bigger bikes, but in reality performance wise? they are no quicker than the 'sporty' 250's it's just they dont need 20,000rpm to reach 160-180kph, produce better torque and power bhp characteristics (usable power without wringing it's neck) and will/should last longer mechanically.... Bikes like the KLR/DR/XT/GS series (650 singles) are ridden by some as long distance bikes that will last high mileages

**ducatilover** · 25th February 2013, 12:08

Graywolf has many good points as always.
Any of the 30+hp 250s will easily sit on 110 in a big headwind, hell, my Spada would pull 160 in a head wind in standard form.
There are a fair few well cared for sport 250s around, they're not all fucked. But, yes, there are more mounted ones than good ones.

My Spada did more KM than my GN (154 thou) and it never threw a wobbly, the GN was an oil eating pig at 44,000km, so it goes to show maintenance is EVERYTHING

**roper1989** · 27th February 2013, 12:58

The Ninja 250 is one of the best handling bikes on the road because they are so light. They'll out-accelerate almost any car, they get almost 70 mpg, they'll hit 100 mph, and they hold their resale value very well. Stay away from any 600cc 4-cylinder sport bike, including the GSXR600.

**Akzle** · 27th February 2013, 14:16