Tyres for SV650S

[GSVR]

Ok when a novice rider gets into a panic situation one of the survival reaction things they are likely to do is grab a handful of front brake. If the front brake is "better" capable of locking up the front wheel with just a reasonable pressure then the chances are greater for the front end washing out or the rider going over the top. The exception to this is if the bike had ABS but this is not on many commuter bikes I know of.

Maybe the use of the word "better" wasn't the best choice knowing how pedantic some kiwi bikers can be.

[Robert Taylor]

Ok when a novice rider gets into a panic situation one of the survival reaction things they are likely to do is grab a handful of front brake. If the front brake is "better" capable of locking up the front wheel with just a reasonable pressure then the chances are greater for the front end washing out or the rider going over the top. The exception to this is if the bike had ABS but this is not on many commuter bikes I know of.

Maybe the use of the word "better" wasn't the best choice knowing how pedantic some kiwi bikers can be.

GSVR, if you are already in a hole the best advice is to stop digging! Your argument(s) were already getting very thin but this takes the cake. The brakes are indeed already relatively weak on many commuter bikes BUT the inescapable reality is that the front end damping control ( and springing ) is woefully weak which causes them to blow through their stroke very uncontrollably. A correct engineering solution is to fix the source of the problem, not to fudge it by de-engineering the performance of a related component that exacerbates the problem. ( 3rd world mentality )
My original post on this thread was to illustrate that the suspension deficiency ( especially lack of forward pitch control ) has an adverse affect on front tyre feel, and to that end it would be unfair to malign the performance and feel of certain brands and sizes until the front is working properly.
So the comments were justified and in the spirit of offering thought without further silly recourse of splitting hairs.
Years ago I recall fitting a Pro Circuit exhaust to Shayne Kings then standard YZ125, when dynoed it lost a little horsepower to stock, when jetted to suit it picked up significantly in delivery and peak power. Later, after we ported the motor we redynoed the stock pipe and then the Pro Circuit, the gain with the Pro Circuit was then huge. Combinations.
This country is full of ''knockers'', someone may have tried the Pro Circuit pipe on a stock pipe, failed to jet to suit and then described to all and sundry that the product was rubbish.
As long as products are engineered by accountants there will always be issues, and to speculate that things are what they are for other reasons is ( frankly ) naive.

[svr]

But you've spent 17K on a 2001 SV650, when you can get a brand new one for 11K?

Gixxer front ends may be an easy fit for a F3 bike (no speedo etc), if you like the stock valving, and don't mind changed geometry

My bike is a road / race bike - retaining the speedo drive is easy if you use the standard front wheel.
The bike cost 10k new in '01 - I've since spent 6k in 7 years ensuring that its the bike I want to keep riding / racing.
When I first road an sv I couldnt stop smiling - its a fun bike - you just have to `finish building it' yourself because as RT said the accountants had the last say on it.
I've ridden gsxr's r1's zx's etc on the road and they make no real sense to me!

[svr]

Devil made his point about the feel of different brands and profiles. All good. Others just spouted information with no real reasoning behind why.

Aw gee thanks Garry!

[Pussy]

And that's exactly why we got the suspension modified on Gassit Girl's K1 and K5 SV650S, to make the bike she wanted. She now LOVES her K6 GSX-R750...with it's modified suspension

[svr]

Making a bike more capable of going faster has not necesarily meant that road bikes are far more enjoable to ride. In the early 80's your gs 1100 would weave a bit, the footpegs would drag, and you thought you were `on it', at say 100 around a 50km/h design curve. Now on the same curve we have bikes that can do, say, 140 around the same corner with the same visibility, road hazards and heavier policing. Do 100km/h and it feels like the bike is just laughing at you - where's the fun in that?
I'm not saying `ride crap handling bikes' I'm just throwing that out there as another variable when considering the bike you should ride for maximum sporting enjoyment.

[Robert Taylor]

Making a bike more capable of going faster has not necesarily meant that road bikes are far more enjoable to ride. In the early 80's your gs 1100 would weave a bit, the footpegs would drag, and you thought you were `on it', at say 100 around a 50km/h design curve. Now on the same curve we have bikes that can do, say, 140 around the same corner with the same visibility, road hazards and heavier policing. Do 100km/h and it feels like the bike is just laughing at you - where's the fun in that?
I'm not saying `ride crap handling bikes' I'm just throwing that out there as another variable when considering the bike you should ride for maximum sporting enjoyment.

Yes I hear what you are saying, I think though that there are a lot of bikes out there that are bordering on dangerous. Like the novice rider grabbing a handful of front brake on a low cost commuter bike that is undersprung and woefully underdamped. Its a sad indictment that on such bikes suspension technology has not advanced in over 30 years. Price pressures from the very shonky offerings from mainland Asia further stunts any progress in this area.
I look back at the stuff I used to ride in the 70s and 80s before I got sick of riding. Frankly, I prefer the march of progress and would much prefer to ride a modern machine with well sorted high quality suspension.

[svr]

Agreed - its a pity manufacturers dont put the same sort of effort into producing quality suspension that they put into a few more hp and revs every new model - particularly for nz roads which are rough as guts (do you nz road bikes would suit say 200mm travel?)

[Robert Taylor]

Agreed - its a pity manufacturers dont put the same sort of effort into producing quality suspension that they put into a few more hp and revs every new model - particularly for nz roads which are rough as guts (do you nz road bikes would suit say 200mm travel?)

Its not so much the length of travel ( although that kinda helps excepting pitch control / balance issues ) its the quality of that travel. Here in NZ we are becoming more and more attuned to sorting out suspension because of what you say, a high proportion of rough roads.

[slofox]

My thanks to all who have taken time to reply to this post. I have read pretty near all of your contributions.

In fact I was merely interested in preferred brands - not so much as to improve performance but to see what other riders liked and whether there was in fact a brand preference.

When it comes to performance, I am quite happy with what the SV does. Whilst it is not perfect, it is vastly better than many of the bikes I have ridden in years gone by - I started out on a 1953 Ariel with "linked plunger" rear suspension..(means "none") and went from there to several better machines over the years. At the moment the limitations of the SV are not so great as to make me want either to swap it or modify it. Instead, I choose to ride within its limits, which still gives me scope to hoon a bit when I want to, but keeps me sensible at the same time. I have no trouble with the front brake, not even under emergency stopping - in fact I didn't use the rear brake at all for the first few weeks on the new bike....... The first time I did have to stop in a hurry, a combination of change down and both brakes did the job admirably - better even than my little Benelli 250 would have done and better than I had expected.

Yes, the front forks are pretty crap and could be way better but like I said, I know how they function so just work with what they can do. The fun factor and general rideability of the SV is undeniable and the wide recognition of that fact was a part of my decision to buy it in the first place.

Thanks again all.

[Robert Taylor]

My thanks to all who have taken time to reply to this post. I have read pretty near all of your contributions.

In fact I was merely interested in preferred brands - not so much as to improve performance but to see what other riders liked and whether there was in fact a brand preference.

When it comes to performance, I am quite happy with what the SV does. Whilst it is not perfect, it is vastly better than many of the bikes I have ridden in years gone by - I started out on a 1953 Ariel with "linked plunger" rear suspension..(means "none") and went from there to several better machines over the years. At the moment the limitations of the SV are not so great as to make me want either to swap it or modify it. Instead, I choose to ride within its limits, which still gives me scope to hoon a bit when I want to, but keeps me sensible at the same time. I have no trouble with the front brake, not even under emergency stopping - in fact I didn't use the rear brake at all for the first few weeks on the new bike....... The first time I did have to stop in a hurry, a combination of change down and both brakes did the job admirably - better even than my little Benelli 250 would have done and better than I had expected.

Yes, the front forks are pretty crap and could be way better but like I said, I know how they function so just work with what they can do. The fun factor and general rideability of the SV is undeniable and the wide recognition of that fact was a part of my decision to buy it in the first place.

Thanks again all.

Glad you got something out of it despite ( for want of a better way of describing it ) all the ''to and froing''
I stand resolutely by what I said in that the front ends of bikes fitted with damper rod forks can be improved enormously. And that really we should all expect more, this ''technology'' has been stagnant for 30 years or longer with the only significant improvement friction reduction via the introduction of DU bushings. Arguably though that causes the forks to blow through their stroke more readily.
One day you might have to do a very sudden panic stop and you will curse those forks for their very poor brake dive control. I know I would because I know what improvements can be made, at reasonable cost.
The thread started as a question about tyre choice. I also resolutely stand by what I said, that suspension character affects tyre feel. Point of fact many problems blamed on tyres are in fact the fault of the suspension. Improving suspension to work as it should makes a significant and positive impact on tyre life. If the suspension is not working properly it overloads the tyres and their life suffers.
''The best youve ridden is the best you know'' We are in the 21st century and frankly we should expect better.

[slofox]

''The best you've ridden is the best you know''

Thanks Robert - your comment here certainly applies to me - one day when I am rich again I will wheel the bike into your shop for some upgrades.......

[Robert Taylor]

Thanks Robert - your comment here certainly applies to me - one day when I am rich again I will wheel the bike into your shop for some upgrades.......

No worries, the intent was one of information and provoking thought, not any commercial intent, as such. We are ever mindful of the affordability or otherwise of doing such work. I also think SVR made a very valid point, to the effect that manufacturers spend ever more on engines and other components etc but do little to improve suspension. In many ways very little progress has occured and we keep evidencing components that have gone to the PCD ( product cheapening department ) prior to production.
Its dissappointing that there are those that post who become in effect apologists for what the buying public are ''rationed''. Yesteryears Suspension Science is just not acceptable in this day and age of ( perceived ) progress.