Is it too much to move from a 250 to 1000 right after getting fulls?

[ducatilover]

Well, yup. The potential is there more than ever...

No doubt about that.

Carver, can I have a go on a Thou if you have one?

[schrodingers cat]

Yes! No! No! Yes!

Mate, please yourself. Pay your money and make your choice.

If you drop it, don't post here admitting it... After all, if you do it is totally your choice, your fault.

Whatever you do, make sure it brings a big smile to your face every time you sling your leg over.

[Jerry74]

It does not matter if you are on a 600 or a 1000, what counts is how much you can open the throttle a 250 cc will do 150 km plus.... so it's up to the rider not the bike.

[ducatilover]

It does not matter if you are on a 600 or a 1000, what counts is how much you can open the throttle a 250 cc will do 150 km plus.... so it's up to the rider not the bike.

A bit easier to fuck it all up on a proper thou though isn't it? I mean, 0-160 if you can keep the front down and not skid the rear up is done in first on most and in 6sec.
A 250cc that he's on, won't do a genuine 160...and it's very, very easy to fuck it up on a thou.

[cowboyz]

It does not matter if you are on a 600 or a 1000, what counts is how much you can open the throttle a 250 cc will do 150 km plus.... so it's up to the rider not the bike.

on a 250 you have ALLL that time while it gets there to think about how faster your going and how much faster you want to go

on a 1000 the bike already left.

thats the difference.

[carver]

and there also is the problem... a rocky, dampness, debri... ohhh oh light up, side step, high side so the 600 has a more forgiving reaction cos it never lit up.

they do, and when they light up they do it well cause all the power is at the top!

[dangerous]

Yes! No! No! Yes!

Mate, please yourself. Pay your money and make your choice.

If you drop it, don't post here admitting it....

Ya see I look at it as a misrable old cunt that I am... his money, his choice... in the case he wipes out OUR money in the form of acc, Im all for restrictions. It fucks me off paying masive acc levies yet I have never claime (not saying one day I might)

[schrodingers cat]

Ya see I look at it as a misrable old cunt that I am... his money, his choice... in the case he wipes out OUR money in the form of acc, Im all for restrictions. It fucks me off paying masive acc levies yet I have never claime (not saying one day I might)

Fair enough. You've spoken sensibly and given good reasons to step up gradually. I guess I sorta think its all got as much to do with attitude as cc's

[zmlam]

So if a jump from 250 to 1000 is discouraged by many, why then would the law allow the new learners max cc rating to be 650? I know the bikes will be detuned, but still to go from those who are entering the motorcycle journey who have NO past experience to go straight to a 650cc (ish) bike? Seems far, far worse to jump straight from 0cc to 650cc then it is from 250 to 1000cc.

Assuming that there will be a large group of people whose first bike is the maximum cc rating they can buy.

All I know is that they are catering for those who are super large/big to fit on a 250cc bike (which they currently cater for by giving exemptions), and also to discourage people to upgrade..

[ducatilover]

they do, and when they light up they do it well cause all the power is at the top!

It takes more to light a 600 up...it has less power and less torque, usually a fair bit less stress on the tyre too.

[Jerry74]

Fully agreed on above posts, but a 600 cc does not carry 160+ hp at the rear wheel generally.

From what the new licence laws seem to point to it will be the types of bikes like is available in aussie, ER6N, Gladius, CB600 etc.

Personally I went from 250 to 800 cc so it's how ya ride not how many ponys are available.

[tigertim20]

So if a jump from 250 to 1000 is discouraged by many, why then would the law allow the new learners max cc rating to be 650? I know the bikes will be detuned, but still to go from those who are entering the motorcycle journey who have NO past experience to go straight to a 650cc (ish) bike? Seems far, far worse to jump straight from 0cc to 650cc then it is from 250 to 1000cc.

Assuming that there will be a large group of people whose first bike is the maximum cc rating they can buy.

All I know is that they are catering for those who are super large/big to fit on a 250cc bike (which they currently cater for by giving exemptions), and also to discourage people to upgrade..

firstly, when the OP asked about a 600 vs a thou, most assumed they were talking about th R6/R1 or ZX6r/ZX10r, so lets clarify that there are LOTS of 600+ bikes with only modest power.

secondly, the up-to 650cc bikes that learners will be allowed to ride will NOT include the R6, ZX6, GSXR6, etc etc.
so I defer to the last line of your first paragraph - IMO it is safer to get on a GT650 as a first bike, than it is to go from a VT250 to an R1/ZX10r.
the prior is a bike of modest power, with plenty of ballast, it wont just wheelie all by itself when you get on the gas, you need to make some sort of concerted effort to get the front wheel sky-bound. a zx10/r1, will wheelie and do a full loop WAY before you hit redline if you give the gas a quick squirt, and that is the difference.

If the OP was looking at going to a 1340 Harley, or an SV thou, or something like that, there probably wouldnt be quite such an excited 'Fuck no, Youll DIE' response, but as it is, the presumption has been that the OP wants to go straight to the ZX10r. which is probably a correct assumption.

Someone else mentioned I think on the last page, that attitude plays and equal or greater part than cc's when it comes to upgrading your bike

[steve_t]

So if a jump from 250 to 1000 is discouraged by many, why then would the law allow the new learners max cc rating to be 650? I know the bikes will be detuned, but still to go from those who are entering the motorcycle journey who have NO past experience to go straight to a 650cc (ish) bike? Seems far, far worse to jump straight from 0cc to 650cc then it is from 250 to 1000cc.

Assuming that there will be a large group of people whose first bike is the maximum cc rating they can buy.

All I know is that they are catering for those who are super large/big to fit on a 250cc bike (which they currently cater for by giving exemptions), and also to discourage people to upgrade..

The LAMS bikes are based on power:weight. You can't just ride any 650cc bike. The ones on the list are relatively slow.

Doh, tigertim beat me to it

[GrayWolf]

So if a jump from 250 to 1000 is discouraged by many, why then would the law allow the new learners max cc rating to be 650? I know the bikes will be detuned, but still to go from those who are entering the motorcycle journey who have NO past experience to go straight to a 650cc (ish) bike? Seems far, far worse to jump straight from 0cc to 650cc then it is from 250 to 1000cc.

Assuming that there will be a large group of people whose first bike is the maximum cc rating they can buy.

All I know is that they are catering for those who are super large/big to fit on a 250cc bike (which they currently cater for by giving exemptions), and also to discourage people to upgrade..

For example a 650 single (DR650, XT660 etc) actualy have no more power (hp), than a mid power 250, although they may have a slightly higher top speed. If you (sorry to rot on about the past, but.....) look at a 650 from the late 1960's? in fact a Honda Hornet (popular 250) is about as fast. I posted earlier, one HUGE difference is, a modern 600 is as FAST as a 1000cc of the 1970's and even faster in many cases. Bike technology, tyre technology etc have marched on exponentialy, rider training, rider ability and rider evolution have not.
Maybe you are right, it could discourage people from upgrading, is that a terrible thing? If a person buys a 650 and find it suits their neeeds perfectly? Bloody fantastic! There are those of us who would love to see a 'stepped' licencing system. I have yet to see a real 'logical' arguement against it. There are plenty of emotive ones.. freedom/choice/my right..... but they are NOT logicaly positioned or rationaly arguable ones.
If I have a concern over LAM's? it is the weight factor for a new biker. Most 250's are forgiving of errors due to lightness and 'flickability' to correct a bad line through a corner for example. A 600 is not as light to flick about. I do hope that the old 2T 350/400's etc are not part of LAM's.... I know there are many of us 'fucking old bastards who don't know shit'!!! who rode 500 H1's, RD400/350's, NS400, RG4/500's etc and know they are in no way learner friendly.

[ducatilover]

The LAMS bikes are based on power:weight. You can't just ride any 650cc bike. The ones on the list are relatively slow.

Doh, tigertim beat me to it

I think the 650 twins are restricted in order to meet the power/weight also.

None of the LAMS bikes are "fast" or unsuitable for a learner, unless you get a ZZR400 and plop a ZZR600 motor in it, like I did last year.