Motorcycle Forum

Motorcycle Forum (http://www.motorcycle.com/forum/)
-   Motorcycle General Discussion (http://www.motorcycle.com/forum/motorcycle-general-discussion/)
-   -   2014 Star Motorcycles Bolt Review (http://www.motorcycle.com/forum/motorcycle-general-discussion/20942-2014-star-motorcycles-bolt-review.html)

Administrator 04-10-2013 01:49 PM

2014 Star Motorcycles Bolt Review
 

Original Article:
2014 Star Motorcycles Bolt Review

Please discuss the Motorcycle.com article 2014 Star Motorcycles Bolt Review in our Motorcycle Forums below. Use the reply button to let others know your comments or feedback on the article. Constructive criticism is always appreciated, along with your thoughts and personal opinions on the bikes and products we have tested.

jmdonald 04-10-2013 05:57 PM

Nothing
 
Nothing like a good old MO shoot out to pick a winner.

Kevin_Duke 04-10-2013 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmdonald (Post 281021)
Nothing like a good old MO shoot out to pick a winner.

Should be an interesting one...

sarnali2 04-11-2013 01:22 PM

The green tank one looks kinda' like a ratty Ascot with the swoopy exhaust. A couple of my buds have the bigger Star-ma-ha's and they're decent enough bikes, I'm sure this one will be every bit as good.

seruzawa 04-11-2013 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sarnali2 (Post 281025)
The green tank one looks kinda' like a ratty Ascot with the swoopy exhaust. A couple of my buds have the bigger Star-ma-ha's and they're decent enough bikes, I'm sure this one will be every bit as good.

Maybe, but I'd like to see the day that any one of the sub-liter V-twins performs equal to a '72 Norton 850 Commando. That bike did, according to a '73 Motorcycle World mag, a 1/4 in 12.75sec. And no one ever accused the Commando of being low on torque. All this crap about "getting the grunt down" low is just so much hogwash. The "modern" 900cc class V-twins get 1/4s in the 14s. Heck my old W2SS 650 was about that fast. 40 years on and mid-range cruisers still lag horribly. Put some guts in one and it might make an attractive 2nd bike.

sarnali2 04-12-2013 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seruzawa (Post 281033)
Maybe, but I'd like to see the day that any one of the sub-liter V-twins performs equal to a '72 Norton 850 Commando. That bike did, according to a '73 Motorcycle World mag, a 1/4 in 12.75sec. And no one ever accused the Commando of being low on torque. All this crap about "getting the grunt down" low is just so much hogwash. The "modern" 900cc class V-twins get 1/4s in the 14s. Heck my old W2SS 650 was about that fast. 40 years on and mid-range cruisers still lag horribly. Put some guts in one and it might make an attractive 2nd bike.



I'd just buy an ironhead or try to find a Trident in decent shape. Or a Norton for that matter. These bikes are aimed at a different demographic than us (ahem) more "experianced" riders......

Duken4evr 04-12-2013 06:10 PM

Agreed. Develop actual horsepower and people will buy these "midrange" cruiser things like free beer. I simply do not understand the problem with doing that.

I do like twins, but I do not like slow motorcycles. Life is too short to ride around on a slow bike. Got a Camry for my boring transport needs. A bike does not have to scare me sh%tless, but it does have to have a good hard pull and to make my heart beat a bit faster on command.

As far as smaller twins go, the SV 650 is a favorite. They make good power, sound great with a can on them, and are complete ball to ride. The smart kids will buy an SV650S, not one of these things. It is a darn shame Suzuki went all "Gladius" on us though. The new SVs have ABS and are over 8K, which is too bad, as they used to retail for under 6K, brand new. Oh well. Lots of 'em used out there.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:35 PM.