Motorcycle Forum

Motorcycle Forum (http://www.motorcycle.com/forum/)
-   Motorcycle General Discussion (http://www.motorcycle.com/forum/motorcycle-general-discussion/)
-   -   2009 Yamaha V-Star 950 Review (http://www.motorcycle.com/forum/motorcycle-general-discussion/9841-2009-yamaha-v-star-950-review.html)

Administrator 10-22-2008 03:29 PM

2009 Yamaha V-Star 950 Review
 

Original Article:
2009 Yamaha V-Star 950 Review

Please discuss the Motorcycle.com article 2009 Yamaha V-Star 950 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.

seruzawa 10-22-2008 03:56 PM

I still don't get the 600+ pound weights. My 1980 Shovelhead weighed a few pounds less than these bikes. Do they fill the frame tubes with lead?

BrowningBAR 10-22-2008 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seruzawa (Post 196405)
I still don't get the 600+ pound weights. My 1980 Shovelhead weighed a few pounds less than these bikes. Do they fill the frame tubes with lead?

I don't understand why the 900 weighs 140 lbs more than the 650.

longride 10-22-2008 04:39 PM

It has the 'road hugging weight' that so graced the 60 Caddies back in the day.

Kevin_Duke 10-22-2008 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seruzawa (Post 196405)
I still don't get the 600+ pound weights. My 1980 Shovelhead weighed a few pounds less than these bikes. Do they fill the frame tubes with lead?

Did the Shovel weigh a few pounds less on a spec chart (claimed dry weight) or on an actual calibrated scale, full of fuel and ready to ride? Also, note the V-Star has a bigger wheelbase, wheels and fenders than the Shovel.

As for the so-called 140-lb weight difference between the V-Star 650, the wet weight now claimed on Star's website says 544 lbs, a difference of 69 lbs. Perhaps this helps illuminate why OEMs are giving up on their overly optimistic claimed dry weights that had no basis in reality.

Duckhunter 10-22-2008 06:00 PM

950 or 1300
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by administrator (Post 196402)
Original Article:
2009 Yamaha V-Star 950 Review

Please discuss the Motorcycle.com article 2009 Yamaha V-Star 950 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.

I'm a newbie to cruisers(have only ridden a 150 dirt bike), but am going to buy one soon. I was going to buy a 1300, but have decided to look at the 950. Will be doing nearly all open road riding. Will the 950 handle the wind? Plan on doing some motorcycle camping as well. I'm not a big guy (5'10" 160lbs), but wonder if it has power enough to get around with camping gear in the mountains?

Kevin_Duke 10-22-2008 06:11 PM

Yeah, you seem like a good fit for the 950. It has plenty enough power for open-road riding loaded up with gear. The 950 makes more sense for you than the $2000 more expensive 1300. I bet you'll love it.

Dr_Sprocket 10-22-2008 06:45 PM

Quite the looker...
 
Great pics, Fonzie!

I'm not really into the cruiser bikes, but this is quite the looker. Not sure if it would fit my 6'5" frame; nevertheless, I'd definitely check it out.

Pete_Brissette 10-22-2008 07:04 PM

Oops!
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr_Sprocket (Post 196419)
Great pics, Fonzie!

I'm not really into the cruiser bikes, but this is quite the looker. Not sure if it would fit my 6'5" frame; nevertheless, I'd definitely check it out.

Photography by Tom Riles

VIDEO by Fonzie

Buzglyd 10-22-2008 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin_Duke (Post 196412)
Did the Shovel weigh a few pounds less on a spec chart (claimed dry weight) or on an actual calibrated scale, full of fuel and ready to ride? Also, note the V-Star has a bigger wheelbase, wheels and fenders than the Shovel.

As for the so-called 140-lb weight difference between the V-Star 650, the wet weight now claimed on Star's website says 544 lbs, a difference of 69 lbs. Perhaps this helps illuminate why OEMs are giving up on their overly optimistic claimed dry weights that had no basis in reality.

You mean the new R1 isn't 42 lbs dry?


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:16 PM.