Thats the point, how many new riders will be sensible? At least on a 125 theres a limit of how stupid you can be and still beat cars of the lights easily
First 600CC Bike recomendations
- Thread starter IronFire
- Start date
Thats the point, how many new riders will be sensible? At least on a 125 theres a limit of how stupid you can be and still beat cars of the lights easily
I think you're actually safer with a higher powered bike then a 125. I'm on a 125 at the moment and it would certainly be nicer to have a bit of extra power when trying to get out of the way when a car tries to squeeze you out.
I ride a cheap chinese 125 bike and even that does 70mph and accelerates pretty quick when you compare it to an average car so it's not like being on a 125 means that you never go fast enough to do yourself any damage. If you crash it's going to hurt whether you're on a 50cc scooter or a 1000cc monster!
I ride a cheap chinese 125 bike and even that does 70mph and accelerates pretty quick when you compare it to an average car so it's not like being on a 125 means that you never go fast enough to do yourself any damage. If you crash it's going to hurt whether you're on a 50cc scooter or a 1000cc monster!
For instance you won't be able to do silly speeds, granted its not the speed that usually kills, but at least you won't find yourself doing 150mph with ohh, practically 0 experience. OP is a student so I guess early 20's? How many people that age are generally sensible?
I am not saying not to get a bike, bikes are good fun but simply saying that a powerful bike as a first bike is a bad idea. Yes you can end up a cripple on a 125 just as easily, but at least you have a slow progression in the power and performance of the bike. Get the experience of riding one and then in a few month's time get surprised with a bigger one.
Edit: Obviously OP will do what he wants and fair enough, but my advice for him would be to reconsider, still do the full test by all means, its a good idea.
I am not saying not to get a bike, bikes are good fun but simply saying that a powerful bike as a first bike is a bad idea. Yes you can end up a cripple on a 125 just as easily, but at least you have a slow progression in the power and performance of the bike. Get the experience of riding one and then in a few month's time get surprised with a bigger one.
Edit: Obviously OP will do what he wants and fair enough, but my advice for him would be to reconsider, still do the full test by all means, its a good idea.
Last edited:
It's still a generalisation though, the OP could be very level headed and know when and how far to test the limits, whilst remaining perfectly safe.
Doing 150 doesn't necessarily equals death or immediate danger, 70 could easily be just as dangerous, it all depends on the situation - the former could be on a nice flat open straight with no traffic, whereas picture riding on a motorway at 70...
I'm not deniying that experience will play a part, I just don't agree wit the argument that 'riding smaller bikes = increased safety'.
Scort.
Doing 150 doesn't necessarily equals death or immediate danger, 70 could easily be just as dangerous, it all depends on the situation - the former could be on a nice flat open straight with no traffic, whereas picture riding on a motorway at 70...
I'm not deniying that experience will play a part, I just don't agree wit the argument that 'riding smaller bikes = increased safety'.
Scort.
Suggesting someone who has taken training and passed the test as part of a DAS goes back from a 500 or similar to a 125 is just stupid. Granted going to a sports bike where you go from half a turn to a quater turn for full throttle probably isn't such a good idea from passing your test but going to a 125 is just totally unhelpful.
Having ridden the 125 and now a 60 BHP 400CC Honda Machine (can't remember model) I will not go for a 125, cars are all over you and you have no poke to get out of trouble.
I have a company car so the bike does not have to be a sensible day to day choice as the bike is for driving fun at the weekends as the Golf doesn't cut it. I have always wanted a Honda car so tempted to get a bike to satisfy my desire.
From the comments I will stay away from the RR until I have put some more miles under my belt. Myabe a CBF 600 instead of a CBR 600 ? I have between 2-5.5K to spend depending on what I will get and I already have leathers + helmet etc. I am also 25 (professional, non student, so this is my toy
)
I have a company car so the bike does not have to be a sensible day to day choice as the bike is for driving fun at the weekends as the Golf doesn't cut it. I have always wanted a Honda car so tempted to get a bike to satisfy my desire.
From the comments I will stay away from the RR until I have put some more miles under my belt. Myabe a CBF 600 instead of a CBR 600 ? I have between 2-5.5K to spend depending on what I will get and I already have leathers + helmet etc. I am also 25 (professional, non student, so this is my toy
)To the OP, if the RR is what you want go for it – there is absolutely no logical reason why a track focused bike would not be a good first bike, none, as it’s all down to how you ride.
If you don’t mind the ‘extreme’ riding position, the lack of decent storage, the higher costs and dancing on the gear lever, then a true sports 600 is going to be fine for you, trust me, I know from my own experience.
Scort.
If you don’t mind the ‘extreme’ riding position, the lack of decent storage, the higher costs and dancing on the gear lever, then a true sports 600 is going to be fine for you, trust me, I know from my own experience.
Scort.
Based on what you've said consider the Honda Hornet, it's a detuned CBR 600 engine with a little more mid range, the CBF (the hornet is a CB600F not CBF600) will be perfect if you want to commute a lot but it lacks a little of the fun, that said it's still a nice enough bike just a little less enjoyable when pushed, feels a bit more budget. The Hornet is right in between the CBF and CBR in terms of power and a lot fo fun for the money but get the 17" front wheel version (99 onwards iirc). You'll also get a very good example for the lower end of your budget with enough left over to get yourself on some advanced training/IAM etc.
a duller 600 is maybe the sensible choice, but you'll always look with envy when a sports 600 scratches past you having tons of fun...
dull commuter bike = just transport
sports bike = fun / adrenaline
cruiser = pipe / slippers / in it for the freedom aspect not the kicks
you'll always be wishing you were on the sports bike, I would be
, not saying commuter hacks can't be fun, but pushing them hard for kicks is pretty dangerous as they aint up to the job.
even 170mph sports 600s are tame as a pussycat under 10k rpm and won't be any more scary than a 500cc das style bike.
end of day bike is only as safe as the rider... if you drive like a tool any bike will punish you, treat it with the respect is deserves and you'll have a lot of fun
i know when I past my test I wanted the fastest / most fun bike I could afford.. ended up with a Kwak KR1 250, they had just been released and 250s were still the tool to have for scratching about (600s of that era were lardy)
dull commuter bike = just transport
sports bike = fun / adrenaline
cruiser = pipe / slippers / in it for the freedom aspect not the kicks
you'll always be wishing you were on the sports bike, I would be
, not saying commuter hacks can't be fun, but pushing them hard for kicks is pretty dangerous as they aint up to the job.even 170mph sports 600s are tame as a pussycat under 10k rpm and won't be any more scary than a 500cc das style bike.
end of day bike is only as safe as the rider... if you drive like a tool any bike will punish you, treat it with the respect is deserves and you'll have a lot of fun
i know when I past my test I wanted the fastest / most fun bike I could afford.. ended up with a Kwak KR1 250, they had just been released and 250s were still the tool to have for scratching about (600s of that era were lardy)
Last edited:
Everything else aside quater turn vs half turn for someone who has very little throttle control and is going to be (no disrespect) a fair weather weekend rider may not perhaps be the best move ?
I'll agree with that
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 92,031
- Location
- Falling...
You got to sit on them and see how you feel. Depends what sort of riding you want to do too. I prefer sports bikes, but if I had the money and ability I'd have one of each i.e. a street bike and a sports bike as I can have the best of both worlds. Also you have to see how you feel with a vtwin vs inline 4. Completely different riding style. The danger vs power aspect is a dumb argument really.
I don't think any standard 600 throttle is quarter turn, my ZX certainly wasn't (06 reg) and all the other 600s I looked at then weren't either
Even so, you have far more control over your wrist than you would have your foot, and I'm sure if the OP test rode a RR (for example) expecting it to have the controls of a DAS 500, they'd be off, but if the OP rode tentatively, as I’m sure they would, they’d be fine.
Scort.
I would imagine the ZZR 600 is a nice bike to have a first 600, its not too sharp, its comfy and it does 0-60 in 3.3 seconds and a 160 mph.
Only thing i find with it is its too slow and not big enough, I find the super sports 600 too small and flighty as well.
Only thing i find with it is its too slow and not big enough, I find the super sports 600 too small and flighty as well.
As a first bike I think 400's are very nice, they're cheaper to buy (nice NC30 will set you back £1000-1500), and cheaper to insure, whilst providing good handling and plenty of speed,
I've had 2 400's now, an FZR (wouldn't overly reccomend it) and an NC30 (Awesome little bike) and I'm now contemplating upgrading the NC30 to a 600 size bike, so i've test ridden the Yamaha R6 and the Triumph Daytona 675/Street Triple.
Firstly the difference in power is quite a lot, and is one of the reasons I'd reccomend a 400, not a problem if you're sensible but possible better to start on something that could vaquely be called 'docile'
I loved the R6 but it's not a bike that I could own, and I think the same thing will apply to most/all I-4 sports bikes, they just beg to be revved, and who am I to argue. Simply put if I bought the R6 I would either kill/maim myself or lose my licence, true that's down to my self control though
The Triumph's on the other hand are awesome, when you want to they're just as good as the R6, I actually felt more 'at home' on the Daytona, but that might've been the lower seat height. But they're also far far better at lower rev's and don't need/beg to be revved right to the redline through every gear so I find it easier both to ride and to restrain myself from going too stupid
So my reccomendation would be one of the triumph 675's if you're dead set on a 600, or an NC30 if you're willing to start with something that is plenty quick enough with awesome handling (a match for the R6/Daytona in just handling imo, why I don't overly see the need to replace it, yet)
I've had 2 400's now, an FZR (wouldn't overly reccomend it) and an NC30 (Awesome little bike) and I'm now contemplating upgrading the NC30 to a 600 size bike, so i've test ridden the Yamaha R6 and the Triumph Daytona 675/Street Triple.
Firstly the difference in power is quite a lot, and is one of the reasons I'd reccomend a 400, not a problem if you're sensible but possible better to start on something that could vaquely be called 'docile'
I loved the R6 but it's not a bike that I could own, and I think the same thing will apply to most/all I-4 sports bikes, they just beg to be revved, and who am I to argue. Simply put if I bought the R6 I would either kill/maim myself or lose my licence, true that's down to my self control though
The Triumph's on the other hand are awesome, when you want to they're just as good as the R6, I actually felt more 'at home' on the Daytona, but that might've been the lower seat height. But they're also far far better at lower rev's and don't need/beg to be revved right to the redline through every gear so I find it easier both to ride and to restrain myself from going too stupid
So my reccomendation would be one of the triumph 675's if you're dead set on a 600, or an NC30 if you're willing to start with something that is plenty quick enough with awesome handling (a match for the R6/Daytona in just handling imo, why I don't overly see the need to replace it, yet)
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 2,041
- Location
- Lincolnshire
and don't forget the 2007/2008 model now has the CBR600 RR engine
I can't really see why people are always so keep to get and recommend supersports bikes
Hornets, Bandits, Fazers etc. are much more comfortable, easier to ride round town, cheaper to insure and have more power & speed than the majority of bikers can handle.
heres a piccy of my Hornet
Last edited:
Hornet all day if yer going naked .. And forget all those that say bandits are better ..
Sports is another matter .... And hard to Answer ... Forget the SV as its just to dam slow ... Cbr rr is i think to much .. Yup its nice but its hard work unless yer riding 10/10ths .. I think Gixxer 600 but k5 + if u can .... Or the 636 quack .. Personally as a first bike i would go naked...nearly just as fast....no big fairing repair bills...cheaper to buy cheaper to insure....loads of extras ... But your choice
Persil
Sports is another matter .... And hard to Answer ... Forget the SV as its just to dam slow ... Cbr rr is i think to much .. Yup its nice but its hard work unless yer riding 10/10ths .. I think Gixxer 600 but k5 + if u can .... Or the 636 quack .. Personally as a first bike i would go naked...nearly just as fast....no big fairing repair bills...cheaper to buy cheaper to insure....loads of extras ... But your choice
Persil
I can recommend a ZZR600 too as I've got one for my first bike
It may not be as quick as the sports 600's but it's more than fast enough for our roads and for me. Some people don't seem to like them so I think they're under rated which means you should be able to get a good deal on one.