[pplassm]

>1: no matter what, no matter how you seem to trade up bigger in the >first year..

You haven't been riding long enough.

>2: It's not "fun" to learn how to ride on a bike this heavy with roads as steep/twisty/off-camber/narrow/pot-hole(y?)/debris-covered as the ones I'm learning on. I often wonder what they would be like on a dirt bike.

Shoulda got a DRZ!

>3: Anyone that doesn't likes Harley's simply hasn't owned one yet

Been there. Done that. More than once.

Oh, does Buell count? Buell is the bike Harley shoulda built. Well, I gues they did, eh? Love my Buell.

>4: It doesn't like to climb hills at all when you forget to push the choke back in.. go figure..

No EFI?

>in summery. i don't recommend a sportster as anyone's first bike. they're loud, heavy and can be difficult to control at low speeds.

I thought you LIKED it?


>but i don't regret buying mine one bit. i just wish it didn't look so hokey.

Huh? Just trying to figure your post out.

 

[pplassm]

When people ask me what to get for a first bike, I always mention dual-sports, and they are always shocked.

They are light, powerful, nimble, and offer much more flexibility than a pure street bike.

My DRZ400 is comfortable on the highway as long as you keep it below 80, and absolutely rules the tight twisty, bombed out roads and forest trails in the western part of the state. The same traits that make it fun in that regime make it an excellent urban commuter and backroad bomber.

I know some riders prefer the larger air-cooled 650s (DRZ and XR-L), but the 400 is more fun in the tight stuff.

The only limiting factor is inseam, I guess. Dual-sports are tall bikes.