[acecycleins]

The M50 is a great little bike that runs out of steam too early compared to the V-star. It handles well, has good breaks and is usually a good buy. However, the V-star has excellent manners, a motor that is nearly bullet proof and insanely long intervals between vavle adjustments. The V-Star will have a much larger selection aftermarket goodies and is easier to re-sell in the event you decide to move on to the next bike. Remember, you have entered the twilight zone when conversing with this crowd. We have more than our fair share of smarta$$es here, but it's all in good fun.

 

[acecycleins]

I've found a ton of V Stars for sale. I had assumed either people didn't like them or they are so popular everyone has an extra. I've found very few M50's for sale so it seems like when I find one, I must be getting a deal.

So there's no concern over the whole air cooled thing?

Also, would you say a fuel injected 800 is near equivalent in power to a carbed 1100?

I've got both sellers standing by. I'm sure they would weigh in if they knew I was asking.

Pretty simple really- Suzuki has only made the M50 since 2005. Yamaha has been building the V-stars since 1999- I think. The power output on the V-star and teh M50 should be similar but the torque on the V-Star wins the show. They've been making air-cooled bikes for 100+ years- Don't think for a minute that you should have problems out of the bike- unless you leave it sitting for an hour + idling.

The bikes depreciate at about the same rate so 2005 models are worth about $1300-1500 less than new retail. So, for me it goes back to which would be easier to sell in an emergency- my pick would be the Yamaha.

 

[acecycleins]

An 1100 V-star, from reports I've gotten from people who had them, steers heavily. You'll need strength to handle the bike well. I don't know about the Suzuki.

Is there any cruiser that doesn't?

 

[acecycleins]

"So there's no concern over the whole air cooled thing?"

No, none. I had a 650 v-star in Arizona. And the summers there tend to get a little warm.

Not directed at you personally, but why do people always get concerned about air-cooled bikes? I've always found them to be less troublesome. Less to go wrong. That's not to say I don't like water cooled bikes. I don't really have a preference, but it was more in defense of the air cooled option.

Yeah, it's weird isn't it. One of the most bullet proof motors in the world was the old Suz GSF1200 motors. You can't break it! My Yamaha XJ was reliable as they get. Never let me down. Water-cooled is nice if your commute involves 30 miles (1 hour plus) of stopped traffic, but in most cases cruiser owners never really get the true benefits of water-cooling, anyway.

 

[acecycleins]

The M50 also looks like they cut corners on quality sometimes. The fenders and tank look more plastic looking. And it also has Suzuki's wonderful paint schemes...which usually cheapen up a bike. In all black it looks much better. But I guess that is the case with most bikes.

Doesn't the M50 have better ground clearance/lean angle, though? I thought I read that on an article somewhere that the M50 was more "sporty"...for a cruiser at least.

Cornering is better with the M50 and the Redbike looks pretty cool, but the Midnight Stars are sweet looking little rides. Also, you can get the Sivlerado version and never have to buy a thing for it.