Vulcan 2000 Teaser
1 - 20 of 177 Posts
Joined
·
2,752 Posts
Joined
·
3,415 Posts
Re: what are you doing?
Why do you continue to post political drivel on a motorcycle web site?
As to the '04 Vulcan it looks like they've got the torque and HP where it needs to be, but that is one big barge of a bike. I guess if there's no corners or twisties where you live it 'd be great.
When the Rocket 111 comes out MO should do an "Extremely Large Motorcycle" test, maybe you could tie a rope too them and toss them off a boat and see which one sinks fastest, kind of a function before form thing.
Why do you continue to post political drivel on a motorcycle web site?
As to the '04 Vulcan it looks like they've got the torque and HP where it needs to be, but that is one big barge of a bike. I guess if there's no corners or twisties where you live it 'd be great.
When the Rocket 111 comes out MO should do an "Extremely Large Motorcycle" test, maybe you could tie a rope too them and toss them off a boat and see which one sinks fastest, kind of a function before form thing.
Joined
·
157 Posts
820Lbs? Where did they put it? I have a Vulcan 800 Classic and GPz 750. the V2k weighs 300-350 Lbs more than either of these bikes. Heck, even harley can make a power cruiser less than 600 Lbs, with the VROD. Sure, the engine is a torque monster and it's well made, but for what it costs, I can buy 2 ZRX1200's or my other favorite, the R1150GS. Neither are cruisers, but far more practical, and better at almost anything. If I was going to pay at least 14.5K for a cruiser, I would probably take a longer look at a Victory.
Joined
·
155 Posts
Well, yes, but one that has four wheels (read: Caterham Super Seven)!
Actually, as one who spent the last week riding the V2K, I can say definitively that it is not too big for the average to above average sized (and skilled) rider. I had a blast riding it, and once off the kickstand, it really didn't feel ungainly. For a smaller, shorter legged guy with less experience handling that kind of bulk and power, you're probably right. In fact, it is extremely well suited to its purpose and a terrific bike.
Joined
·
17,458 Posts
Cruisers aren't used that way.
Cornering ability isn't a priority in designing cruisers. The sort of riding that cruisers are designed for makes cornering ability a distant second in importance. It's sort of like worrying about high speed aerodynamic factors when designing a tank. Doesn't matter all that much. People don't buy cruisers for the purpose of carving canyons. No reason to expect the bikes to perform that way.
Cornering ability isn't a priority in designing cruisers. The sort of riding that cruisers are designed for makes cornering ability a distant second in importance. It's sort of like worrying about high speed aerodynamic factors when designing a tank. Doesn't matter all that much. People don't buy cruisers for the purpose of carving canyons. No reason to expect the bikes to perform that way.
Actually, the V2K doesn't scrape early. The floorboards are positioned fairly high. The increased torque marks an enormous performance increase in my book (I've still got the grin to prove it), and it handles surprisingly well for its girth. Excellent ergoes and very smooth in the corners. The power band never necessitates a mid-corner emergency downshift either. 3rd gear will still get you through a hairpin if need be.
But if it's corner carving you want, might I interest you in an R6?
But if it's corner carving you want, might I interest you in an R6?
Joined
·
157 Posts
Ergo's for whom? It depends on your body type. From what I have read, between Cycle World, Motorcyclist and Motorcycle Cruiser, for a such a big bike, it doesn't treat larger riders well. For someone that 6'5" and 300 Lbs, that worries me. It surprising how sometimes cruisers seem to be made for those short of inseam and torso. My KZ-1000 had better ergos than most cruisers.
1 - 20 of 177 Posts
Join the discussion
