Trying to decide on first cruiser. HELP!

[MBYC]

Ok so I have owned a bike before, it was a naked bike and fun. Looking to get another bike and thinking about the Suzuki SV650, another naked bike, however thinking that I would really like to try a cruiser. I have been looking at them and need to keep the price low, so have been looking at the early 2000-2005 models. So trying to decide between Honda Shadow 750 (really like the size and ease of customizing the Spirit), Honda Sabre 1100, Boulevard C50/M50, Vulcan 900, Yamaha VStar 1100....and so on. Is the Honda 750 enough motor and will keep me interested in it? How would the Honda 750 compare to the Vulcan 900 or the Boulevard 50 family??? Which has more power, a better ride? Is there a huge difference between these and an 1100? At which point would it be considered too much bike for me? Love the Mean Streak, but seems as though that would be too much for me. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Also I am 6'1".

[Motorcycle Forum]

[QZephyr]

I decided on the '07 M50 over others because I read a bunch of reviews that I found on the net. Most liked the Honda but not enough to choose one. The other choice would be the Vulcan 900. I Took the M50 because it was shaft drive and fuel injection. Before '05 it would be carbureted

[slozomby]

what bike did you have before. and how many miles did you put on it. that'll change the recommendations.

if you compare the sv to most cruisers it would come in somewhere around the 1100's power wise. but at much higher rpms and weighing a good couple of hundred pounds less.

i'd pass on the honda 750 its a little underpowered. most of the others on your list are pretty good. just need to sit test them and find one you like. if you plan on eating tons of freeway then an 1100+ will probably be your best bet.

the m50's are fairly cheap used. and after a couple of upgrades do pretty well overall. im still reasonably happy with my M50 but i keep looking at the yamaha stryker.

cooley's 2 inch risers help a bunch for comfort.
and a fuel processor with good map or autotuner( my personal choice) help give it a little more oomph.

at 6'2 and 270ish the m50 will push me along at 65 all day long. lots of tallish folks opt for john's forward control. but if your used to riding a standard/crotch rocket the leg position is easily doable on the stock setup. but the seat sucks.

[Easy Rider]

what bike did you have before. and how many miles did you put on it. that'll change the recommendations.

The SV is an excellent all-around bike. Late models were called Gladius.

If you want performance in a light general purpose bike, don't overlook the S50/VS800 either.
It's kind of like the SV650 on steroids.

[DrBob]

What did you have before? What kind of riding do you plan to do? These two questions are vital if you want a cruiser recommendation.

If you are looking for comfort, smooth ride, and being able to ride 2-up in weekend trips, the VStar1100 is top of the list. The C50/ M50 would be a second choice. The Honda 1100 Sabre is capable but not as comfy, and the 750 is just too small.

If performance is important, none of the bike on your list are a good choice other than the SV650. The Honda 750s are very underpowered, which makes them last but also makes them dull. The Suzuki M50/C50 are heavy enough to have a good ride, and are comfortable, but acceleration is in the 250 Ninja range. The VStar 1100 is comfortable, reliable, and very good looking, but performance is lacking. The Sabre 1100 is faster, but stil not exactly spirited. A 500cc sportbike will run away from any of those bikes stoplight to stoplight like the cruiser is chained to a tree.
EasyRider has a good suggestion with the S50. It has the same displacement as the C50/M50, but is powered by a 805cc high compression, dual carb motor originally designed for the VX800 naked. Combined with light weight and steep gearing, and lots of lean angle, it is a rocket ship compared to most cruisers. It is WAY faster than any bike on your list, and it even beats bikes like the VTX1300 and Intruder 1400 in the quarter mile, and many even larger bike stoplight to stoplight. But it is also small and narrow, so it is not a good choice for two-up comfort or if you have long legs.

There are SO MANY choices other than cruiser and sportbike though. There are a lot of good standards on the market that will outperform a cruiser and out-comfort a sportbike, so don't limit your choices by only looking at cruisers.

[skibold]

When you are looking for a cruiser you must be looking for comfort on long trips and not so much performance. My wife rides a C50 and keeps up with my 109 just fine. Stay away from air cooled, they make less hp than a water cooled.

[Easy Rider]

Stay away from air cooled, they make less hp than a water cooled.

But they aren't as heavy either.....in general.

A water cooled engine is not automatically better in all cases.

[DrBob]

Stay away from air cooled, they make less hp than a water cooled.

Not true. Engine configuration, RPM range, fuel delivery, compression ratio, and a hundred other factors have a LOT more to do with HP than the type of cooling a motor has. HP is simply a number generated by (Torque x RPM)/ 5252.

An air cooled 865cc Triumph Speedmaster makes 20% more HP than a water cooled Kawasaki Vulcan 900 does with 903ccs. An air/ oil cooled Suzuki Intruder 1400 made almost 20% more HP than a water cooled Vulcan 1500 of the same vintage, and 1170cc BMW R1200S makes about 3% more HP than your water cooled C109rT does with 1783cc. But there are examples the other way also: the water cooled V-rod makes the most HP of any stock Harley motor, and the water cooled 805cc S50 makes 15% more HP than the air cooled 883 Sportster (though it is significant to note that the lower HP engine in both of these cases is a pushrod engine while the higher HP motors are both dual overhead cam ones, so water cooling is not the only difference). Not that HP means much in a cruiser, where torque is much more important, due to the low RPM nature of cruisers and the type of riding their owners do. Your C109rT has a lot more grunt on the bottom end, but the BMW makes huge HP numbers because it can sacrifice low end power for high RPM; a great example of how HP numbers are less important than matching the the engine's optimum RPM range with the type of riding the bike is intended for.

Water cooling has the advantages of being able to cool engines with any configuration, where air cooling only where you get adequate air flow to all cylinders, like with a V or parallel twin, or a boxer. It can also cool a motor located anywhere, such as behind fairings on a Goldwing or sportbike. This created the added bonus of being able to put the same powerplant in multiple bikes of radically different styles, like the Ninja 500 and the Vulcan 500 using the same engine, as did the Suzuki VX800 sportbike and the Intruder 800 cruiser, though not many makers take advantage of this because of the radically different desired RPM ranges of different types of bikes. The water jacketing can also reduce engine noise. It also allows for the use of far less expensive alloys, as engine heating will be more equal across all parts of the engine, so engineers do not need to worry nearly as much about formulating different alloys to make sure all engine parts heat up and expand equally despite different airflows. All gasoline motors need to operate in the same rather narrow operating temperature range (too hot and the engine oil breaks down, too cold and the engine will not burn off the acids that build up in oil, both of which will drastically shorten an engine's life), so design and development to make an air cooled motor run in this range is harder and thus more expensive, driving up the cost of the motorcycle. These reasons are why almost all lower to mid-priced cruisers are water cooled: a dependable motor that keeps the bike under the desired price point.

But on the downside, designers are a slave to the radiator, there is extra weight from a bulkier engine and the associated cooling system, extra maintenance for the consumer (coolant changes, thermostats, flushing to remove scale and corrosion, etc), and more parts to break down over time. For these reasons most high-end cruisers do not use water cooling: a dependable motor that is more expensive, but required less maintenance and allows designers to pen a more traditional design free of a radiator. And without water passages, an air cooled motor is very easy to repair or modify: a simple piston swap and some larger bore jugs let Harley go from 883 to 1100 and then 1200ccs on their Evolution Sportsters, and with a few hundred bucks worth of aftermarket goodies you can actually bore out an 883 and make it a 1340cc quite easily. Harley also found it quite easy to bump their Twin Cam 96 up to 103 and then 110 cubic inches by increasing cylinder bore over the years, something you could never do with a water cooled motor. And finally, if you DO overheat an air cooled motor, it usually simply stalls, and will restart once it is cool. Overheat a water cooled motor (or run it out of water) and you can blow a hose, leaving you on the side of the road, or you often blow a gasket, letting water into the combustion chamber and requiring major work to get it going again. There is definately something to be said for simplicity.

So, with all that said, power output is a function of engine design as a whole , and it is incorrect to make a generalization about water cooled motors making more power than air cooled ones, or vice-versa.

As for durability, there is no evidence that one type of cooling makes a motor last longer than another either. In general, larger engines last longer than smaller ones, and lower RPM engines last longer than higher RPM ones. I've seen water cooled Concours and Goldwings rack up over 500,000 miles, but I've also seen air cooled Electra Glides go well past that mileage also. I've seen air cooled 883 Sportsters blow up at 50,000 miles, but I've seen them go 150,000 miles also. I've seen water cooled C50s blow up at 50K, and I've personally put 150K on a water cooled Intruder 800. So again, it is incorrect to make a generalization that water cooled motors last longer than air cooled ones, or vice-versa.

The very first water cooled, 4-valve, gasoline motorcycle was patented in 1894, and the first mass-produced water cooled motorcycle hit the market in 1908. Water cooled motorcycles and air cooled motorcycles have co-existed for over 100 years now: if one had a clear advantage, the other would be long extinct.

[QZephyr]

I really like the info you share with us Bob. It makes you think a little more before making a choice.

[AfterDarker]

When is the book coming, Dr Bob?
I'll buy it!

[QZephyr]

Me too, by Dr. Bob MD (motorcycle doctor)

[JmalB]

The aircooled Ducatis make good power too.

As for something close to the performance of a SV650, you should consider Kawasaki's Ninja 650R/Versys/E-6rn. 649cc parallel twin. Makes good power. Handles well. Offset shock is a snap to adjust. I'm only slightly biased

[skromfols]

Since you're thinking about getting a cruiser my guess is that you're not looking for all out performance, but more of a comfortable ride that looks good and still performs well. Am I close?

Unlike a car, a motorcycle is something you choose to ride because it's fun, it's not just transportation. In order to choose the right motorcycle first consider what characteristics you're looking for. Will you be primarily bar hopping, commuting, touring, riding alone or two up, or ?? To meet those needs you'll decide how comfortable the seat should be, if you need a windshield, saddlebags, etc.

Then start looking at Craigslist, Motorcycle Trader, E-Bay, and your local paper to see what's available. Go see as many bikes as you can. Sit on them, can you hold it up comfortably, does your butt fit the saddle, do you like how the handlebars feel, etc. As you're sitting on the bike think about how it would feel after an hours ride, how you appear to friends while sitting on it, will you get tired of it easily.

Check maintenance records and inspect the bike carefully. A bike that looks like it's been well cared for probably has. If it's not well maintained cosmetically that tells you something about mechanical maintenance too.

Now, the most important thing. Does it put a smile on your face? Remember I motorcycle should be fun, and if you own it you should want to smile every time you walk out and see it. You want to ride it, not need to ride it, so you should feel the attraction.


I wish you the very best of luck in finding just the right motorcycle, and suggest that you look at the Triumph America and Speedmaster. These are both great mid size cruisers with very good power, good handling, comfort and looks. The Triumphs are very dependable, are comfortable cruisers. While Harley guys often snear at Japanese bikes, I've found that they are interested in my Triumph, and I seldom stop for gas without at least one or two people admiring the bike.


Again, best of luck in your decision.

[Hopper]

Thank You Dr. Bob

[KiwiRider]

What skromfols said, in spades! You've gotta like your bike, or else you'll just not ride as much as you should. Get a short list of what you like, stand beside each one, and the one to get is the one that you rested your hand on longest!