Best bike: light or heavy
 

FIRST OF ALL: I'M SORRY FOR THE MISLEADING TITLE OF THIS THREAD. WHAT I REALLY MEANT WAS:

-WHAT ARE THE ADVANTAGES OF RIDING A BIGGER (HEAVIER) BIKE?


I really like light bikes but it seems that the heavy bikes (Varadero 1000, R12000GS, Tenere 1000, V-strom 1000) are the way to go for travelers these days.
I can name some advantages of the small bikes like maneuverability, fuel economy, you can pick it up yourself after a fall. For the people whom have seen The Long Way Round there is even a good example when Claudio drives a local small bike and can travel much faster than Charlie and Ewan.

Can somebody explain the advantages of these 'monster' bikes?

GLAMOUR -> The actor rides the big bike, while the cameran films him riding the (sh*tty) light bike.

PS: If next time the actor swims wearing boots and the cameraman swims with fins...

2 factors
 

1. Covering longish distance, at high speed on major highways (and stopping quite frequently along the way for fuel).

2. Carry a pillion in the comfort that the passenger expects, and needs, if the relationship between the rider and pillion is to survive the journey.

That's it really.

You can travel on anything, just read some of the stories on here.
Bigger bike = more comfort, maybe better fuel range, higher speeds on larger roads, good for pillions.
Small bike = can go places the big bike cannot.

So if you want to travel with a passenger or plan to stick to roads mostly, a big bike is good but if you want to get off road, are happy to travel a little slower & are riding solo a small bike is better.?c?

These are 2 good points but still...many of the riders I see on the internet do a lot of offroad and hardly ever carry a pillion!
But it reminds me why I'm not a heavy bike user, I always travel alone and I really don't like highways.

I absolutely agree that you can travel on anything, a Harley, a Vespa, a R1200GS. Just wondering why so many times the 1000+cc bikes are chosen for trips that (in my opinion) can easily be done by a 250.

I agree 100%. But isn't that what most travelers do or want to do? Travel slow and get off road here and there?

They can be done by bus or bicycle too. The Western biker can be one big fashion statement and practicality doesn't seem to enter in to it. Getting half the riders out on anything under a litre is like getting my wife to leave her hand bag and use the pockets provided in her jacket, practical but not going to happen because they just aren't comfortable with it!

Andy

This has been discussed a few times already, but here we go....

I can see a lot of great things with heavy bikes (range, power, security, ability to carry water and food, funfactor, comfort, some are reliable etc). I can only see one downside and that's the weight, with the right driving-technique weight is a manageable problem.
My bike has been on all kind of odd places, only once I had to turn around (vann Zyyls pass) because I couldn't carry enough fuel. It still nags me!


Personally I use a 200kg bike for traveling, if you can find a lightweight bike that have a range of 700kms, can carry all my gear without behaving like a overloaded bicycle, manage 150kkm without major rebuilds and still be able to blast through the gravel in 160km/h I might have a look.
In my experience small bikes generally come to short and follow the main-routes because of lack of range (fuel, water, spareparts and food).

I'm not saying that all heavy bikes are great for touring, I'm saying that we have different preferences. There is nothing wrong with that.


Btw: I also have a 250cc and a 400cc

Yep, horses for courses for sure. Take the bike that you think will be best for the job. If you're doing lots of small trails and really enjoy the off pavement experience then get a small bike. If you're doing lots of long distance riding on pavement a big bike is best. Another factor is how much you're going to pack (a big bike can handle big loads very easily) and your own personal dimensions (I find I'm too cramped on most smaller bikes at 6'4").

Actually the best bike for your trip is the one you already own, just get out there!

As a point of reference, when we rode from Germany to South Africa on the East side and then across Canada back home we covered approximately 45,000 km. I had sold my R1150GS Adventure before the trip because I wanted something lighter. Of the 45,000 km I would guess that about 1,000 to 2,000 km (Nubian desert in Sudan, Northern Kenya)was better with a lighter bike, the remaining 43,000 km would have been better (or perhaps the same) with the big Adventure. I'll be taking an R1200GS Adventure on the next trip (and probably hating it in Mongolia) because for the majority of our riding we're on half way decent roads where a big comfy bike is quite nice.

They set off on 3 fat bikes. While welding one of the fat bikes they fried the electrics on it. Hence only 2 fat bikes left = 2 actors (actually one actor and one unemployed carpet fitter, but that's another story :helpsmilie:)... Claudio ends up on the little bike.

I'm on a trip this summer (Central Asia/Rus/Mongolia) where I had the choice between a (medium) fat (Transalp) and a little (DRZ) bike (both already in the garage). I've gone for the Trannie:

Why
1. it's expendible
2. I need the DRZ for trail riding in the UK
3. everything's a compromise
4. my definition of hell on earth is riding 100s of miles on a screaming DRZ and sitting on THAT seat.

I am going with soft and minimal luggage though: That's my contribution to the mantra of light is right.

cheers
C

Different strokes for different folks: I've read of people going RTW on everything from 50cc scooters to Goldwings or Harleys with sidecar rigs. If you want to cover a lot of ground quickly or have a lot of cargo/pillion to carry, a bigger bike is of course the way to go. If you have more time and want to travel at a relaxed pace without a lot of cargo, a smaller bike will do fine. I've always thought something around the 250cc-400cc range is ideal for riding solo in most of the world.

Which is why I've reluctantly binned the idea of a small bike. Many things in their favour but two-up comfort's not really one of them...:(

I don't see the need for any more than a 650 though, unless you really WANT it

Whatever floats your boat.:thumbup1:

Another Angle
 

Just another angle on it:
A small basic dual sport bike can be compress packed into a crate of under 1.8m2. A bike like a DR, XT660, KLR etc can be stripped down to fix, clean or service very quickly. The above bikes can also be squeezed through a 2'6" door of a hotel/house if needed. Sand is a pain but manageable for one person on a small loaded bike but a GSA loaded is a two man job.

For me some people just need to decide what trip they want to do more than what bike to take. Once you know you will be either mainly on the road or doing more than gravel tracks the bike type choice is easy. When Yamaha build a 750cc twin, shaft drive XT750R - I'm having one !!

Maybe that's my problem, being to practical!

(range) OK nice to have less stops for fuel, (power) when do you need the extra power from the R1200GS in comparison to a F650?, (security) ???, (ability to carry...) OK, (funfactor) funfactor is also available for small bikes!, (comfort) OK but you don't travel RTW on a motorbike for comfort now do you?, (some are reliable) some small bikes are too!
So that leaves us with these advantages:
-range
-carry more stuff
-comfort

You use a 200kg bike, then we are talking more about a F650 than a R1200GS? Let's say middle class, but not a 1000+cc, is it?

Different preferences is OK, better than OK or else we all would be riding the same bike!

It's nice to stop other places then petrolstations, but the important part is that when you drive in the third world and want to get away from the main route and explore exotic places you will not find fuel (and water and food) everywhere. For me range is necessary!

I also use my long range back home. Last year I was going to a town 500 km away, I chose to follow gravel roads and 900 kms and 3 days later I got there. On my way I saw two petrolstations, it was a marvelous trip! For my this is freedom!


There might be some situations like overtaking and getting out of a problem. But most of all it's because I enjoy driving powerful bikes. I travel for my own pleasure and a powerful bike increase my pleasure. I'm not saying that this point (or anything else I write) is important for other people but a lot of people like to have some extra power (air-filter mods, different exhaust etc)

A bigger bike will normally have a stronger frame, better rims, better brakes, better suspension and more comfort then a small bike. For me this is safety-factors. I don't find it fun or safe to travel with a overloaded bike.


Sure, if you enjoy it then do it!


I'm not the kind of guy who rides RTW at all, I haven't found a nice route.
But yes I've had trips longer then RTW and I think I enjoy the trip more when I relax and watch the scenery then when I'm cramped on a small bike with a sore arse.


Sure, but in general I think twins are more reliable then singles. There are a lot of exceptions to this but basically I think a twin should make at least 150kkm without major problems and I don't expect that from a single.
My bike has 235kkm (it has been rebuilt). Some people like to change bikes often, I prefer to keep mine for a long time.



Well, I think there are a few other factors, but the factors you listed are important (to mee). I always try to reduce my luggage, but it ads up.

1043cc to be exactly.
Personally I'm not a big fan of the 1200GS, but if you look at the routes many people takes (95% tarmac, 4% fast gravel) I think it can be a sensible choice (for some). IMHO it's a machine for covering long distances on most kind of roads- but as other bikes it has weak spots.

Sure, that's why I don't see the point in topics like this doh

I think you may have misunderstood my reason for this topic.
My question in this thread/topic isn't about a competition between small and large bikes but I just want to know if somebody has a good reason for me to switch from my small bike to a large(r) bike.

Thanks a lot for your answers!

Only you can know this.

Reasons for "needing" a bigger bike to replace a smaller one will vary from the entirely believable as circumstances change (see Alibaba and co above), to the honest to the honestly strange.

I used to believe that a certain badge meant I didn't need to learn mechanical stuff. I've reasoned that if 652cc allowed me to get to the top of Norway, 1085cc would obviously be required to go further, would wear better because it was less "stressed" and would give me more time due to less maintenance (shaft vs chain :offtopic: ). My local BMW dealers were pleased to confirm this (twice). A couple of years later I "needed" a 21-inch front wheel as I was going to become an off road God of some type (Yamaha agreed). This all pretty much wasted petrol money at the dealers and in the TT catalogue and didn't really achieve any more than I could have done by sticking with the first bike and learning how to use it. I blame Chris Scott for my stupidity, he obviously didn't know what I wanted to do when he wrote that book. doh :rofl:.

I did sell an Enfield Bullet and buy the brick while shuffling jobs from one with a company car to one without that's 20 miles down the motorway. This verges on the sensible although I do miss kicking the green swine on sunny days.

If you want to hear real daftness find some bloke with a huge bike who's bought his wife a smaller one. Go ask if it doesn't make sense to have two the same.....:oops2: :innocent::rofl:. :offtopic:

Andy

And in the last day or so it has come around twice!!! http://www.horizonsunlimited.com/hub...679#post374990

That's kind of weird (but that talk is going on in the bar).

I always thought you need a medium sized bike ie a 650 Vstrom which I have done quite a few miles and lots of European trips.

So when looking for a bike for a RTW trip I bought a DR250.. lovely little bike but I couldnt get it out of my head that it was too small....

So I bought a Yamaha TT600RE... yep thats the bike :-)

However, I have just completed a 3,500 mile trip to Gambia on a
HONDA C90 !! and enjoyed every single minute of it... average speed... 45mph :-) you get to see so much more.

So the bike going on my RTW trip is .... My TT600 because I have put a lot of time and effort.. not to mention money on getting the bike just right.

I am keeping my 250 for a future trip to Africa.... less speed more to see

Cheers
Geordie aka Will

Honda C90 or BMW Adventura
 

Hi
No one can tell you which bike to ride you take the bike you feel most comfortable with, you only have to look at this site HU to see the many different bikes that travellers are on. You can go around the world on a Honda C90 just as easy as BMW Adventura. Skip

I just thought I'd mention tyres and mpg :)

I had the chance to try a 1200GS and a XChallenge on the same muddy gravelly terrain, and the lighter bike made things so much easier everywhere, but the knobbly tyres as BMW supplied meant the 650 hardly ever slid, the 1200 slid its (high speed rated knobblie) rear all the time. Getting going again was easy on one, nigh on impossible at times on the other even with plenty of hands to push.

Riding to and from the "offroad" bit was nasty on the sewing machine smaller bike, lovely on the big one :)

I bought a 1200GS in 2005 to commute with and dream on, and loved it despite me being 5'6". 200 mile range without panniers, less with.

Now, I like the idea of the 650 Sertao purely because its supposed to do 80mpg, so again a 200 mile range but still a nasty engine?

To me, many people who say you need a more nimble bike are talking about mainly off road in their neck of the woods. RTW with proper off road seem to be a fairly rare combination from what I've read??? ?c?

I wouldn't use a tiny bike for a holiday to ride 2000 miles to somewhere interesting either :confused1:

Too many choices!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jason

:)

This is going to be unpopular though...
 

Maybe not for someone in HUBB, maybe not for a serious traveller, maybe not for 99% of you and not for many but... I've got quite a few friends (good as brothers, actually) riding 1200GS and, of course it is a great bike, it is very confortable, it has long range, you can carry your wife, your luggage, your dog and your aquarium... but social status was definitely involved in their decision. They are my friends, so I know that vanity was there as well. And the bigger, the better, as it happens with cars: bigger Mercedes, better than old 2CV. And if off roading, you have the Mercedes G owners, a class on its own. Sure, it's good...

So, I'm sure that it's not the case for those writing here, seasoned riders, serious off-roaders and many making 6ft 2" who are not going to ride a 125cc all the way to Cape Town (I'm smaller, travel less, etc, ok), but... the hipe of big bikes and particularly the GS is in many cases tied to upper class adventurous way (aka E+C LWR and the like), as the pimped Harley chopper with black/white tyres weekend bad-boy looking private banker (and I've got friends who are p. bankers, nothing wrong with that, they are nice). And sorry, that's a good reason why me, with all my prejudices, I don't feel part of that bunch.

I like the shity tiny cars, bikes and the people who like them. Especially if they can the big/expensive, but I like this way.

Sorry, I have to say it. I'm not ready for the storm if it comes, so do not be too bad with an honest prejudiced guy.

Whatever you ride, it's good, each one his needs, and there is the right time for everything (maybe for me is yet to come). I'm sure a huge bike is a great pleasure to ride as well. But when I see a GSA I feel I'm looking an XT who became a bodybuilder on steroids, kind of a Ben Johnson.

Happy travels,

Esteban

Nothing wrong with having a preference for one type of vehicle over another - as long as you realize that other folks will have different tastes. Even if I won a million dollars in the lottery tonight, I would never buy a Mercedes or a Cadillac - it's just not my thing. Why should bikes be any different?

A few random thoughts based on my travels so far. Many of these are already noted by others.

I recently dropped a lot of weight by switching from hard luggage to soft (on a KLR650), and dropping a few extra items. After doing this I found I had a lot more fun riding. Easier on dirt roads, which I seek out often, and more nimble on pavement. Just be certain whatever bike you use is setup to be comfortable.

If you like carrying lots of stuff, get a larger bike. It will handle the heavy load better.

If you carry a pillion AND need lots of stuff, get a larger bike. But I am 100% confident I could travel happily on a KLR650 with a pillion that travels as light as I do. I've done it for short distances and been happy with the impromptu setup.

If you want to do all your own maintenance, choose a smaller bike, preferably with a carburetor. It will be a lot easier to work on.

If you are traveling lots of highway miles and must go very fast, get a larger bike. But I would only consider this in the USA, Europe, etc. where the roads are good. If you don't need to go fast a smaller bike still works fine. Just modify the bike to be comfortable by changing tings. Comfortable seat, possibly changing final drive gearing, better windshield, better grips, better handlebars, throttle lock, etc.

If you like to get on dirt roads away from civilization, take drop as much weight as possible. I would consider it more important to have less luggage weight than a smaller bike, but decreasing both is best. Also seriously consider soft luggage for this type of riding.

If you like being the center of attention, get a bigger bike. Ditto if you want fashion.

I ride a KLR650 setup for dirt riding and have one of the smallest amounts of luggage I've seen among travelers. I've spent a lot of time practicing riding dirt roads. But I still see small 125cc street bikes with tires resembling racing slicks going places that are impossible for me. Next time around I may try a smaller bike....

Well said. :thumbup1:

Every activity that gets any attention has it's Charlies. I've owned training shoes but have no intention of doing any running or jumping. I could claim they give me the chance to win medals once I've done some training and given up the pies and the beer and got over the stage where the thought of any physical exercise makes me sick and you'd simply think I was daft. Lots of fat old blokes wearing football shirts enjoy themselves and do little harm. Same goes for the sixty year olds with squared off tyres and Rossi lookalike leathers and the bad boy rebel bankers. It's telling some kid that he's only got a chance of getting to the Olympics/Premier league/RTW if he buys the kit with certain expensive logos that I find annoying.

I hang around here because despite having no intentions of going anywhere that involves lots of paperwork to get in and doesn't serve a decent cappachino when I get there, the ratio of guys with real information to Charlies is pretty high on the whole. There are a couple of other sites where your comments may be taken the wrong way but not I think here.

Andy

I think the question is in reality unanswerable.
You should ride the bike you like to be with. That way you will find it easier to live with its downsides. All bikes have good and bad points in various proportions. It is your own mindset and physical abilities which will determine which particular bike will serve you best.
You can optimise your choice of bikes good points by selective routing. Conversely you can choose a bike that is optimised for your preferred routing. It is up to you where to make the compromises.

Do you have a 650 in mind?
I have considered a few, but it all depends on your build (heavy weight westerner with a beer belly or just a 2m tall well built athlete??), the build of your pillion passenger, the general size and shape of both seats, the amount of luggage that you and your pillion need, or want, to carry, the duration of the trip, the nature of the trip (the old favourite question of "to camp or not to camp"), it goes on; all of these factors have always pushed me toward inline 4 cyls and hotel bookings!!

This is a good point.

We found this guy in Mongolia who let us follow him to a monastery we were looking for. Despite having a couple of heavy bags of grain and his wife on the back, his route included a couple of trickier little bits that I could describe as goat trails. Fortunately we were also on a lightweight bike as I suspect being on a large "off-roader" would have led to the embarrassing situation of not being able to keep up, or more likely dropping the bike in a river.
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-8...0/DSCF3051.JPG

Going for the middle option...
 

Very interesting topic that there is no definative answer. Each to his/her own. I'm influenced by people like Lois Pryce - 225 Serow and TTR 250 - but have just bought a BMW G650GS Sertao as I believe it's the right bike for me - planning to go back to Africa in 18 months ish. Even then I wish the tank was a bit bigger - only 14l, but not often you need more than 200 miles range. So carrying a can or two is the answer. Weight, isn't too much and feels so much easier than my KTM950 adventure that is at home bombing about Europe but consumes nearly double the fuel and is far too fast for the trip I'm planning.
My view is that nothing is perfect!
Recently saw AJP motorcycles at a show in Manchester, they seem to be testing out a 250 adventure travel bike. Ideal for most of us and I hope they go on and produce 'em!
Cheers and happy riding
Coljeiger

Totally agree, go for what you like, get the best basket trainers if you like basket or just the shoes, do not need to be in the Olympics. Or sometimes you plan to do it, but never get to that. But please do not lie yourself or the others with an stupid reasoning. You keep it to yourself, but if you still try to convince the others, then you may get an honest answer. I also belong to the group of ideas that often do not materialize as planned: it's always better to have dreams than nothing, especially if they are more on "doing" than "owning".

Thanks, I am happy nobody got harsh (I am not as honest as Touring Ted yet!), but it is a feeling I sometimes have to tell it... and could not stop myself when I wrote it.

Anyway, no matter what is the bike of anyone's preference here, just enjoy it for your purpose.

Esteban

Hard to see past the V-strom for the combination of economy, reliability, comfort and carrying capacity. The plan is too buy in the states and ride down to South America for a an extended tour. We've had a 600 TA for a few years now and the only complaints I have about it are: it's a bit top heavy, a little cramped for two and I get butt ache very quickly. I've tried a sheepskin, airhawk and a custom seat all to no avail so it must be me..!:helpsmilie:
Incidentally, the other half thinks it's really comfortable.

I've never felt the need for more power though, 120kph cruising all day long with a bit in reserve if you feel the need. Good enough for me but feel free to differ.:mchappy:

I did consider a Bajaj Pulsar for all the reasons already discussed but decided it wasn't really going to work for two of us.

My thread title is misleading but what i meant was:

- what are the advantages of bigger (heavier) bikes?

I've already seen some answers that make sense, thank you all for that.

Then there's the bloke who has a light small bike, but his wife owns the big, heavier 650!!

Ride magazine are saying that the Sertao gave them 54 MPG on a run they did to the Scottish borders (no more than a couple of days); based on the earlier F650GS fuel economy, they must have been caning it.
But, yes, the tank is becoming a tad too small.
Dry weight = 175 Kg.

Yes, that is one of the bigger 650s with a good sized seat for two people.
The twin engine helps when two-up IMO with that bit more HP than the singles of the same engine capacity.
The newish one (released late last year) is "neater" looking but it still appears big when you get up close (to me, the older model always seemed big with the scale of the plastics).
The same Ride mag report claims 46 MPG for the new model Wee strom.
Kerb weight = 214 Kg.

Despite some convincing arguments in favour of small bikes in the other thread running in the Bar I'm still a big bike fan myself.

Most of my travels are with my wife as pillion and the first requirement is comfort for both rider and passenger, however, travelling 2 up means you have to carry more luggage and riding off piste is not a priority. We've not avoided the more difficult routes, but accept that in some places we will struggle. So far my wife has only had to walk on 2 occassions (about a mile each time) but I know there have been times when she's wished she was walking rather than sitting on the bike.

Other benefits of a bigger bike are better performance on the road. We can avoid the vast stretches of tarmac across Europe by travelling on the back roads which is enjoyable but if our destination is southern Africa or India, for example, we'd really just want to get through Europe to places we had'nt seen before to start exploring. A modern 650 has perfectly adequate road performance but they are all physically too small for our use.

Obvious downsides to a bigger bike are higher fuel consumption, greater tyre (and chain) wear, more difficult to transport by other means (canoe) and generally harder to be inconspicuous.

2 stroke
 

Did anyone consider a 2 stroke bike? They are addictive with the best power to weight ratio and might offer best of both worlds.
I love my 2 stroke Kawasaki KE175s specially when driving offroad or the KKH and prefer it over my VX800.

Cheers
Omar

I'm a two stroke fan but the reality is that there aren't any new 2Ts of any capacity for sale in Europe and there hasn't been for quite some time. Mainly this has been down to emission regs getting tighter and tighter leaving the manufacturers with little choice. Even those of us with a few carefully hoarded smokers are now being faced with an increasing number of low emission zones (mainly in Italy at the moment) specifically banning two strokes from entering the town / city.

I own 1 MZ 301 Saxon Tour and enough bits to make 2 and a bit more. They are, overall, my favourite bike ever, fast enough, addictive performance, so simple it's unbelievable. If I could only have one bike the MZ would be on the list of possibles (with the Bonneville).

Would I tour on one? Absolutely, been there done that, will be doing it again.

Would I consider one for RTW or similar? Not unless the aim was specifically to get that bike somewhere. Good stroke oil now requires hunting down in bike shops or online. In Europe you can buy something that will get you to the next town or home but don't expect a choice. Parts for 20 year old machines that when abused eat pistons and bearings and now mail order only. I wish it was like 1989 but things have moved on and the practical answer is 4-stroke.

Andy