My next bike?

SuprSi

Well, I passed my test back in January and have thoroughly enjoyed being a full license holder since then. Naturally enough I'm still forced to run a restricted bike, but my current Kawa is only a 250 so it's not a big deal. My SSIA matures shortly and I'm thinking of getting a brand new bike, though I'm confused about what to get. I'm pretty crap at saving so I'll only have one chance to get a bike that's going to have to last me some time.

My first idea was this one...

http://www.kawasaki.co.uk/product.asp?Id=34045ECD22D&S=2

with a restrictor kit, which I can hopefully remove when my 'grace' period is up. This got me thinking though, and seeing as Eye (who posts on here) has a restricted FJR1300 and doesn't think it does it any harm, what about something bigger that will last me longer?

I know it's a step up in terms of power/performance, but what about fitting a restrictor kit to something like a KTM Supermoto 950, assuming I could get the insurance? Would that much of a step up be stupid? The restrictor would limit the performance to something reasonable and could be removed when I'm allowed to remove it. I've been driving bikes for nearly 5 years now and that KTM is one of my favouites, mainly due to the seating position and the sound it makes!

murphaph

Don't worry about stepping up to a big bike. Get whatever you feel comfortable with! Fair play to the wreckless spending of your SSIA, too many sensible plans surround that scheme

Idleater

fitting a restrictor kit to anything makes 0 difference to any bike. It covers you legally (so you must do it) but you won't get an insurance discount.

To get the insurance company to recognise it, you have to go to Aon (or maybe Quinn) and then they might not give you much discount on something like a 636 but will class something like the Bandit or SV as group 5/6.

Do an advanced training course too to get more discount (again from Aon and Quinn - CN don't recognise training)

L.

SuprSi

I thought the kit restricted the HP by limiting the amount of either air or petrol allowed into the engine? If not, fair enough. I know about the full insurance thing and obviously wouldn't pay way over the odds, though if it meant me being able to get the bike that would last me for the next 4 - 5 years it might be worth it. Thanks!

Hotblack Desiato

SuprSi wrote:

I thought the kit restricted the HP by limiting the amount of either air or petrol allowed into the engine?

That's one way of doing it, yeah. The idea is to reduce the power output.
A factory restricted bike is usually pretty expensive to derestrict (usually better to sell on) so you can (except with CN) get insurance discount on it.
Any restrictor that didn't come from the factory is easy to remove and so the insurers have no way of knowing if it's been removed or not, so no discount.

Though what power output has got to do with the risk of causing a third-party claim, I'd like to know...

Eye

To be honest i'd say go for it if you can afford it and that's what you want then certainly go ahead. Bit of an odd looking bike but each to their own

The whole restriction issue is stupid really but purely for legal reason i've done my FJR, mind you it can be removed for me at the end of this year but it wont make a lick of difference. My brother also has an FJR (without restrictor) and back in Jan i was on holidays and his bike was off the road due to a problem installing heat grips. Gave him my bike for the day and there was no difference powerwise that he could see, he was talking to dealer that fitted it afterwards and he said the restrictor on a machine like that only kicks in from about 120mph+ and slows you down so you wont hit the top 165mph as fast as a non restricted but that's about it.
So for all intense purposes we have the same bikes

You will still have to pay full whack for insurance though because it's not a factory restricted bike, other than that though your flyin

SuprSi

Hey Eye, was hoping you'd comment! I'd love to go for an FJR, though I just wonder if it would be too big a bike for me at the moment. The two above are quite nicely sized, not too big, but big enough, whereas the FJR is in another class. Still, again it's nice to know that it performs more or less the same!

Paparazzo

Get the exact bike you want, you don't want to look back in a year and wish you got something else. eg, when you're driving around on your er6 and every time you see an FJR you'll think "i wish i got one of those". If you plan on keeping it for a while check if there's much add-ons for it. If you're interested in that type of thing of course!
But defo call up insurance companies and ask questions about quotes and which restriction kits to get. Also, make sure you can get the right kit for your bike. I know I asked about one for my last bike (1150GS) and was told there's no factory kit for it.

Eye

As Paparazzo said, make sure you ask lots of questions and get the bike that you want.

Certainly powerwise the FJR is a big step up from what your used to but it won't take long before you get the feel for it and as long as your not a lunatic on the road, you'll be fine.

Dunno if height is an issue for you, myself i'm 6ft and have no problems with the FJR. Even my brother who is only about 5ft 7 or so can handle it no problem, coz you can make slight adjustments to the seat height too which helps the vertically challenged

But before you buy anything make sure to throw your leg over one and sit on it to see how comfortable you feel on it, riding position on the FJR is nice and comfortable, not laying down on the tank holding on for dear life and at the same time not sitting back chillin' like a cruiser, but more of a happy medium somewhere in between.

Hotblack Desiato

Eye wrote:

Gave him my bike for the day and there was no difference powerwise that he could see

He must only have ridden it in town then...

he was talking to dealer that fitted it afterwards and he said the restrictor on a machine like that only kicks in from about 120mph+ and slows you down so you wont hit the top 165mph as fast as a non restricted but that's about it.

That's a load of cack. It's amazing what people in the bike trade in this country will tell you :rolleyes:
33hp is good for roughly 100mph (depends on aerodynamics) although the speedo will undoubtedly read a bit more than that.
Friends of mine who have had their bikes derestricted say that the difference in acceleration from about 60mph is very noticeable.

There is no way in hell that a restricted bike will hit a true 120mph, never mind 165. It's not a question of accelerating more slowly to the same speed - there just isn't the power there to overcome the wind resistance to reach that speed.

Idleater

The biggest, and most noticeable difference between two identical bikes bar the restriction in one, is the roll on acceleration.

80-120 takes me a couple of seconds more than it would on a non restricted sv.

In fact, I am ashamed to say that it is only just faster than a bmw 523.

0-100 though on the other hand is remarkably similar to a non restricted SV. (though yes, it is slower, probably by as much as 1.5 seconds). which is a lot - 4.5 instead of almost 6.

As you can see, yes restrictions give a huge performance hit on a bike, but it is all relative to pretty much anything other than a hypersports car costing 10x the price.

L.