| Author | Message | ||
     Randymoser |
*This might be a repost* Hi all, I’m going to buy a new bike in the next few months and was wondering how you would justify getting the Buell Lightning (B9S) over the Bonnie and Monster 800. What I’m looking for is an interesting middle-weight machine. I own a RZ350 and Trident 900 right now, but the T3 is too tall and the RZ too fragile. This would be an everyday ride, a sort of sporting standard, and not “the ultimate hooligan tool.” Does the Lightning succeed at this level, or do you need to thrash it everywhere. One of the criticisms I have of the M900 is that the ones I’ve ridden seemed like they were gutless unless you were wringing the hell out of them. Dows the B9S share this sort of bias? Thanks for the help, Randy (In magical New Hampshire) | ||
| Roc |
Randy, Isn't the Monster a 900? I've never ridden the XB9s, but the 9r has good power band. You should at least ride one before you buy anything. Buell markets these bikes as hooligan tools but they would be excellent for what you have in mind, good mileage too. | ||
| Randymoser |
Ah, the old Monster 750 has been punched out to 800 ccs this year. I think this is so it can beat the SV650... Thanks for the help, Randy | ||
| Mikej |
What's a B9S? Anyway, you're the only one who has to do any justification. I just say to take a test ride and then decide. No justification involved. Buy what works for you. Test ride it like you'll be using it and then decide or justify if it works. Some people do just fine on a Monster900 without wringing it's neck, some don't, seems to have more to do with the riders than the rides. YMMV. http://www.buell.com/en_us/products/motorcycles/lightning/lightningmain.asp Torque (North America Per SAE J607) 70 ft. lbs. @ 5500 rpm Horsepower (North America Per SAE J607) 92 HP @ 7500 rpm Wheelbase 52.0 in. (1320 mm) http://www.ducati.com/bikes/my2003/ducatiModel.jhtml?modelName=800sie-03 Power 54 kW - 73 HP @ 8250 rpm Torque 69 Nm - 7 kgm @ 6500 rpm Wheelbase 1440 mm / 56,7 in http://www.triumph.co.uk/site/bikes/BikeSpec.cfm?BikeID=64 Performance (Measured to DIN 70020) Maximum Power 62PS (61bhp) at 7,400 rpm Maximum Torque 60Nm (44.3ft.lbf) at 3,500 rpm Wheelbase 1493mm (58.8in) After looking at the above links, if you're considering the Triumph then the other two are not in the same arena. Take a real close look at those wheelbase dimensions.  | ||
| Randymoser |
Ah, poor use of words with using justifying. I also should have said XB9S, not B9S. In my defense, I’m writing this from work on a laptop with no “u” key… I was trying to convince a friend to get the Bonnie over a BMW R1150R and started having naughty thoughts about the bike myself, even though I’m pretty much sold on the Lightning. I’m waiting on a modest inheritance to come due and have flip-flopped several times from a Speed Four to XB9 to Bonnie to SV650 to a M800… I guess I should just unplug until I have the time to test ride a couple of these bikes, eh? Thanks, Randy | ||
| Mikej |
Wait for the XB12's to arrive locally to you then test ride. | ||
| Jim_m |
From what Randy is saying, the XB12 is not in his market. He's going for the middleweight bikes w/ middleweight power. If handling is not a real issue, then I would look at maintenance next. If that is not a concern, then you'll need to go with what floats your boat the most. The Monster is starting to look old (classic, but old). The Bonnie just looks classic (but that's me in love with British Iron  ). The XB9S looks, as John Burns' "sprog" says 'like bikes of the future.' edited by jim_m on July 24, 2003 | ||
| Mikej |
Yep, old Trumpets are cool, so are old Beezers. | ||
| Krait |
I would add to this that the valve adjustments on the Ducati engines can be a greatly added maintenance expense and hassle. My finacee has a Monster 620 that will be due for a valve adjustment soon. This will take all day and can be expensive. After that, additional adjustments will be needed every year, if she continues to ride a lot. As to the somewhat dated look of the Monster, there are many, many aftermarket parts out there to change the appearance of Monsters. An advantage of being on the market so long is the variety of parts. | ||
| Apex1 |
Randy, At the end of last year, when the B9S's (i knew what you meant)where first available, I faced a similar buying decision. The single most important thing you can do to ensure that you will be happy with the decision you make is to RIDE the bikes first. I chose the XB. It is a great "sporting standard" in my opinion: comfortable, agile, & has very smooth power. Feels right at home on the blvd. at 2500RPM or carving canyons at 6000RPM. Also as stated above, maintenance is an important issue (was to me anyway). The new Buells are low maintenance & now come with a 2 year, unlimited mileage warranty! There will be no competition here from other marks. Then there's the "cool" factor. I think the Buell takes this category, hands-down for it's tech features (frame/swingarm, wheels, brakes, belt drive)and edgy styling. Just one more thing; don't expect either the Triumph or Monster, or ANY other bike for that matter, to handle like the XB.The XB is has better suspension components, is shorter, and has far more cornering clearance. My 2 cents... stepping down from soapbox, now. Good luck in whichever way you decide to go. | ||
| Kevyn |
Uhhh, the 2003/4 Monster(M1000) has the 1000DS(DualSpark) motor with significantly increased performance margins in HP and torque...if you're really interested, visit the Duc site and have a look at the S4R... not sure how it stacks up against the XB12's performance wise or as eye candy, but the Duc is available is several frame/wheel/body combinations. Ohhh, you won't have to wring it up to get it to go. Want middle weight performance in British dress...TT600 is getting some excellent motopress reviews. And, it looks friggin' fantastic! Personally, the XB12R in black/gold has my heart fluttering... | ||
| Jim_m |
"Want middle weight performance in British dress...TT600 is getting some excellent motopress reviews. And, it looks friggin' fantastic! " only problem I see with this (in Randy's situation) is that it's an IL4. His choices place him in the air/oil cooled camp. But it does look awesome. I can't wait to see what they did/are going to do with the Daytona | ||
| Randymoser |
Thank you all for all your help. Jim is right: I’m really after a middle-weight bike. My Trident is a lovely machine, but it’s too tall and top heavy to be comfortable, and the RZ is a little too little. The XB9S looks like a very good fit as far as weight and power goes… I know the XB12 will be faster, but I think I'd rather have the XB9. I don’t think I need a naked bike that will run the quarter mile in less that 12 seconds. How often would I use this power without any wind protection? I know that I'm rarely going above 80mph on the Trident. I thought hard about the Speed Four, but really like torque and the Triumph makes, what, almost half of what a M800 or XB9 pumps out? I may ride the Buell, Bonnie, M800 and S4 back-to-back when my parents' house sells and my inheritance comes in. The Bonnie is the odd duck here, but it’s bikes like this that make me consider it: http://www.mecatwin.com/fr/motos/triumph/racer/index.htm In its stock form it does nothing for me, but guys have gotten this beast down to around 400 pounds and 100 horsepower. Of course this requires a big bore kit, new carbs, etc…, which is a lot of work and money to splash on a new machine. I’m much more inclined toward the Lightning, to be honest. I’ve wanted a Buell forever, and got the Trident because I was still about $1,500 short for the M2 of my dreams… And personally, I like the XB series better (visually) than any Buell since the very Early S1s… Thanks again, Randy | ||
| Mikej |
Nice   | ||
| Jim_m |
that's sweet | ||
| Kevyn |
Did anyone notice the Evo-XLCR... | ||
| Darthane |
I don’t think I need a naked bike that will run the quarter mile in less that 12 seconds. <~~Randy Just so you know, if you can launch it right, the 9S is most likely capable of a sub-12 second quarter mile. I've gotten a 12.2 on my 9R after only two trips to the strip.  | ||
| Jim_m |
the Trumpet flat tracker is nice image{ } edited by jim_m on July 25, 2003 | ||
| Jim_m |
Let me try again  | ||
| Randymoser |
Hey Darthane, I think quarter-mile times in the neighborhood of 12.70 to 11.50 are fine for a naked bike. I just don’t understand why reviewers continue to say the XB9 engine is flaccid when it runs almost identical times to most of the bikes in its class. (The M900 and Speed Four, to name a few.) I don’t get why Ducati Monsters are called balanced packages while the XB9S is “too extreme” for everyday riding. It seems to me that there may be a bit of a Euro-bias… Randy | ||
| Jim_m |
'cause they read 984 and match it up to the 1000 cc IL4 naked bikes. Cycle World and MO has not been bad about this, but Motorcylist has. | ||
| Randymoser |
Yep, you’re right Jim, but I think theses Buells have a lot more in common with the Multistrada, Speed Four and a/c Monster series than the SV1000, FZ-1, Ducati S4 and Speed Triple. Maybe the XB12 will go head-to-head with these beasts and leave no doubt that the XB9 is a middle weight? Randy | ||
| Jim_m |
definitely, but the only one who ever had anything good to say about Buells at Motorcyclist was John Burns. I've always classified Buells with Ducatis. Air cooled sporting twins. But that just makes too much darn sense, I guess. | ||
| Kevyn |
 | ||
| Jim_m |
It needs the siamese pipes | ||
| Jprovo |
Recently, T.W.O. magazine did a review with the XB9R, the Multistrada, the Z1000, and the Triumph Speed four. The XB9R came in last, with the reviewers bitching about the transmission, clutch lever effort, and lack of power. Looking at the numbers, the XB9R was really well matched to the Multistrada and the 600cc Speed Four up to about 100 mph. What really suprised me was that despite the Z1000 kicking everyone's butt performance wise, the Multistrada was picked best of the bunch. It has to be Euro-Bias that allows a bike that is described as ugly (personally, I think it's really fugly), having a heavy clutch pull, and an uncomfterable seat be considered the best bike. Personally, I think that the XB shifts really well, has enough power to easily lift the front wheel, and can go fast enough to get me in real trouble. I just wish I could afford one. James | ||
| Jim_m |
I don't get the clutch comments (then again, I have a Bandit with heavier springs, so anything is like slicing butter to me) The shifting I can understand...but I'ne read it gets smoother around the 5 grand mark...can anyone validate this? | ||
| Josh_ |
I agree with the pipes comment and damn but that looks nice! Wish it wasn't so dark. | ||
| Kevyn |
Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but I remember something about Erik having some influence in the frame design for the XL series in the late 70's. Probably will never sound like DAve's XR1000 snortin' through Supertrapps but the possibilities offered with the Evo motor are interesting...hopefully it will have fit and finish above the American offering and a measure of reliability. Is it beggin' for retro flames or what? How about some inverted forks or a beefy M2 front end and some gas charged Penske's on the rear... Uhhh, probably won't run with the middle weight 600's or approach the handling of the XB's... | ||
| Darthane |
Jim, Definitely. The higher you wind a XB the easier things go in there. I've never missed a shift at higher RPMs, but it loves slipping second on me if I shift too early. The XB as a whole though shifts very nice, ESPECIALLY when compared to the other Buells. Bryan | ||
| Randymoser |
I don’t know why anyone would want a Multistrada. Although I like the tail section and sss, the bike is so ugly that it hurts. I don’t see the advantage of this bike over the lighter, wackier KTM Duke II or heavier, more sensible Triumph Tiger, and all three bikes are way too tall for most humans I know. The Kawasaki Z1000 looks tacky to me and the Speed Four is trying too hard. It reminds me of a lot of the suburban punks I knew in the 80s: Beneath its streetfighter mask hides a pretty pedestrian TT600. (This isn’t a bad thing, but if I was going with an i4 I’d get a CBR.) Randy | ||
| Jim_m |
I like the Multistrada, right up until the headlight/upper fairing. Then again, I also like the 999, so I may just be a Terblanche mark. | ||
| Randymoser |
Oh, agreed. The bike would still be way too tall for me, but I’d like the Multistrada a lot more if the front didn’t look quite so much like the robot from Mystery Science Theatre 3000. I’d also like the Speed Four better if it was a single large headlight rather than the bug-eyed units from the S3. I think the headlights on the XB9S are lovely, but by and large think café racers should have single headlights and streetfighters dual ones… Randy | ||
| Mikep |
Randy, It is in the end, your choice. My opinion is that the Buell XB is truly a nice, easily maintained, no blue pipes, fuel injected, no chain (or belt) adjustment, no anti-freeze, nice sound, nice vibration, starts every time, very light weight, wonderfully suspended, sticky tired, comfortable, great stopping, great handling, head turning, did I say, easy to own motorcycle. A bit expensive, but nicer than the other two. mikep |
