| Author | Message | ||
     65535 |
Hey guys, Newbie here... I have a Suzuki SV650s. I'm used to the riding position by now. Inseam is 32". I'm a pretty new rider. I want to buy a XB12 I am stuck deciding between the SS and SCG. There is no opportunity to test ride unfortunately. I want a bike that handles well, if possible better than my sv650 which feels a bit top heavy and is not so easy to turn. Comfort is important but honestly the sv650s is pretty OK. If the XB12SS really that much worse at handling than the SCG? I can flatfoot on the scg comfortably, and the ss not bad... 3/4 flatfoot let's say. I need help making a decision. Salesmen say it's about the same in terms of handling but all google searches say the SS is a topheavy pig, and to get true handling nirvana you need the SCG. Help! | ||
| Hughlysses |
I don't know what you found on google ("topheavy pig"???), but the only reason to choose an SCg over an SS would be if you're short and you're not. The SS has one of the best suspensions Buell ever put under a bike and will definitely out-handle the SCg on anything other than glass-smooth pavement, which doesn't exist in the real world. With your 32" inseam, the SS is the clear choice. | ||
| Dancing_dogs |
Being smaller and lighter than the average target rider neither stock suspension works that great for me. I'm in the "under 150 lb club" with my gear on which puts me on the low end of the bell curve. I'd have to modify the suspension to fit my body weight and how I ride with either bike. I've already done this on my other bike and it makes a world of difference. Get the one you feel the most comfortable on. The Scg is more cramped for larger folks. I'm only 5' 7" and the Scg was the best fit for me. | ||
| Syd2315 |
My wife has an 06 SS I have an 04 S. They are both excellent handling motorcycles. The SS is a bit more more civilized and less "twitchy". It is no less responsive or fun to ride than the S. You cant go wrong with either bike. Since you have a 32" inseam the SS would probably fit you a bit better. | ||
| Andymnelson |
a few thoughts: flatfooting is over rated. you spend 99% of your time wit your feet on the pegs. the SS will serve you fine here. the ONLY reason to choose the SCG is if you are very short. you lose handling and suspension travel and therefore rider comfort with the SCG. the longer wheelbase won't hurt your handling that much to worry about. last but not least, buy the SS!  | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
I have one of each. Be glad to work you a deal.  | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Both handle well, but because the SS has a longer wheelbase, it does handle "slower" than the SCG. The SCG has the same dimensions as the S and R. The positive trade off is that the SS is more stable in turns. The longer wheelbase provides increased stability at speed. Additionally, the SS has a larger gas tank. Range for me on the S/R frame is a REAL issue. I don't get more than 105-110 miles on the tank before I'm sweating walking. I can easily get 150+ miles out of the SS tank before the light comes on. Once you put the high seat (from S or SX) on the SCG, you have the same seat to foot ratio as the S. The pegs are just going to be lower to the ground. I've ridden both and really like the quick handling of the SCG, but I prefer the SS. | ||
| Dancing_dogs |
Check out the thread in the Quicklink section. There's some talk about Ss vs Scg..... (Message edited by dancing_dogs on November 12, 2009) | ||
| Bikertrash05 |
The SS has one of the best suspensions Buell ever put under a bike and will definitely out-handle the SCg on anything other than glass-smooth pavement, which doesn't exist in the real world. Well, that is like, your opinion, man. BTW, my muffler wouldn't have a dent on the bottom if I had a SS.  With your 32" inseam, the SS is the clear choice. I agree. | ||
| Wavex |
32" = SS indeed. However, there is a lot of misinformation in this thread. The Scg has a shorter wheelbase, smaller trail, smaller rake, and a lower CoG, which all means that while the SS is more stable in a straight line (who cares), it also makes it less responsive and more difficult to lean in corners (twisties)... so in other words the Scg handles BETTER than the SS. However, if you're tall and can't fit on the bike, you are obviously better off choosing the bike with ergos that fit you, in this case the SS. | ||
| Fishgutz |
I am 6' and I chose the 09 Ss for the longer wheel base and higher seat. Love the way it handles. Even with my XXL backside on it. I am looking forward to seeing how it handles after I lose 100 pounds. | ||
| Mikef5000 |
I have ridden both on the track, and can attest that they both handle PLENTY well. You're top priority should be fit and feel. If you ride them back to back, you'll notice the SS turns in slower. Many people prefer that of the SS, and claim the Scg turns in so quick it feels twitchy. If you go with the Scg you will want to find a new seat for it ASAP. Either an S, SX, Select, Corbin, or Baldwin. The factory Scg seat is useless, unless you actually need it that low (by having a 26" inseam). What kind of riding do you do? I absolutely LOVE my Scg for blasting around town. It's so small and flickable, it is the ultimate city/commuter bike. If you get out of town often, the bigger gas tank of the SS may be helpful. You will not be disappointed by the suspension and handling of either. Get the one that fits the best... most likely the SS. |
