| Author | Message | ||
     Hughlysses |
Pretty cool: http://www.motorcycledaily.com/04june08_star2009vm ax_p1.htm | ||
| Glitch |
197 horsepower and 122 pound feet of torque Damn! | ||
| Danger_dave |
Good to see that they have stuck true to the original and made it look ^($@#^* horrible too. | ||
| Glitch |
There is after all the only way to do a V-Max! | ||
| Spike |
I'm glad to see they've finally brought it back and they kept the V4. I was hoping it would be less ugly, but I guess that's par for the course these days. We've reached the age of the B-King.   (Message edited by spike on June 05, 2008) | ||
| Gentleman_jon |
I don't think I will be trading Lil' Blackie in for a new V-Max, but the motor might be just the thing for my friends new car...................  It could use another hundred and twenty ponies, if you ask me.  | ||
| Danger_dave |
 | ||
| Hughlysses |
The special "Bender Edition". I like it! | ||
| Brumbear |
Love the trombone exhaust FOR THAT BIG BAND SOUND | ||
| Rubberdown |
$17K plus. edit: $18K plus OTD. pass. (Message edited by rubberdown on June 05, 2008) | ||
| Danger_dave |
Ahhh - it'll be all right I'm sure - I get snarkey because my knees hit about half way up the top inlet stack. I can't ride a b-king. my legs don't fit in the holes. same with this thing i bet. which kinda hacks me off in a big motorcycle - that it cant carry a big guy. | ||
| Cataract2 |
ew. | ||
| Not_purple_s2 |
Can someone tell me why, after all these years, the V-Max still has that hideous seat? | ||
| Danger_dave |
Your feet get sore if you have to stand up for too long. | ||
| Spatten1 |
Gnarley power. They left the weight off of the spec chart.... | ||
| Greenlantern |
Your feet get sore if you have to stand up for too long.  | ||
| Miamiuly |
The gunfighter seat is functional if ugly. The bike is all about straight line acceleration so it gets the gunfighter. The exhaust kills it, the new standards make them big these days. | ||
| Hughlysses |
Another article: http://thekneeslider.com/archives/2008/06/04/2009- vmax-official-photos-and-specifications/ The wet weight's shown here- 683 lbs!!! | ||
| 4cammer |
Wow - all of a sudden the V-Rod looks better to my eyes and actually priced pretty well. | ||
| Swordsman |
I liked the last version better. This one's cool until you get midway... the rear fender looks like crap, and the exhaust is just dorky. ~SM | ||
| Spike |
Full specs are listed on the Yamaha (oops, I meant Star) website: http://www.starmotorcycles.com/star/products/model specs/23/0/specs.aspx Claimed wet weight is 683lbs, unless you're in CA. Interesting that they list the weight as wet since they used a dry weight for all the other models I looked up. In any case, if 683lbs is accurate it's on par with a Concours 14 and a bit lighter than your average Softail. | ||
| Buellinachinashop |
 | ||
| Djkaplan |
For 18 large, I can think a LOT of other irresponsible things to get instead. I'll ride one, but I'll never buy one. | ||
| Spike |
I thought it was growing on me, but then I went back and looked at a picture of the last Vmax:  Compared to the old one, the new one just looks too stylized. The massive scoops and exhaust actually seem to make the motor look small in relation to the rest of the bike. | ||
| Bads1 |
I remember I paid 6200 for 86 Max new in 87. So given twenty sum years gone by I see the price difference. If the money was there for me I'd buy it. A V-Rod runs 16 plus for a Night Rod. Which I really like but the HP isn't to my liking. I'd say its worth the cash..... but thats me. |
