> I tend to dissagree with you. Thor: You are not the first to disagree, and that's OK by me. HOWEVER.............
> A heavy powerful bike is something you must respect. My first bike when I > was 16 yrs old and only 180lbs was my fathers 1974 Kawasaki z1 900. Which > weighs close to 500lbs. Worse-over it had an upright seating > position which > caused the bike to have a high center of gravity, drum brake > rear, and disc > brake front, with skinny tires. No leaning on curves you either > slowed down, > or you had tire wobble. The seating position is not what caused the high center of gravity. The bike had a high center of gravity before anyone sat on it. The design caused it to have a high center of gravity. Tire wobble"???--nope, it was the frame flexing (or wobbling, if you will) because the frame wasn't anywhere near good enough for that engine. And the fact is all bikes that have lousy frames have what is known as "frame flex", even today. > That was a monster bike for a 16yr old. Granted I had a wonderful teacher. The fact is, Thor, it was a monster bike for everyone because of it's handling "deficiencies" because of frame flex. It could go straight like a bat out of hell, but turning, there were serious problems, all related to that crappy frame. I don't believe the tires were a particular problem because every manufacturer in those days were using them, and they were only thin in comparison to the rubber we have today. > When I got onto the GTS, it was heavy into the turns, but the balance, > control, and torque where amazing in comparison. Old technology vs New > technology I guess! Gee, I worked my way up from a small bike (a Yamaha RD400--probably not a good beginner's bike) and I never found myself thinking that the GTS was "heavy into the turns". But that's probably because the bikes I worked my way up to got progressively heavier as time went on (after the RD came a Suzuki 850, then a Kawasaki Concours, and now the GTS, which I do not find to be heavy--like you sport bike weenies--just kidding!!). > I learned to countersteer from my friend David that went to race school. The real fact, is that you learned to countersteer on your own--probably when you learned to ride a bicycle--because you cannot turn a single track vehicle above walking speed (or 10-12 MPH), without countersteering. My guess is that your friend David simply identified what you were doing and gave it a name for you. I remember reading about countersteering many times until I actually began to understand what the author(s) was(were) talking about! > So > yes, that might be a higher advanced riding technique, but very easy to > understand and practice. Not so. I can say this because I've been teaching folks how to ride for 11 or 12 years now, and I see every training season just how "easy" it is. If it were so easy then how come many more aren't out there riding? IMNSHO, riding a bike is anything but easy. In fact, for some people it is impossible. For others it is extremely difficult, and for a relative few, it is easy. > My point to you Henry is if you are going to ride out of > control/out of your > abilities, then it does not matter what bike you purchase you are still > going to be a danger to yourself and others. Well, that's certainly true. And my point is that if you start small and work your way up, building on your experience and perhaps educating yourself along the way, then you are much more likely to have a successful time at it than if you try to start with something big--i.e., way beyond your capabilities. Why do you think people learning to fly (excepting 19 guys on 9/11) start with the small planes and work their way up to bigger ones? It's because they build a foundation of knowledge and skills which come from only one thing: the experience of getting out and doing it. I wouldn't trust a beginning rider on a GTS or any other "large" bike simply because they don't have the knowledge and skill (K&S) to stay out of trouble. Eventually their lack of K&S will catch up to them. > If he enjoys the GTS, like we all do....then he can learn to ride it with > control, which may take years of practice before he is comfortable. But how is a beginner to judge whether or not the GTS is for or not for him if he has no experience on which to make that judgment? Any person doing anything needs experience in order to be able to make the comparisons necessary to move on. > But the GTS is not a nightmare of a bike, you could learn it, if you took > the time and dont over judge your abilities.....and if he took > your class of course.(free promo :) Yes, one COULD learn it. But is it worth dropping a plastic covered motorcycle that you may not even be able to pick up by yourself, when any of a dozen or more non-plastic covered bikes are available that will better fit a BEGINNING rider? I do not believe it is. I also believe that almost to an instructor, those of us who do it professionally would recommend to any beginner that they take a rider education course from a professionally staffed institution, then start small and work up, gaining the aforementioned experience and skill to become a better rider. Then they will be able to judge for themselves (and by themselves) what are the bikes that will provide a satisfactory riding experience--rather than relying on the advise of well-meaning friends, who don't really know what they are talking about. > P.S. I recommend ANY GTS, to Anyone, you simply cant find the same standard > features, front and rear ABS, EFI, liquid cooled, the list goes on and on, > not to mention the rare anti-dive swing arm, for an affordable The front swingarm notwithstanding, you can't find those features on an almost-10 year motorcycle that's for sure. But the fact is you can find them on a number of newer bikes. Regards, Henry S. Winokur 94 GTS1000, AMA, MRF, Nationally Certified Riding Instructor Columbia, MD Ride for Kids Task Force West Bethesda, MD USA
