vs:
GO!
vs:
GO!
SV650, duh! It is at least 80 lbs lighter, plus the V-twin character more than makes up for any horsepower deficiency (if any) compared to the Bandit's I4.
The early Bandit 600 was just basically a naked Katana 600, and the best you can say about them is that they were ok bikes for the time. Both bikes suffer from low-budget suspensions, but there are fixes for the that - looks like it has already been done to the SV pictured.
The Bandit has always been a 1 generation out Gixxer, very awesome machine. The SV650 doesn't have the same, although still impressive, aftermarket support due to the that fact.
Wet Weight is 432 to 492 so 60 lbs and 70 to 80 so 10 hp difference.
So very good comparison, don't worry the next one will be SV1000 vs Bandit 1250...
I vote SV650. Good gearing and torque combination. Although I've not sampled a Bandit so I cannot really compare the two. That being said, the Bandit seat looks like it will be the more comfortable of the two. I hated the seat on my '03 SV650.
what are you gonna do with them? Is it a daily driver? track bike?
I had a SV650. Enjoyed it very very much. While it had a few short comings there are a million ways to fix them.
It seems like both have a big following. I'm sure you can fins a fix or two for any issue you might have. I'd say my choice would be based on condition and price.
Can't really lose with either, but I vote SV.
I dislike sv's and katana's.....so IDK what to pick.
My Bandit. 46,000 miles. I think I'd like more HP/Tq for the mountains.
I ride 2 up quite often with my 10yo or 8yo's. They are comfortable and so am I.
Next bike will probably be a liter in a similar configuration.
The bandit doesn't have enough power for what you want to do? How did we all survive in the olden days when a 70hp 750 was considered powerful?
Moparman wrote: The bandit doesn't have enough power for what you want to do? How did we all survive in the olden days when a 70hp 750 was considered powerful?
56k modems was a fast internet connection once too. Doesn't mean I'm going back to dial up any time soon because "it used to be enough!".
In reply to Moparman:
This reminds me of the kid that I sit near at work asking last week why I didn't tour on a Vespa instead of my VFR. "But they've got 300cc engines, I mean, how much power do you need really?"
The power to pass safely at 75 mph is my though. Anything under 500cc is going to be pushing it. I might have a little trouble on the new Hawk GT (1989 model) that I just got.
In reply to singleslammer:
Yea, I found out my sho is faster than cbr250 on saturday night.....
yamaha wrote: In reply to singleslammer: Yea, I found out my sho is faster than cbr250 on saturday night.....
This does not surprise me in the slightest. How much faster we talking? My guess is a good bit.
In reply to clutchsmoke:
Not by that much, but still......30 something hp in a single thumper sounds horrible.
Ugly Aunt Ester rides a SV650. In turn the ugly bike, makes her look good.
yamaha wrote: In reply to clutchsmoke: Not by that much, but still......30 something hp in a single thumper sounds horrible.
It's closer to the low 20 something hp than 30. My wr250x is closer to 30 and it's still a blast to ride, but I wouldn't want any less power.
skierd wrote:yamaha wrote: In reply to clutchsmoke: Not by that much, but still......30 something hp in a single thumper sounds horrible.It's closer to the low 20 something hp than 30. My wr250x is closer to 30 and it's still a blast to ride, but I wouldn't want any less power.
24hp at the wheel......crank would be 30 or so.
singleslammer wrote: I might have a little trouble on the new Hawk GT (1989 model) that I just got.
Full exhaust, airbox delete (for Uni pods, or do the lid modification) and a carb re-jet will wake that motor up in a big way.
skierd wrote:Moparman wrote: The bandit doesn't have enough power for what you want to do? How did we all survive in the olden days when a 70hp 750 was considered powerful?56k modems was a fast internet connection once too. Doesn't mean I'm going back to dial up any time soon because "it used to be enough!".
My Katana has 100hp, it does 0-60 in about four seconds and runs the 1/4 mile in under 12 seconds. Where the hell am I going to use more power than that? Once am nearing 100hp I am caring a whole lot more about handling than power. I can ride two up on a 50hp bike and I live in the mountains.
Insurance is also a factor. I pay $300 a year for four bikes and I have very good coverage. Not owning a 150hp+ monster is why.
If you can't ride hills, canyons or two up with 75 to 100hp, I think there is a problem. FYI I am 5' 11" 245lbs.
In reply to singleslammer:
For interstates I cam see your point, although my CB400 and GT380 can do it fairly easily. My 750 Katana can usually do it without downshifting. My point is that a 1000cc 150hp+ bike might be fun, but is in no way necessary for safe or efficient riding. If the bike is making more than 50hp, it is competent on expressways. If it is above 100, it is more than enough. Heck, even the new 300cc bikes will outperform 3/4s of the cars on the road.
However I condone noobs buying very high performance bikes. It usually results in low mileage engines being available.
In reply to Moparman:
Oddly there are many more suzuki powerplants like that available than the others, despite lower sales volumes.....
Suzuki needs a new motto, "Suzuki, choice of squids everywhere"
Moparman wrote: The bandit doesn't have enough power for what you want to do? How did we all survive in the olden days when a 70hp 750 was considered powerful?
I remember when a 4.3 liter s10 beat me in a drag race when I was riding my CM450e...talk about embarrassing.
In reply to yamaha:
Sup Bro. 
You'll need to log in to post.
