1125R In Person

[Rogue]

I promised to test hop a Firebolt and I intend to keep it Rogue... full report will follow...

I've been waiting since last year....    

[Sport-Touring]

[Busy Little Whiner]

I've been waiting since last year....    

Are you going to the WCRM???

[atadaskew]

Are you going to the WCRM???

Why wait, just go to a Buell shop and test ride one.

[Rogue]

Are you going to the WCRM???

No.

New job = no time for big rides for 6 months or so.

[Busy Little Whiner]

Why wait, just go to a Buell shop and test ride one.

If it's a Buell... I can wait...

[atadaskew]

If it's a Buell... I can wait...

 

[Phenix_Rider]

Hey, new here  

The 1125R will probably be my next bike- gotta test ride it first though.  And wait for the bugs to be worked out.  I love the look and feel and color.  The narrow (compared to a 600 I4 with your legs spread wide while you're humping the tank) waist is great, and the fairing is totally unlike anything else.  I've seen in several reviews that the 1125R is improved in every way over the older Buells.  The gauges are massively improved over the other Buells, and a decent redline means it'll be more fun to ride.  

I test rode several Lightnings at a Harley/Buell demo last season.  Wanted to try a Firebolt.  Seen one in person, and it was far more comfortable than the ST, STT, etc.  The lack of a front fairing- face out over the front wheel was bizarre.  They didn't have a 'Bolt, but they all have the same engine.  I hate the Harley lump- hate it.  A bike should not try to vibrate off it's sidestand.  Ridiculously low redline too- my truck almost revs higher.  Don't like having tons of torque low, but running out of engine in 5 seconds.   I'd much rather have an engine build power linearly, with just enough vibe to let you know it's alive.  The brakes were disconcerting (nothing like standing straight up when you trail brake), as was the harsh clutch and difficult neutral.  Hated trying to find the sidestand too.  Handling is incredible, but throttle is twitchy, and there's no room to hold higher revs through a corner- you need them to get out.  I've heard a couple owners brag "You only need one gear," well I'd rather shift, thank you.

  with my Ninja 650R though.  Had to wait for the second model year there too, for Kawi to iron things out.  The trans is slightly clunky, but the Lightnings felt like a cement mixer chewing bricks.

[Brad1445]

.... and the fairing is totally unlike anything else.  

Tru Dat!

[Rogue]

I've heard a couple owners brag "You only need one gear," well I'd rather shift, thank you.

That's completely not true of the Thunderstorm engines.  You need all those gears.  In fact, because of its relatively narrow powerband, you need to shift it often.  The Thunderstorm requires its rider to adopt more to its nature.  Especially if you are used to the multi-valve, high revving motors with redlines up in the stratosphere.  It's not for everyone.

[Phenix_Rider]

That's completely not true of the Thunderstorm engines.  You need all those gears.  In fact, because of its relatively narrow powerband, you need to shift it often.  The Thunderstorm requires its rider to adopt more to its nature.  Especially if you are used to the multi-valve, high revving motors with redlines up in the stratosphere.  It's not for everyone.

Yeah- it's a sportbike with a Harley engine.  My 650R's redline is 11k, so not that high, but the short rev range on the XBs was horrible.  I can go into a corner at 5k and go up from there.  At 5k on the Thunderstorm, you're only what? 1500 from redline?  That's just far too much of an adjustment for me.

[scott-sts]

Yeah- it's a sportbike with a Harley engine.  My 650R's redline is 11k, so not that high, but the short rev range on the XBs was horrible.  I can go into a corner at 5k and go up from there.  At 5k on the Thunderstorm, you're only what? 1500 from redline?  That's just far too much of an adjustment for me.

You're missing the point of the engine, which is "Torque".  I rarely excede 5000 rpm and ride rather quickly.  You can't ride it like a japanese bike.

[Phenix_Rider]

You're missing the point of the engine, which is "Torque".  I rarely exceed 5000 rpm and ride rather quickly.  You can't ride it like a japanese bike.

Definitely a love it or hate it engine.

[Kinger]

You're missing the point of the engine, which is "Torque".  I rarely excede 5000 rpm and ride rather quickly.  You can't ride it like a japanese bike.

Great point.  Everyone always says it doesn't rev high enough.  Riding style needs to adjust to the bike.

[Busy Little Whiner]

That's completely not true of the Thunderstorm engines.  You need all those gears.  In fact, because of its relatively narrow powerband, you need to shift it often.  The Thunderstorm requires its rider to adopt more to its nature.  Especially if you are used to the multi-valve, high revving motors with redlines up in the stratosphere.  It's not for everyone.

True:

quote June 08 Motorcyclist

"The latest air cooled Thunderstorm twin concentrates its underwhelming muscle in a
relatively narrow band above 4000 rpm, just like previous Buell efforts. Below that
figure it feels unresponsive, a bit asthmatic and generally unhappy"  

[Rogue]

I don't find my Thunderstorm engine "generally unhappy" below 4k RPM.  In fact, around town I frequently have to spend a lot of time between 2k to 4k RPM.  It runs fine down there and is very torquey and responsive.  Off the line, I can pull away very easily and leave everyone behind without exceeding 4k RPM.  Coming out of a slow corner the bike pulls quickly away.  It is nice not to have a frenetic sounding and feeling motor that constantly feels like it's working hard just to deliver a good drive out of corners.  

If you want to compare that to your beloved V4, well the VFR800 motor doesn't even wake up until passed 4k RPM.  Off the line I need to slip the clutch to keep the engine from stalling.  PLus, it doesn't quite have the energetic pull of the Thunderstorm off the line.  This actually makes the Firebolt way more fun to ride around town and in tight twisties.

The difference is like a musclecar engine (Thunderstorm) vs. a high reving multi-valve V6 (VFR800).  

Both are fun.  But you need to ride each one in a different way.

Honestly, if you are the type that can't adopt or won't, then stick to your high revving Japanese inline engines.  Me?  I like both and enjoy both and find the required difference in riding style quite entertaining.  I guess some people are just not the type to try new things.  

[Busy Little Whiner]

 

If you want to compare that to your beloved V4, well the VFR800 motor doesn't even wake up until passed 4k RPM.  

Mercy Rouge... I'm not impressed with the VFR800 either... but if want to compare try
my 360º crank Race Bred V4... then you'll have a clue to a truly mind altering power
band...

Quote Andrew S3 Triumph Triple:

"OMG.  The RC45 is amazing.  It feels nothing like a VFR motor (Which I don't think is
anything special, anyhow.) The RC45 motor is amazing, smooth, torquey, not at all
lumpy like I think of the VFR. Larry may have converted me to a V4 aficionado."

[Bueller]

I guess that is the thing with the Thunderstorm.  There is no mind altering power band.  It is just on all the way.  No arm jerk, hands before neck when you wind on.  It just goes out through the rev range in a pretty linear fashion.  With the Micron it's even a bit more linear.

[Rogue]

Well, I have no clue what difference there is between the RC45 motor and the VFR800.  

What are the specs on the RC45 motor?

[Busy Little Whiner]

Well, I have no clue what difference there is between the RC45 motor and the VFR800.  

What are the specs on the RC45 motor?

[st ryder]

Where's the beef?