Suzuki Burgman USA Forum banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Stuck this in here as it's very competitive with the smaller maxis.
Light and fun - met and exceeded expectations. Free revving up to 8500 rpm and then the rev limiter cuts in just when you would be shifting anyway - very civilized,

The suspension was comfortable but the bike flexed a bit on a rough corner - my weight at 250 likely beyond the best for it.

Superb move up bike or even first bike for a mature rider that wants upright seating.
Would be interesting as a real dual sport since it's so light. Comfie seat.

It was just the right seat height and ergonomics for me at 5' 9" - flat foot easily- just an enjoyable one up do most anything bike.
Take it in a heartbeat over the NC700x tho that bike would do for moderate two up and is a bit stiffer sprung.

If you are looking to move to a smalle lighter "do everything" bike - this is very good value. And interesting machine and might take a chunk from the KLR650 sales.



••

VFR1200dct was a bit of a disappointment - Honda doesn't do automatics well tho the paddle shifting was quite good - but the entire mechanism was clunky

Did not like the high pegs - there is some butterfly valve that opens at 6k and that really hustles in that range - ran out of road before redline at 10.5k

Kids loved the 600rr but were shaking their heads on the CB1000RR they both snagged - too much power not enough road. Off course Andrew weighs 130 lb so felt like laudry flapping in the wind on the 1000.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
The bike twisted a bit. The Burgman suspension sucks but it never flexes even under duress - suspect it's the low slung design
All the tupperware hides how low slung it is....



Now the Honda NC700 mimics that as well



But the Honda CB500x much lighter to handle.

Much different on the CB500 structure - really reminded me of a modern take on the CB450 which was a lust object in the 70s.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I'm sure the X version is just as good, but I'd be leery about doing real dual sport stuff with it.
I agree - but of all the twin cylinder dual sports I've ridden this is a standout - the BMWs feel clunky and too tall and heavy by comparison. Casual dirt road and easy around town and long legs plus the small CC on this means relatively cheap insurance.

While the F and R were designed for a global average rider, the X is an ever-so-slightly bigger bike that aims to please the (taller) average European. Its seat is 25mm higher, its forks 20mm longer, its ground clearance 15mm higher, and its wheelbase 10mm longer. All of which makes for a bike that feels just little bit more grown up than the F. (Of course, at my not-so-towering 5’7”, it meant my heels were off the ground just enough to make manoeuvring the 195kg bike a watchful affair.)

It’s a comfortable bike – the handlebars curve up to meet your hands, instead of summoning them down to their level, and you sit upright on a wide and supple seat, looking down at an amber-lit dash (the F’s is blue and the R’s red) that offers such niceties as a clock and fuel consumption figures, but unfortunately, no gear position indicator.

The engine is the same 471cc, 47bhp parallel-twin that does duty in the F and the R. Though wearing a silver-coloured coating rather than black, it has the same untimidatingly linear power delivery, same brisk acceleration and torque-rich roll-ons, same approx-115mph top (I saw a max of 110) as its brothers. It’s a good, healthy engine – not madly exciting, but capable enough for most (sensible) needs, economical and forgiving.

Honda promises 28 km per litre, or 79.5 mpg, for a 485km (302 mile) tank range. When we stopped for a fuel top-up after 88.5 km (55 miles) of spirited riding, my bike took on 4.1 litres – that’s 21.6km/l, or 61.3 mpg; a still-respectable 373 km (233 mile) tank range. Needless to say, if you ride more sedately, you’d see significantly better numbers. And while on the topic, a hinged fuel tank cap would be handy.

Read more: http://www.visordown.com/road-tests-first-rides/first-ride-2013-honda-cb500x-review/22704.html#ixzz2aOpNfBuJ
**** - big range too and it sips fuel - what's not to like. That's better mileage by a tad than the NC700 and a MUCH more spirited ride:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
This is the first mcycle I'd actually consider over the Burgman 650.

It's lighter and more agile, much longer range and better gas mileage and similar acceleration - hugely better suspension and $3k plus cheaper.

The tricked out for touring version would rival space on the Burgman 650 and the bike was so comfortable and light you just wanted to point it at the horizon and keep going….the only thing missing from our ride was a decent windscreen or we might have :D

Best cross over machine in a long time…..gonna eat BMWs lunch and the low CCs is very important for insurance costs here in Ontario
Totally delightful upright ride - ( of course that's why it needs the windscreen ) Would be a treat in town - even easier than the Burgman and cheap for a Honda $6500 brand new in Canada - incredible gas mileage AND a big range approaching 500 km
and that's with ABS

versus $11,000 for the 2013 650 with almost identical horsepower and the CB500x has much better suspension.

Suzuki needs to take some notes on this and get the Burgman 650 price down and perhaps the weight as well and for sure deal with the suspension.

Now Honda accessories are $$ so that will narrow the gap but given loads of 3rd party will not be bad and this will do decent adventure touring as a bonus so it can be armored up for that.

The Burgman 650 is very nice two up and I think the 500 would be a stretch for that but it is a torquey engine and a nicely spaced 6 speed that is really effortless to shift

I'd miss the adjustable windscreen and upfront storage and protection but I tell you it's a near thing and the feeling of lightness and suspension might tip the scales.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,396 Posts
And what about Multistrada?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
As against what?
It's a $20,000 1200 I'd not give the time of day to.



I'm sure it's a fine bike but not for that coin against this for one third the price tricked out for light touring.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,396 Posts
As against what?
As per your first post in the thread. Dunno but i see a grey grantourismo 2013 model, so i was waiting for some kind of a review :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
That's just an example of what the CB500x can be set up for about $7k
There are no photos on the web fully equipped.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,396 Posts

source advrider

I don't know really how to compare Burgie with this bike though. CB are likely made for very short people, besides one leg position have a very sharp knee angle, can't accomodate comfortably a passenger, have no usable storage, also poor weather protection, budget brakes.

Yes, it's still a good motorcycle for an average customer but do you really wanna go touring on it :confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #10 (Edited)
Why would you think that??.....have you actually ridden one?

The seat height is 31.9' versus the Burgman 650 at 29.5
The CB500 models are not all the same. The CB500x is a bigger bike period than it's siblings.

ABS hardly qualifies as average brakes especially given it's such a light bike.

The horsepower is similar to the Burgman and the weight much lower and it's 40% cheaper which pays for a lot of storage. The weight to horsepower is much better than the Burgman 650 and it shows in performance.
Burgman 0-60 is somewhere 5.8. to 8+ seconds depending on who you believe while the CB500 series is in the 5 second range which makes sense given the torque curve and lighter weight.

Weight on the Burgman is 590 lb
Weight on the CB500x 430 lb wet

Horsepower 54 on the Burgman
versus 48 on the X
which given the weight difference gives the X and astounding HP to weight head start.

Burgman 4 gal capacity
CB500x 4.5 gal

Fuel economy Burgman about 50
CB500x 70+

That translates into just about 50% more riding range on a tank or more

Front Suspension 4.3 inches for the Burgman.
41mm fork; 5.5 inches travel for the X

I would tour it in a heartbeat as the suspension is much more supple.
The Burgman 650 is stable even at high speeds and in the twisties.....comfortable on uneven pavement???? nope.

Suzuki needs to move forward. I love my 650 Exec....I'd seriously consider the HondaCB500x as a valid alternative.

And one last bit ...the stock Honda seat is far more comfortable than the stock 650 seat.

Two up touring - yeah the 650 is the clear winner.
Most other aspects go to the 500x

Yes they are different bikes.....but can serve very similar purposes and as a dedicated Burgman 650 rider and admirer....the CB500x gives me pause...it was that much fun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,396 Posts
wait, wait not so fast :)

you can not really compare a motorcycle and a scooter for performance, as even a 250 bike might have better figures.

double disc brake is an advantage, Honda just pinched funds on this, they have abs both and approx equal in functionality.

You can visit cycle-ergo.com to see the difference in saddled position, no way cb can stand up to the b here. What you feel during 30 min test drive doesn't usu give you enough experience.

Suspension is better, obviously -- it is a motorcycle! :) Scooters generally aren't great in this department.

Acceleration? Every owner of 'true' motorcycle will confirm they both suck in this regard. They tell me that about my Vee too, but i can live with it. Not sure if i could with the cb though, cause its really not enough for a bike. But scooter is another story, it's not for the performance that i like them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #12 (Edited)
Sorry but you are wrong. A bike is a bike period and serve the same purpose of getting people around for fun or commuting or touring.

There are simply different choices. You tell me where this fits in the spectrum.



Of course you can compare them.
The reason I got into the Maxis was based on this review.

http://www.onewheeldrive.net/2006/10/04/scoot-touring-the-honda-silverwing-and-suzuki-burgman/
In the twists the Burgman, surprisingly despite its mass, is having an easier time of it, with its power mode Kevin can make better use of the engine’s compression braking and then torque out of the corners with better pickup. If this were a race, rather than a frolic there would be no losing the Suzuki. For a while Kevin’s even switched to manual mode, but futzing with the buttons becomes bothersome. The Burgman’s suspension is a bit more settled through here too, taking up the bumps and wallows better – it’s a more refined experience.

Eventually things settle down and we pull into a rest stop for a bike switch, gales of laughter, and conversation as to how the scooters, an advised use of the term, fare when thoroughly “tested”. Giovanni puts it best, “I’m shocked. I’d say you were doing 80% of a sportbike’s pace.” Suddenly it’s hard to see these as mere “scooters”, let’s drop the pretense and call them “bikes” – that will certainly make the guys at Honda and Suzuki happy won’t it?
You tell a lot about a ride on a varied half hour demo and talking with the other riders that demoed it they had the same the impression .....this is a bike you want to point at the horizon and ride. It only needed a decent windscreen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,396 Posts
You tell me where this fits in the spectrum.
Just where others do. Take a normal 800 cc bike, like Triumph Tiger and it will obliterate that in all the performance. What's the difference.

.....this is a bike you want to point at the horizon and ride. It only needed a decent windscreen.

You're right about the screen, but how'd you know? ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Just where others do. Take a normal 800 cc bike, like Triumph Tiger and it will obliterate that in all the performance. What's the difference.
and this will "obliterate" the Tiger ....so what....we are talking about a spectrum of machines and performance/comfort trade offs



Not some magical line in the sand.

THe Tiger is a triple not a twin and designed for higher horsepower and certainly not going to walk away from the 850 - just different rides that's all.
ALL I can see is some sort of mcycle snobbery along these lines.

A few years back a Sports Bike magazine had a number of their more seasoned staff participate in a race and did not reveal what bikes they would be riding untill they got half way to the event when they stopped so they could switch to the bikes allowing them to get aquainted on the ride the rest of the way to the track. All were 400cc to 650cc scooters. The writers all got a bit of ribbing and teasing from the young kids on the sport bikes at the race however when the race was over and the scooters had all placed well above mid field those behind or who had a scooter close on their tails having to fight to maintain their lead were not laughing any more.
It's a bike a two wheel ride... - period.

The comparable ride to the Aprilia 850 twin is the 800 cc BMW twin and that's NOT going to walk away at all

Engine

TypeWater-cooled, 2-cylinder, 4-stroke, four valves per cylinder, two overhead camshafts, dry sump lubrication
Bore x stroke82 mm x 75.6 mm
Capacity798 cc
Rated output71 hp (52 kW) at 7,000 rpm
Max. torque55 lb/ft (75 Nm) at 4,500 rpm
versus the SRV850

Top speed 126 mph 1/4-mile acceleration secs Max power 76 bhp Max torque 56.3 ft-lb Weight 249 kg Seat height 780 mm Fuel capacity 18.5 litres Average fuel consumption mpg Tank range miles Annual road tax
Insurance group of 17 Engine size 839 cc Engine specification 90º V-twin four-stroke, SOHC, eight valves, electronic fuel injection, liquid cooled. CVT transmission, chain final drive Frame Double cradle high strength tubular steel Front suspension adjustment 41mm fork with 122mm travel. Rear suspension adjustment Laterally mounted monoshock with seven-position spring preload adjustment. Front brakes Twin 300mm semi-floating discs with Brembo double piston 28mm floating calipers. Rear brake Single 280mm disc with 25.4mm double piston caliper. Front tyre size 120/70-R16 57H Rear tyre size 160/60-R15 67H
I know which one I'd take in the twists in a heartbeat.
[/quote]

They are all bikes - this motorcycle versus scooter snobbery and bigotry does no riders any good at all when they are looking for a range of choices.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,088 Posts
MacDoc: I'm not sure I agree that a bike is a bike is a bike. I see the maxi as a jack-of-all-trades: commuter (storage/maneuverability), sport (80% sport bike in the twisties), and tourer (storage/comfort, 80% of a dedicated touring motorcycle). Add to this a step-thru design and an automatic CVT. For me, the sum of it's parts - its sheer versatility - outweighs the fact that it will never be the top of it's class as a dedicated sport bike or touring bike.

Now that you've lived with them for a while, it sounds like the Burgman's inherent limitations (suspension, weight, cost/benefit), are beginning to outweigh the appeal of it's advantages, especially in light of attractive new alternatives like the new Honda line.

I only learned to ride in my fifties. The only manual shifting I did was in my MSF class, so I'm pretty much wedded to the ease of an automatic (which means I'm keeping my eye on DCT bikes). But I also like the idea of using my bike to pick up a few bags of groceries, running all my city errands, and logging 2000 miles on my annual summer tour. For my kind of riding, I still think the Burgman 650 is the right fit for me
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
18,359 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
MacDoc: I'm not sure I agree that a bike is a bike is a bike. I see the maxi as a jack-of-all-trades: commuter (storage/maneuverability), sport (80% sport bike in the twisties), and tourer (storage/comfort, 80% of a dedicated touring motorcycle). Add to this a step-thru design and an automatic CVT. For me, the sum of it's parts - its sheer versatility - outweighs the fact that it will never be the top of it's class as a dedicated sport bike or touring bike.
You are misreading me - there should be no artificial distinction between a "motorcycle" and a "scooter" in this class - they are all bikes with difference feature sets and I agree ( as I think I said ) the 650 Exec is the best all around bike I've had in 40 years of riding.

The ONLY machine I'd consider, and that's for a combination of features, weight, suspension, value for money and gas mileage, is a tricked out CB500x.

It was just a treat to ride and if you get a chance demo the CB500x ( the other 500s are smaller ).

THe step through is nice not critical for me ( **** getting over a 35" KLR is a chore ) and I adore the ECVT but again that's not critical for the riding that I do.

If I was commuting - 100% I'd want the automatic.

But after trying the Honda DCT I value the Exec even more.
Honda don't do automatic.

I tried several and will try again this year - the BMW middle weights and have not found one I'm fond of.
I'd ride the BMW 650GT as a reasonable alternative but it needs to mature a bit and I want to see the maintenance record.
The Burgman 650s have been literally trouble free except for tire wear which is a real expense ( considering dark side next time )

Starts every time - summer or winter and nothing breaks.

I just came home in absolute deluge and there is not another bike I'd rather be on the Exec.

What I'm trying to get across is rides should be evaluated on their feature set and not stuffed into scooter or motorcycle categories as some inherent great divide....it's not.

In Europe the maxi's are so prevalent it's a moot point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,396 Posts
Triple is someth Triumph tried to make to have both of two worlds - twin and four. And one usually doesn't get too much comfort with performance and vice versa. Trade-off point is right, but imo the Burgman and CB500x are too different or rather a weird comparison to me, cause it implies change of priorities.

I would understand more a move to the Royal Star Venture or similar. But Burgie and CB for me would complement each other but hardly replace
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,088 Posts
MacDoc: I'm in agreement with you about the advantages and disadvantages of the 650. Since you are adept in both the shifting and non-shifting world of motorized two-wheel transport, I can understand how you think a bike is a bike, and one just choses the feature-set (both inherent and bolted on) that will best satisfy what one wants from a bike.

My world view is much smaller. Since I'm shiftless, I see the auto CVT (and other inherent attributes) as part of a scooter's core DNA - a separate species from motorcyclus-masculinus.

What I'm waiting for is for some Dr. Frankenstein to create a beast that takes the best from both species - automatic, good power, great suspension, lots of native storage and FUN. (I thought Honda was making strides in that direction with the NC700 DCT. I'm a bit bummed that you think the tranny is not ready for primetime).
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top