SuzukiSavage.com - Print Page

SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl
General Category >> The Cafe >> Sportster Savage Comparisons
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1583089789

Message started by d3adrock on 03/01/20 at 11:09:49

Title: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by d3adrock on 03/01/20 at 11:09:49

Hi, I know it's come up before but I thought it might be nice to have dedicated forum for those with experience.

For those of you either have or have ridden a Sportster (particularly curious about 1200's) how do they compare to your savage? What is the difference in feel, balance of power/torque vs weight/handling ect. Any other things such as reliability that pop up in your experience.

One of the reasons I ask (aside from curiosity) is that I'm looking at the possibility of starting a norcal style chopper project. I would probably base it around a 1200, and do a minimum of 4"-10" over forks.

Thanks for all your opinions!

Title: Re: Sportster Comparisons
Post by Serowbot on 03/01/20 at 15:38:06

Comparing an 883 to a 1200?,... or a 1200 to a Savage? :-/

This is more of a Cafe type question,...
I'll move you.

Serow

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by d3adrock on 03/01/20 at 16:15:50

Thanks, sorry about that. I meant compared to the savage

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by Dennisgb on 03/01/20 at 19:37:09

Not sure there is a real comparison. Sportsters are much heavier than the Suzuki. They along with all Harleys don’t carry their weight well. Difficult to maneuver slow speed. Once moving they are okay but still don’t handle great. The tractor comparison is an accurate one.

Having ridden an owned many different bikes, including the Suzuki Savage/S40, Harley’s in my opinion are more for show than enjoyable riding. The Suzuki is a fun, light, small bike. Much more enjoyable to ride than a Harley.

Power wise the Harley has more overall power.

If your building a chopper, the choice really doesn’t mean much because what you will end up with won’t handle well anyway. Not that I’m against choppers, but they are show no go...except for in a straight line.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by d3adrock on 03/01/20 at 19:50:18

Thanks! I've never ridden a harley, only sat on them where they seem to take allot of muscle to get upright (or maybe i'm just weak).

I think it stands mentioning that most of the chopper mods I would to to the sportster would be to make it look more like the savage, which i'm also giving a chopperesque makeover too (will post pics once finished)

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by Armen on 03/01/20 at 20:09:08

Some years ago I went to the Barber Vintage Festival. Saw a bunch of cool builds. Decided to make a cafe racer. Thought about the donor bike. Narrowed it down to a 1200 Sportster. Specifically. an XL1200S. Thats the one with adjustable suspension, high compression, twin plugs, and bumpy cams. Up til '03, Sporties were rigid mounted. Weighed about 500 pounds. Ran around with a girl with an '89 4 speed 883. Did a ton of work on it. Prob dropped 75 pounds. And picked up a few ponies. Nice bike. Made me think a 5 speed, 1200 would be a good starting point.
In '04, they went rubber mount motor. Had to add (literally) 60 pounds to the frame to make up for the chassis rigidity lost to isolating the motor. The later bikes picked up a few ponies, but not enough to make up for 60 lbs of extra mass.
So, I almost bought an '03 XL1200S. Found one for only $3K or so. Thought long and hard about how hard (time and money) it'd be to drop 100 lbs off the beast.
Figured I'd be at $10K for the project (including the price of the bike) in no time. Hmmmm....
Always thought the Savage was a good starting point. Big air-cooled single, belt drive, 4 valve, single carb and exhaust. Did some reading and saw that you could get them down to 300 lbs. Jesus Christ on a bet couldn't get a Sporty to even 350 lbs. Sure, the Sporty would have more HP and torque (a lot more), but it'd be moving a lot more msss.
And what did I want? A bike that'd go 20-80 MPH quickly and easily. And be flickable. Seemed the counterbalanced 300 lb Savage would be able to do the smoothly and easily. A lot less money and effort than the Sporty. Figured I didn't owe HD anything, didn't need to be their R+D team showing what their bikes could be. And there are lots of trick Sportsters out there.
One day a kid I work with tells me he has a Savage in boxes and buckets that he took apart (used to run) in his garage. Says he has to move out of the garage, and now that he has an HD that works, he isn't likely to ever get the Savage back in one piece.
Do I want it for free? And he'll deliver it.
Tough decision, yes?
Not at all :-)

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by MMRanch on 03/01/20 at 22:12:35

Funny , but several Savage folks are also Sportster owners.
I knew better than to get a pre 2004 Sportster .
I used to ride with a feller who had one of the 1990's model , he just would NOT ride that thing over 65mph. The vibration was just to much !

I've had Sportsters in the form of a 1200 Roadster and a 883 XL . neither of them can handle anywhere near as good as a Savage/S-40. The Sportster are the same except for piston size (3" or 3.5") and front primary drive sprockets (4 extra teeth on the 1200's).

The 1200 are powerful and quick , some say they are the "Hot Rod's " of the air cooled Harleys. I've run mine up to 75 mph in second gear just as quick and easy as the LS650 will hit 40 mph in second gear.

The 883 is smooth and power to weight is still a little better than the Savage/S-40's are.

I still have my Savage but the Harley's are gone ! ;)

Just my opinion but I'm sticking to it ! ;D

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by d3adrock on 03/01/20 at 22:48:58

Thanks, how would you compare the different weights and their effects?

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by srinath on 03/02/20 at 03:15:51

The carb/FI air filter hits your knee - very awkward place to put it.
I have a Yamaha bolt, which seems to have pulled that stupid Idea out of the HD playbook, along with other retarded ideas in that same FI/Manifold region, the 2 intake ports are on the left and the literally face each other, the manifold run between the 2 cyl from your right knee to the left and make a hook shaped turn to the cyls. Absolutely killing intake velocity. The stupid thing makes 47 or so hp from 950cc, and just dumb stupid low tech (which I like) but you can not get it breathing worth a darn.
IMHO V twins are stupid, they end up being either impossible to get any power from, or being beyond complicated to work on.
Obviously people make HD's produce power, but really from 883 or even 1200 they even as a twin they can make a lot more.
One advantage of being inline with the chassis instead of sideways is that it wont shove right like Motoguzzi's and R BMW's do.
Now 650 is about as big as a single could get while still having more advantages than disadvantages, but to get a multi cyl motor, IMHO parallel twins work a lot better. Then of course 3 and 4 and 6 etc.
Cool.
Srinath.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by pg on 03/02/20 at 05:21:37

By in large do you like the Volt? I checked one out and I was interested till I sat down on it. I had to reach to get to the handlebars, it was really uncomfortable for me.

Best regards,

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by srinath on 03/02/20 at 06:57:34

5A4D4B4748582A0 wrote:

By in large do you like the Volt? I checked one out and I was interested till I sat down on it. I had to reach to get to the handlebars, it was really uncomfortable for me.

Best regards,

My bolt is a c spec now with R spec seat extra padding. Its about the only setup that works, well its SCR handlebar but R spec seat worked too, but its far too wide bar for highway use.
C spec seat is far too tall and the café cowl is at the wrong angle, regular R spec seat has very little padding and that pleather fabric look alike doesn't let me slide, many problems all around.
Ideally I may want to try the R spec/base forward control combo along with higher ape style bars, but otherwise its excellent. Belt drive too. SCR has aluminum spoked wheels in 17X19 fitted with light trail tires that essentially wear like iron. 8K on those and its barely 1/2 way worn. People have got 15 and 18K and changed them out of boredom. I have R spec alloy wheels too but they are 15X19 but nice cruiser tires are easily available on those too.
Overall, darn fine bike, just some convoluted design BS.
BTW mine was an SCR originally, I turned it to a bolt.

Cool.
Srinath.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by Fast 650 on 03/02/20 at 08:11:39

41404B4B4C564247250 wrote:

If your building a chopper, the choice really doesn’t mean much because what you will end up with won’t handle well anyway. Not that I’m against choppers, but they are show no go...except for in a straight line.

I am guessing that a lot of you guys are too young to remember when California tried to outlaw choppers, claiming that they handled too bad to be safe. So a group of bikers proposed a test of their choppers against the most popular Japanese and British bikes available at the time. They took the bikes to a track with the cops riding the stock bikes and the bikers on their choppers. The choppers outperformed the stock bikes on the track. If a rigid frame, raked and extended chopper handles better than the 750 Hondas, Kawasakis, and Triumphs of the day did, they can't handle that bad.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by d3adrock on 03/02/20 at 08:14:33

For me personally i think it's worth mentioning that one of the main reasons why I chose the savage was because it was already basically a chopper (raked end, skinny tant, ect)

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by MMRanch on 03/02/20 at 08:15:53

d3adrock

I have never lost a SLOW-RACE to a Harley while on my S-40. I've been to the CMAUSA State rally every year for the past 10 years. Seven out of 10 years I've took the S-40 , and never lost. The other 3 years , One of them was the Guzzi (came in second to a Harley) Two of them were Sportsters came in 2nd with the Harleys .

I've ridden the Dragon more than 100 times and never been passed by a Harley of any kind , but have never not passed a Harley on a dragon run. I have passed Sport-bikes on the Dragon too but that is rare and the sports-biker has to make a mistake for it to happen (and ya have to be ready to jump) . ;) The Harleys are just always in the way ! I couldn't make either of my Harleys keep-up with the Savage guys on the BlueRidge or any of them twisities type roads.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by pg on 03/02/20 at 15:45:45

2C2D36313E2B375F0 wrote:

[quote author=5A4D4B4748582A0 link=1583089789/0#9 date=1583155297]By in large do you like the Volt? I checked one out and I was interested till I sat down on it. I had to reach to get to the handlebars, it was really uncomfortable for me.

Best regards,

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by LANCER on 03/02/20 at 16:51:46

I have both, a ‘96 Savage and an ‘05 1200C.

The Sporty is not quite stock and is faster than my Savage. It dyno’d with 72hp and stated stock weight is est. at about 520 with a lighter Danmoto exhaust. It’s not a hot rod but is moves out quite smartly.

My Savage weighs in at 325 and handles much better than the Sporty, no comparison.
Planning (once again) a dyno trip later this spring.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by d3adrock on 03/02/20 at 17:33:04

What do people mean when they say handling? Ive hear it a bunch but it seems pretty vague to me. I imagine better handling could also be very subjective. I personally don't want a sportsbike that can turn super fast and needs steering dampers ect. I prefer something a little more stable in a straight line but still able to duck and dodge easily in thick traffic. I think it would be helpfull in a thread like this if we didnt just use superlatives like "handling is much better" but tried to describe the feelings and experiences in different circumstances.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by Armen on 03/02/20 at 19:26:53

'Handling' is something a bike with 10" over forks will never have.
That kind of front end is for looks. Or maybe slow straight line riding for short distances.
Maybe before doing that, get the bike sorted out and ride it a bit? At least that way you'd have a reference point.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by d3adrock on 03/02/20 at 19:50:42

10" is veering more twoards the extreme of what i'd be planning (more likely 4-6" or maybe 8" ) in either case I would be putting allot more miles on my savage beforehand. I like the way the savage front end looks, and itd take some work to get a sportster to even look like that. As regards handling, from what i gather, enough people on here seem to complain about the way the stock savage handles (hence the proclivity of turning them into cafe racers) that I think it warrents further description of what "handling" means to each individual.
Not trying to bash anyones opinions (i hope it's not taken like that) just trying to gain some experience and understanding

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by Fast 650 on 03/02/20 at 23:03:48

I don't know if it is still in print, but if you can find it the Custom Chopper Cookbook will answer most if not all of your questions. It was written for the big twin Harleys but the info applies to all bikes.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by srinath on 03/03/20 at 00:54:10

2E393F333C2C5E0 wrote:

At 4K rpm, what mph will that be running?

Best regards,

No idea it doesn't have a tach, but my guess is maybe 70. Maybe less, 60 possibly. It tops out @119 indicated likely around 8k. I might edit this post if I find something on the bolt forum.

Oh 80 at 4300 per bolt forum, so its redline is 6K ? Like WTF, my gs500 doesn't even do much of anything till 6k.
BTW mine was an SCR, started out with taller rear tire but no other changes, likely I got a few extra clicks for the same rpm.

Cool.
Srinath.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by pg on 03/03/20 at 05:15:55

Ok, the SCR is the scrambler version. So it purrs along the super slab at 75 mph?

Best regards,

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by oldNslow on 03/03/20 at 08:00:06

Quote:

What do people mean when they say handling? Ive hear it a bunch but it seems pretty vague to me. I imagine better handling could also be very subjective.

I agree.

I own both a Savage( a 2006 S40) and a Sportster(2004 xl883), so I'll give my observations about how the two bikes compare.

I think "handling", when most people talk about it refers to how a motorcycle behaves, and what it feels like, when going around corners, and to a lesser extent, how stable it feels at speed in a straight line.

I have a favorite stretch of twisty road not far from home that I have ridden both of my bikes on numerous times so I think I have a pretty good idea what the differences between them are. Whenever I go for a ride on either of them with no particular destination in mind I try to incorporate that road as part of the ride.

Honestly, if you asked me which of my bikes "handles" the best, I'd tell you that it was the one I was riding when you asked. And if you were to stand with a stopwatch at the end of a section of that road, and time me riding that section on each bike, riding as quickly as I felt comfortable, I'm pretty sure that the time difference from bike to bike would be negligible.

But the two bikes feel very different.

The Suzuki is easier to turn. It requires a very light push on the inside grip to get it leaned over and turning. The Sportster needs more pressure on the bar to make it lean. When exiting the turn, the Suzuki is easier to stand back up to vertical. In a series of tight left,right.left right,S turns the Suzuki is easier to flick back and forth. It "feels" quicker. But I'm not sure if I can actually make it turn any faster than The Sportster as long as I use enough force on the Sportster's bars.

Once it is turning the Sportster "feels" more planted than the Suzuki and it doesn't get as upset by pavement irregularities as the Suzuki does. There is one turn on this road where the pavement is rippled, and it's hard for me to resist the urge to roll off the throttle on the Suzuki if I'm going a little faster through that turn than I probably should be. That doesn't happen on the Sportster. So in that particular spot I'd have to say the Sportster "feels" better.

Does it actually handle better there ? Is the Sportster capable of going around that turn faster than the Suzuki ? I don't know. I'm not a skilled, or brave, enough rider to know for sure.

In a straight line, at sane speeds (droning along the expressway at 70 or 75} there is very little difference. Both bikes feel fine. Both of them wiggle a bit on pavement grooves, and on steel deck bridges, but not to the point of feeling unsafe. The Sportster is more sensitive to tar snakes but that may be the tires. The Suzuki has a Shinko 712 on the front, the Sportster has an HD branded OEM style Dunlop. The Suzuki gets blown around more by the buffeting from big trucks.

Both bikes have stock suspensions and brakes. The forks and the shocks are about equally mediocre on both. Neither have enough travel in the rear, and the fronts are too soft. The Sportster is worse. The forks on the Harley sag more when I get on the bike and they dive more under heavy braking. I rebuilt the Harley forks about a year ago with OEM bushings and the recommended weight and amount of oil because I had to replace a leaking seal, and they aren't much better than they were before I had to fix the leak, so I suspect that they could use slightly heavier springs.

When I bought the Sportster it already had what HD calls a "stage 1" performance upgrade. That consists of a different, supposedly less restrictive, air intake, a different ignition module, and more open mufflers. I don't know how much extra HP that's supposed to produce compared to stock, but the Sportster is much faster than the Suzuki in spite of weighing around 560 pounds vs 380.

I'm a little skeptical about some of the claims regarding performance gains anyway. The mufflers that were on the bike when I bought it were pretty loud. Last summer a pair of OEM take offs popped up on the local Craigslist for my year bike for $50 so I bought them and put them on. I've noticed no difference in the way the bike runs, or how fast it feels, and it's much more pleasant to ride. The aftermarket mufflers did look nicer though. :)

The brakes on both bikes - which is also related to handling I guess - are pretty comparable. Perfectly adequate for sane riding but not great. The drum on the Savage is actually better than the rear disc on my Sportster. The Suzuki brake is a little touchy if I'm not careful but at least it's strong enough to lock the wheel if I wanted to. The rear brake on the Sportster won't slide the wheel no matter how hard I stomp on it. The fronts of both bikes are about the same. Just OK.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by d3adrock on 03/03/20 at 08:23:56

Thanks!!! This is the type of comparison I'm looking for. Sorry to ask more of you, but any experience riding in city traffic or slow traffic speeds? Does the weight of the sportster bother more at those speeds? Also, any mods on the sportster? Thanks again!

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by srinath on 03/03/20 at 08:39:19

584F49454A5A280 wrote:

Ok, the SCR is the scrambler version. So it purrs along the super slab at 75 mph?

Best regards,

SCR was the scrambler version, mine has been turned into a bolt, that SCR was unuseable. It will run very very well well past 100, the SCR's wide handlebar would make you feel like a sail past 90 or so, I went to the C spec narrow clip on's and no problem till 119 or so indicated, not had it over that.
Cool.
Srinath.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by oldNslow on 03/03/20 at 09:20:12

2B7C2E2B3D202C244F0 wrote:

I don't ride in city traffic much, but if I had to I'd pick the Suzuki. The Sportster is a bit top heavy feeling at very slow speeds even though the seat height is about the same. The Sportster clutch is a bit harder to pull also so in a lot of stop and go traffic that might get a bit old after a while. The engine cases are a lot wider on the Sportster so my feet are spread wider apart when I'm sitting on the Sportster and not moving. I think that might get uncomfortable after a while.
I'm only 5'6'' tall though. For someone taller that might not be an issue.

Where I live the roads are pretty bad. The city streets in Rochester are horrible. They spend four months of every year frozen and covered with road salt. The pavement takes a real beating and a lot it doesn't get repairs every summer. Even the street I live on, which isn't in town, is a dead end, and gets very little traffic, is a wreck.

If I had to have a city bike around here it wouldn't be either my S40 or my Sportster. It would be a street legal dirt bike. The tallest one I could straddle and still get the balls of my feet on the ground.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by MMRanch on 03/03/20 at 14:29:04

d3adrock

2" over will make a driving difference. I had 4" over on a Sportster and it REALLY raised the center of gravity almost too much .

You need a 10/10 kit if you want the chopper look. That is 10" over and 10 degree extra rake. I had the kit on a XS650 Yamaha in the mid 1970 and the long wheel base made the rear of the bike drift a lot easier , but it felt Good ! :)
The long wheel base also put an end to turning around in the middle of the 2 lane highway ! ;D

http://www.choppersurplus.com/bikekits/index.html

http://www.choppersurplus.com/np/frontends/index.html

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by d3adrock on 03/03/20 at 14:44:59

That would be a bummer, I love doing u-turns in narrow streets on the savage. Is the 10/10 kit you mention one of those "chopper kits" that have the extra wedge under the tripple tree? no offense to anyone who likes those but I think they look awful. Thanks for the advice! No chance you got any pics of your yam 650, or the sporty you rode. I love pics!

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by pg on 03/03/20 at 16:20:10

57564D4A45504C240 wrote:

[quote author=584F49454A5A280 link=1583089789/15#21 date=1583241355]Ok, the SCR is the scrambler version. So it purrs along the super slab at 75 mph?

Best regards,

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by d3adrock on 03/03/20 at 18:29:04

47797874667A7B150 wrote:

[quote author=2B7C2E2B3D202C244F0 link=1583089789/15#23 date=1583252636]Thanks!!! This is the type of comparison I'm looking for. Sorry to ask more of you, but any experience riding in city traffic or slow traffic speeds? Does the weight of the sportster bother more at those speeds? Thanks again!

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by MMRanch on 03/03/20 at 19:49:01

I've got the Sportster on my computer . Its got the 4" over forks on it and the mini ape-hangers . I also put the higher geared front primary off a 1200 into my 883 . It was geared to run 140 mph if the down hill was long enough and the tail wind strong enough. ;D
It did bump along the Super-Slab at 75mph really nice . The taller front end raised the foot pegs up enough that it corned better than a stock Sportster. :)

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by oldNslow on 03/04/20 at 06:14:03

Quote:

I forgot to ask, does your sporty have mids or forwards?

Mids.

Oem style bars. Mustang solo seat. The seat is about the same size and shape as the OEM solo but the foam was pretty much shot in the original so I replaced it.

The mid pegs are OK for me, but I'm short. Anyone tall might find the seat peg distance a little cramped and prefer forwards.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by Bokobob on 03/10/20 at 09:54:45

One big thing about the Sportser 1200 is that the seat height is 29.5 inches while the savage 650 is 27.2 inches.

Also, the difficulty of checking oil with the dry sump and oil tank on the right side of the bike is a real drawback...I think that is needed because the engine is too tall for a crankcase and thus has a dry sump.

Finally, the Savage can get away with the air-cooled engine, while some Harley Vtwins tend to overheat at stop lights.

You may suspect that I don't care for Harleys.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by d3adrock on 03/10/20 at 10:22:28

Ive never ridden one, only sat on one. But i spend an unfortunate ammount of time at stoplights living in chicago. May I ask why the dry sump makes it difficult to check the oil? Ive never heard of that before (i actually just googled the difference between wet and dry sump to understand what you meant)

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by srinath on 03/10/20 at 18:03:26

6B7C7A7679691B0 wrote:

Does it vibrate? I remember reading the V-Star 950 would vibrate pretty good as it approached 70 mph.

Best regards,

Sorry missed this question - but really not much more than a savage or any other jap V twin for that matter. The V star 950 vibrated a lot ? That's odd, in fact the bolt has a upper cyl motor mount bracket they left out that is present on the 950 V star. Its got holes in the frame, holes in the head, and no bracket. There is some people who have bought the Vstar bracket and cut off a couple ears that aren't in use in the bolt and bolt the bracket in. Weird, a missing or loose motor mount = major vibes. Well apparently not on this bike LOL.
The worst thing in that regard is the clunk at shift especially into first from N 1st and 2nd from 1st - apparently they wanted it to be clunky … grrrrr. The worst feature of it though is that the FI runs open loop after 2500 rpm - hate that.

Cool.
Srinath.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by jcstokes on 03/11/20 at 00:51:44

Srinath, thank you for your comments about the Bolt, I've toyed with the idea of getting one, but as far as I can see, the only advantage over the S40/Savage, higher top speed, grossly illegal where I live, and more grunt for overtaking.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by oldNslow on 03/11/20 at 04:27:04

297E2C293F222E264D0 wrote:

Ive never ridden one, only sat on one. But i spend an unfortunate ammount of time at stoplights living in chicago. May I ask why the dry sump makes it difficult to check the oil? Ive never heard of that before (i actually just googled the difference between wet and dry sump to understand what you meant)

It doesn't. Sportsters have an oil tank just behind and below the back of the seat on the right side of the bike. The cap on the tank has a dipstick built into it. With the bike on the sidestand take off the cap and look at the stick. Just like a car. No trying to hold the bike vertical while getting down on your knees to peer in a little window with your chin 10 inches off the ground.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by pg on 03/11/20 at 04:28:48

The V star 950 vibrated a lot ?

That's what I remember reading, there was a lot about it that I liked. They said as you approach 70 it became very noticeable. I was looking to do some moderate touring and I ended up passing on it. I bought a V-Strom 650 a couple years later and that is a phenomenal motorcycle.

Best regards,

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by srinath on 03/11/20 at 06:03:16

445355595646340 wrote:

I have heard the 650 V star pretty much loses much of its grunt at highway speeds. The 950 - maybe … its only 47 hp but that 950 carry an extra 100 lb. The bolt has been specifically made to be a heavy duty overbuilt in some kind of clunky and unrefined way. Sort of like a soviet era motorcycle, its almost like, you want an air filter huh, lets slap it where it will clock your knee, you want a gauge, lets make this unseeable crap and slap it behind the triple clamp where it will get in the way of you filling gas etc etc that'll teach you to ask for sheiite. The SCR is even worse, the seat hoop and the seat and the whole thing was just painful. They gave bolts to 15 or so custom builders and took the best features of that they did and built the SCR, and turned a bike they could not keep in stock @8K into a bike they could not give away at 4k. In fact a few of the 17's in summer of 2019 went for $2999 from a dealer in Missouri. I bought mine @ 4500 in summer 2018 but it was at a dealer 100 miles away, not 1000 miles.

Cool.
Srinath.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by srinath on 03/11/20 at 06:33:52

BTW the one thing that Yamaha got absolutely spot on for all the 950 motors and even the 1700 and those raiders etc is that belt drive. The 650 and 1100 Vstar had that retarded exposed shaft, that thing will leak, rust and lead to a lot of crap from owners. They went to belt and just freaking nailed it.
The second thing is - and this is specific to the SCR, aluminum rims, spoked wheels and they sold these rims as an "accessory" to the bolt for 3 yrs for almost 3K before it got "standard" on the SCR. Rear is a 17 and 19 front with trail tires that literally wear like freaking iron, but its a 17", 150 wide tires are available to suit every mood you can have with those. They could have fit a 17" up front too, and I might use one of the GR rims I got lying about and lace it if I ever get the skills to do it, but till then I'm happy with these tires that don't seem to wear, and they grip well due to their massive teeth tread pattern, even in rain, they're very good.
The best part - I bought a set of bolt wheels for $150 - direct bolt on, have 15 and 19 cast wheels with a choice of cruiser tires, so if I want to, I can swap entire wheel sets day to day. I used to do that for the GS500, but was more of a wheel loaner service when one of my local custo-friends was going to put tires on his bike, I'd loan out wheels and get their wheels in exchange, usually I'll be doing both the wheel swap as well as taking the thing to the bike shop to fit tires, I made some $$ on the side.

But the whole wheel swap idea is very very cool and appealing to me.

Cool.
Srinath.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by d3adrock on 03/18/20 at 17:00:29

Since I think theres been a pretty good response to this, let me ask one more clarifying question. Between the sportser and the savage, which one do you think would do better off-road, in muck, in rain, in sand ect. I know neither one is good for it, and neither one is truly capable of it. But to the extent that each one can, if you had to choose, which would be better?

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by Armen on 03/18/20 at 17:41:20

Neither one, stock. But the Savage starts out 150 pounds lighter than the Sporty, and can be made 200 pounds less without an insane amount of money. Jesus Christ on a bet couldn't make a Sportster in the low 300's.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by oldNslow on 03/18/20 at 17:51:17

62514E464D230 wrote:

Yep

Anything you ride off road you're going to have to pick up off the ground sooner or later :D

Great story:

https://www.biltwellinc.com/blogs/wtf/finished-norra-mexican-1000-stupid-sportster

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by d3adrock on 03/18/20 at 17:54:49

Thank you for that. I've seen and am a big fan of the frijole. Perhaps my question wasnt as clear as it could have been. I meant if forced to choose between both vehicles stock, which would you take and why?

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by youzguyz on 03/19/20 at 02:11:32

520557524459555D360 wrote:

The savage. But, I have never owned a sportster.

I own 2 "stock" savages. By stock I mean they have not been setup for dirt in any way. Street tires, stock fenders, stock suspension.
I go off pavement quite often. I don't say "off road", as where I go is still intended for vehicle traffic.. even if they mean only 4x4 trucks.

The Savage is light, as has already been pointed out.
However, it also has a short wheel base. That makes it easier to turn around when the road just isn't there anymore. (Paved, gravel, dirt, 2 tracks for tires, goat path, rancher with shot gun.. darn. Been there, done that.).

This picture was taken while I was on a TWT (Two Wheel Texans) ride. They do "adventure" riding for the most part, and are always amused when I decide to tag along. Most of my "dirt" pictures are just of the bike, as I usually ride alone.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by youzguyz on 03/19/20 at 02:24:29

The Savage probably has better low rpm torque than the Sportster as well. That is important when trying to bull your way through loose gravel in the bottom of creek beds.. and similar stuff

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by srinath on 03/19/20 at 03:33:57

2E792B2E382529214A0 wrote:

Since I like to yap about the bolt when ever someone says sportster (its a jap sportster IMHO) Yamaha Made a bike called the SCR950 - intended as a on/off road styled motorcycle - the operative word being styled. It came with Trailwing tires and a higher rear fender by virtue of a seat hoop. Look up 2019 SCR 950. It had spoked alumimum rims and a wide handlebar.
My bolt is one of those I Unbolted - and in the SCR form well, its suspension travel was dismal cos it was cruiser suspension but it did get you the extra travel if needed. Its ground clearance was same as the cruiser, which is a bit better than a savage IMHO.
I am tempted to say while heavier than a savage, it may make a 1/2 decent trail bike just by virtue of tires and handle bars alone.

Else my nod to the savage. Almost depends on the tires you have on it.

Cool.
Srinath.

Title: Re: Sportster Savage Comparisons
Post by d3adrock on 03/19/20 at 08:03:17

Thank you very much, that is exactly the type of thing I was looking for. Like I said I know it's not a dirt bike, but im still relatively new and wonder what characteristics would be more predisposed to rougher terrain on one vs the other. Ill never take my bike off road, but sandy gritty muddy terrain are likely (theres more of that here in the city than youde think)