I don't think that r6 is a lot faster than monster 696 for example but people buying r6 usually buy it for racing. So the first bike not being 600 is not what I think. It is all in your head - you don't have to go full throttle if you can't control it and then you can increase the rpms as you learn.. monster 696 was the first bike for me and now I have about 2000km on it  and I think that a 125 ccm would be more dangerous for me than the monster. didn't buy the r6 because it is made with all of the fairings for higher speeds and I don't want high speeds for now.

This thread has been very interesting, and a lot of my opinions have already been stated.  There does see to be confusion about the '600' nature of the smaller monsters (and SSs, back in the day).  They are NOT in the same class as a 600 race replica from the big four.

The first motorcycle I ever "rode" was a late nineties CBR 600RR.  It belonged to a friend of my cousin, who stuck the helmet on my head and told me to let 'er rip.  I was still in middle school, no license, really stupid.  But I thought I'd give it a shot.

That bike, while it didn't so much scare me, made me feel both idiotic and feeble.  I couldn't control it, had no idea how the power curve worked, and couldn't modulate the front brake much more than "on" and "off".  Taking that ride, however stupid, at least taught me very quickly that someone DOES NOT learn to ride on a bike like that, and in fact learns more bad habits than anything else.

When I did decide to get my first motorcycle, I knew that I wouldn't be flinging myself around corners and riding even close to the limit with any skill for quite some time.  At the same time, I wanted something that I could still learn start learning "that stuff" on later.  So it needed to be sporty, cool, practical, and unique without being suicidal.  620 monster.  Bingo.

I now ride an S4R, and I know that I will never stop learning.  I want to buy a good used 99x or 74x superbike soon (after Indy, I gots da feva) because I want to learn to ride faster on the track, not the street.  And that's the same place a 600 racer belongs, too.  I would even argue, having ridden a 2005 R6 in both conditions, that 600s are super fun and the track and ABSOLUTELY SUCK on the street, at least by comparison.  With any monster, its more of a bike that, while still fun at a track, allows you to go almost as fast as a 600 on street with more confidence, comfort, margin for error, and dare I say a little more style.

-Nick

One last opinion: A great supplement for a beginner motorcyclist is mountain biking, preferably with a 29er.  More gyroscopic effect, and more of a hold-your-line cornering style than wee lil 26ers. 

I could not agree more...
Just came back from a 250km tour in the nice autumn weather.
Some sun, some rain, dry road, wet leaves , cagers, sunday cagers with bicyle/caravans/boats/horses in the back..
So a lot of things that could go wrong on their side and mine.
I was not riding for three weeks and my 695 really needed to show me there is enough fire to thrill me for more years.
What Ducati should do is not to think about a Monster in between the 696 and 1100...no
They should have a YoungMonster with 250cc and kick some ugly Ninjas butt.
That would bring youngsters to the brand and show the the beauty of a half upright machine compared to that green toilet seat.
Just my 0.02

Quote from: semyhr on October 12, 2008, 06:09:01 AM
I don't think that r6 is a lot faster than monster 696 for example but people buying r6 usually buy it for racing. So the first bike not being 600 is not what I think. It is all in your head - you don't have to go full throttle if you can't control it and then you can increase the rpms as you learn.. monster 696 was the first bike for me and now I have about 2000km on it  and I think that a 125 ccm would be more dangerous for me than the monster. didn't buy the r6 because it is made with all of the fairings for higher speeds and I don't want high speeds for now.

So you're asserting that your 80 hp (at the engine) 696 is comparable to the 110+ rwhp (6th paragraph down) Yamaha R6, the first production bike to break 170 mph, or even a comparable KawaHonZuki.

Riiiiiiiiight.

The first bike I rode was a Kantana 600. It was too much bike. I never had a problem riding it, in fact I found learning on it easy. But I was not responsible with the power. And I still have a copy of the ticket (100 in a 55) to prove it.

Quote from: somebastid on October 11, 2008, 04:59:20 PM

Personally I think if you find yourself in a situation where the only way out is to accelerate as fast as you can, you may have other issues. How did you get into that situation?

I've never once found myself in a place where the best thing I could do was twist the throttle as hard as I could. Some idiot coming up behind me *way* too fast? Change lanes. Someone not paying attention? Calmly pull away from them. Etc. It's all about reading the situations, and avoiding them before they happen. This comes with experience.

I know you have some experience with this, but for the record, when I'm sitting at a light-one eye is one the light and the other is watching the driver behind me until I pull away. No abundance or lack of power would've ever done anything to help you when you got rear-ended.

True no amount of power would have prevented my rear-ending for the simple fact the driver behind me jammed on the gas after we had both been sitting at the red light for a few minutes, this you're right about. I will say though when I am on the highway I have been in plenty of situations where rolling on heavy throttle has helped me escape drivers that look to be dangerous. I am not saying I outrun every car but when I see a driver that looks to be absent-minded I use acceleration to get clear of them and then if I need to position myself elsewhere to let them pass I do just that. I have never felt dropping back is as safe as I can more easily judge hazards ahead than behind, typically it is easiest to just move faster than the traffic and leave them behind. Basically, I think we'd all agree a Vespa on the highway is more dangerous than a 620 monster, which is why they are not allowed on the highway where I have lived (not sure about everywhere else), the reason being not enough power or speed to beat the flow of traffic. I think every car that passes you presents the possible risk of not seeing you, therefore by not being able to increase speed as quick as you decide to presents a greater risk. In the same sense I think that owning or driving slow cars is more dangerous than fast ones, there have been a handful of times when I am driving a car where I am avoiding trouble by accelerating, I ride a 620, it's not a ton of power but anything less and I would feel vulnerable. I just think it's better to have a little extra power if needed to avoid a problem rather than not enough, I know most people are idiots and they don't understand why a faster vehicle can be safer but in my mind you can speed up or slow down to avoid trouble, I like to have the option to do both, if you don't have enough available power then you limit yourself to possible options to escape tricky situations. Keep in mind I think a 620 is plenty of speed for me, I do not feel underpowered as I can probably accelerate faster than 95% of cars on the road, I am just saying that this is how a bike should be and that if a beginer wants the same power to weight ratio as a family sedan then they can go buy a Vespa, which in my mind is more dangerous than a 600cc motorcycle because of the low power. On the Japanese 600cc bikes I agree, it's too much power for a beginer, but if someone can't handle a 620cc Vtwin then they probably shouldn't ride at all.

Have you ridden a smaller bike?


The MSF ones don't count.

i think that new suzuki that is coming out that is a single cyclinder 250 that looks like a retro 70s bike is going to make them a lot of money.

i'm considering getting one of those for daily commuting in a suburb town.  think about it probbaly really great gas mileage and it looks like a fun bike for just tooling around on in genearl and probably won't have maintencnace till 15000 miles.  and it has that retro look.  the real question is how does it ride.

the dirt bike thing people speak of sounds like a great idea.  only problme is that those of us that live in more urban areas don't have access to dirtbike trails on a regular basis so that dirbike thing would be really bad since that person migh only get out to ride dirtbikes maybe 1 or 2 times a month tops and not have the storage space for the bike/trailer/etc.  so while i agree dirbikes would be great to learn on, its not really feasible for everyone.

Quote from: somebastid on October 12, 2008, 11:22:27 AM
Have you ridden a smaller bike?


The MSF ones don't count.

Only the MSF ones... I am under the impression that a 250 ninja is much quicker than a 250 Nighthawk. I think smaller bikes are fine, maybe I am 'personalizing' my posts too much to just my thinking and size... I guess I should clarify, what I am saying is a 620 Monster is a great bike for a beginner, I weigh 225 and I think anything with less HP than my 620 might actually be more dangerous. I believe a 250 Ninja might have roughly the same HP, so there might be no sense in some of my posting as I have never rode a bike like this. Regardless, to touch back to the OP here, to imply "all 600cc bikes are too much for a newbie" is a blanket statement that I do not agree with, is there not a big difference between the 2 valve and 4 valve motors? I just find the discussion interesting though, but I will freely admit other than the MSF bikes I have only rode my 620.

did they ever sell the 400 monster in the states?

Quote from: Raux on October 12, 2008, 11:37:24 AM
did they ever sell the 400 monster in the states?

from what I know it was in Japan only... that's a great example of a bike that I would need to lose 50 lbs to feel okay about riding, at my current weight I would feel like it would be unsafe/underpowered.

maybe now with the light 696-style frame a 400 wouldn't feel so sluggish.
figure that the bike could lose another 10-15 pounds (696 to 1100 gained 15) to 340lbs and hp ratings near around 50-60 it might be the right bike for starters.

Quote from: Raux on October 12, 2008, 11:42:16 AM
maybe now with the light 696-style frame a 400 wouldn't feel so sluggish.
figure that the bike could lose another 10-15 pounds (696 to 1100 gained 15) to 340lbs and hp ratings near around 50-60 it might be the right bike for starters.

That's a good point...

Quote from: eesnas on October 12, 2008, 11:45:13 AM
That's a good point...

the more and more i think about it, it would be the right move for Ducati. I mean the new fighter will take the hi end and the monster could grab the entry level with a 400.

i think the 400 idea from ducati bringing it to the states would be a disaster.

here is why, ducati still likes being viewed as somewhat of a "premium" brand over the japanese bikes.  if they brign that bike here it will have to be a few thousand cheaper than the 696 and that puts it at around 5500-6k out the door.

as an entry level bike its going to be more expensive than other beginner bikes like the ninja 250 and rebel and such, and its going to be underpowered for even a person that likes ducatis.  people would say, for that much i'lljust buy a used 620 or 695 for the same price or cheaper.

its still going to have the valve adjustments and such so that would turn people off, great way to intorduce them to the ownership of a ducati. and that would not be great.