Ttaskmaster

Bollocks... It doesn't start until 1st Dec with yer Advent Calendars and doesn't end until first paycheque AFTER the 25th!! I am SO looking forward to not buying presents for the children of relatives I don't even see, and instead getting back to spending money on my PC upgrade!

You'd still be better off speaking to the maufacturer as they may need the exact model/version/serial number, have changed the wiring, have a quick fix or all manner of useful things. That, or perhaps a professional fitter, who could then sort/advise on the Datatool as well.

WTF with stamping on someone's head to break a kerbstone??!!

That is one sexy bike!!! I wonder if I could convince the Mrs to get one....

Nope. *Ground clearance* matters nothing - Above the ground, I have my pipes (no belly pan), then my frame, then a bit of a gap, then finally my crank case and engine. Ground clearance means nothing because, as you say - "what matters is how far the crank is from ground". However, until I bother to go out and actually measure my crank height, it is still something you can calculate. You can find the wheel rim diameters, calculate the axle height and scale map that on to photos, for accurate measurements. I have a 3XW by the way, so that's a 17" on the front. Eh??!! Because the Cruiser has the wider arc? Assuming you meant the Tall bike has the wider arc (which it does)... Yes, that part is correct. But so what? The Cruiser centre of gravity could even be heavier than the Tall, but the height of the CoG *and* its relationship to the length of lever (in this case height of the bars) are the main factors. With that, the Drop-Angle (might as well find a name for it) on the Tall will be smaller than that of the Cruiser, ie it has to tip less. But the Drop-Angle will be greater on the Cruiser, so you'd have to lean it very far 'on accident'... further than the Tall bike. Also, leverage works both ways. Even if your primary CoG is the same value and height, the longer lever on the Tall adds more weight and raises the overall CoG anyway. Y H | | W - Tall | | W - Cruiser | | O------------ X Assuming X is flat ground, Y is an upright lever with H being the handle, O is the pivot, W is the weight/CoG and the angle X to Y is 90º... As the lever tips over that 90º decreases. The further out past O and toward X the W is, the heavier it will feel at H. Now, gravity pulls down the Y axis, so the Cruiser may well reach its Drop Angle of, say, 30º over a shorter arc before the Tall bike reaches its own, but at that angle H will also be closer to O than to X. It is the other way around with the Tall, as the Tall will reach it's Drop Angle of 20º with W further out. Further more, you have an A frame over the top of the lever, formed by your legs as they hold the bike upright. Assuming the same one rider tests all bikes - The taller the bike, the sooner the lever will interfere with the inner apex of his A frame and the sooner his own centre of gravity will be moved away from a sufficient supporting position to keep the bike up. Similarly, the shorter the rider, the sooner the falling bike will shove their leg out from under them, resulting in the bike hitting the deck, with them collapsing arse-first atop it, with legs flailing in the air and all their mates laughing at them. So, short rider plus tall bike STILL equals embarrassing drop. Yeah, because it reaches its own Drop-Angle before the Cruiser does. Nothing wrong with that. I'm proud of my lump! Paranoid much? Guess you'll have to come to me then. Can you at least let me know whether you'll be needing full accomodation, or just a cup of tea and a biscuit?

Which is my point. On the FJ it is all higher than you seem to think. The ground clearance is correct, but my engine sits a good few inches higher. The Shadow's crank sits slightly (0.5-1") below it's axle line. The FJ's sits 3-4" above. Add to that the higher fuel tank, front frame and all the above, you have a lot of weight high up. Which is what I was saying about my in-line four and the higher, greater weight. I could tip my cruiser over way past the sidestand angle and still hold it braced against my left knee. If I tried that with the FJ, I'd have a smashed bike and a snapped leg... as I almost discovered when the sidestand bounced back up as I was leaning it over once! And now factoring in the further 3-4" mentioned above, plus all the other heavy high-up parts? Hold two 5kg weights out to your sides, arms straight at shoulder height and lean sideways. Now hold the weights down at your arms' lowest point and lean sideways. Which one is more likely to make you fall over? The FJ is more Tourer than a Sports and certainly not low down like a Blade or anything these days. Mine seems to be the odd one out, then? No, I really I do, but only because they look like they're made of LEGO™!! As you've not filled in your profile - How far from Reading are you?

Why? Just because the crank case is the heaviest part, does not mean that the other components higher up have no weight to them. For starters, there's a bloody huge fuel tank atop this thing, you know... Add in quad-carbs, four laterally in-line cylinders (rather than just two longitudinal (roughly) in-line ones), battery, upper frame, a blood massive headlight and instrument housing, fairing et al... NOT safe to assume. I thought you already tried to lecture me on that one! There is far more weight far higher up, part of which is the 'lever', that is to say the bike structure itself, which is why (as well as being too short to manage) people drop taller bikes more easily than Cruisers and consequently have more trouble lifting them again. Then why will you struggle more to pick up an FJ1200 than you will a Cruiser? Because you will. I guarantee this... to the point I invite you to come try it on my own bikes. Seriously, come pick up my lighter 650 and then try my heavier FJ. See which one wrenches your back. Hell, bring a Shadow along and do the same. Have however many feet on the ground you like. Video it and post it here. Whatever you want. Let's see your physics in action!

That's two things. Sonny also fully admitted in writing that the Harley build quality is vastly inferior to that of Japanese bikes and that, if they had a choice, he and all his evil 1%er criminal ilk would have dumped their shitty Harleys for nicely built Jap bikes. It's an opinion shared by many riders, 1%er and otherwise, worldwide. So fuck that opinion, yeah? So given how the empire of evil has been built on piece-of-shit Harleys that they didn't even like - where are we at here, now... You hate Harleys and think they are bikes for biker-scum, or that the biker-scum have made exceptionally savvy bike choices, or that only criminal wannabes ride Harleys and endure the dreadful build quality in order to look well-'ard? Add into this the fact that none of the Harley specialist mechanics round here actually ride Harleys, you have yourself a conundrum... Off you go, then!

Oh dear, it looks like the invincible infallible Yamaha Star product line might not be worthy of the hype as predicted! Who the fuck ever even *suggested* they were, aside from you? Again, you're the only one who has even imagined such a concept to begin with. You're making shit up in order to tear it down and are arguing against your own point that doesn't even exist!! Quick, bring out Ttask to disagree with everyone in spite of obvious evidence to the contrary! Oh I'm already here, kid. This is my thread, in case you hadn't noticed... though I'm sure a trolling fuckwitt like you would only be here because of that! Wow, it almost makes you think that maybe, just maybe, these bikes from this period might actually have a build quality issue because they are *shock* budget cruisers! Well fuck me... the kid has a point. Dragstars are shitty deathtraps that kill people!!! Now, lets go look on the owner forums of other brands, just to rub in how fucking awful Yamahas really are - Harley Davidson, Victory, Indian, Honda, Suzuki, Kak, Jing Chen, Hyosung, Enfield, Norton, BSA - Oh look: Dozens of threads on all their bikes about problems, broken parts, lacking build quality, design flaws, defects and so forth. That must mean... ALL bikes are shitty deathtraps that kill people!!! Let's get a nice safe car instead... nope, wait, the vast majority of those have similar threads on their forums too. Hell, everything from an Aston Martin to an FV432 has mechanical, electrical, design and build quality problems. Looks like your only option is to get out and use your dumpy little stoat legs to walk everywhere. I like proof, because it's incontrovertible. Then when are you going to use some for existing cases instead of making your own up to argue against? These bikes are what they are, they aren't beautifully hand crafted engineering masterpieces. Is that what the bloke told you when you bought your piece of fucked up shite off him, then? any bike, well cared for, so long as it wasn't overly compromised at the design or manufacturing stage, will serve it's owner well. Yep, we pointed this out to you in the opening responses of your own ranty-bollocks thread. Despite any design flaws, the Dragstar range still serves its owners perfectly well, so long as they are cared for. Yours was severely mistreated. You bought a duff. You were fucked over by an unscrupulous or simply ignorant seller. GET OVER IT!!! This is why people still buy Harleys, because for all their faults, they are built to last. Really? Tell that to the numerous Harley specialist mechanics round here who are making a fucking mint off the rich riders perpetually bringing their machines in for work. I'm sure they'd *love* to hear how they really don't need to be in business fixing up oil leaks, replacing parts and so forth. Also tell that to the likes of Sonny Barger, who rates Japanese bikes well above the Harley build quality. I'm sure he'd be delighted to receive your amazing insight... They only cost a bit more brand new compared to a Jap bike, but don't depreciate anywhere near as much. The cheapest new Harleys costs almost twice what the upper end Dragstar does. Your concept of 'a bit more' is somewhat skewed. But then, if they were as cheap as you claim, you'd have bought one instead of a seriously questionable-condition rice burner... right? Why? Because the people who buy them look after them and they're not compromised on design and build quality just to lower the price point. Harley riders also don't generally ride their bikes anywhere near as much or in as wide a range of weathers as the general Jap Cruisers do. As for design and build quality - See above, along with reviews pitting the Bolt against its Harley equivalents. the point stands, irrefutably: What, like all your other irrefutable points we have irrefutably refuted? Never trust a bike just on a brand, because I guarantee that they will quite happily let you down, ESPECIALLY if they have a legendary reputation. Who here ever said they had a legendary reputation??!! YOU are the only one with that concept bouncing around inside your empty little head, kid. You'd actually be better off with a Sinnis Apache, at £1500 brand new, than a 10 year old XVS 125 at the same £1500 after it's been dropped and lowsided a bagillion times and everything is rusted, scraped, the chrome is pitted, the piston rings which are like unicorn shit are beyond use and Yamaha want £480 just for a CDI box so you have to wait for someone elses bike to break just to get one as a scrap part. So... you really *are* here to just rant and ramble and kick off because you got fucked over in a purchase and wish to tar every Dragstar with the same brush. 'Nuff said, I think. You're clearly not here to contribute anything to the forum beyond malcontent and trolling guff, so do yourself a favour and fuck right off.

If you can keep a long, heavy, unwieldy, ungainly cruiser upright and handle it, then weight or ergonomics is clearly not the issue. If you can get a bottom-heavy object to remain more upright than a heavier top-heavy one, then ergonomics is *blatantly* a factor. Where did you learn physics again? Since we've also established that height is not an issue either, what the fuck is exactly the issue? The issue is that *we* have proven that it is a factor and that you're just countering (or perhaps trolling) with random bollocks. Cruiser - High weight, low centre of gravity. FJ1200 - Greater weight, higher centre of gravity. Your masterful understanding of physics surely comprehends such a basic concept as even us old-age donkey Harley wannabes can easily understand, right? Oh wait, I know what the issue is, Ttask just wants to be a contrarian so that he can continue to argue with everything I say! If you stop posting utter opinionated crap and start coming up with actual proof that more people than *just you* concur with, then we might reach an accord. Until then, fuck yeah - I disagree with you and will challenge you on every point. Since my 5'0 girlfriend had trouble keeping my 125 drag upright or reaching the pegs (back when it was still a bobber and using the stock pegs), there's some evidence against you. So she's a weakling and you're not teaching her how to hold the bike up properly... What's your point? Are you sure she's fully inflated? And yes, I am aware you can fit swept back bars, that opens a whole can of worms about people's different opinion on whether or not doing that is safe. No, not different bars, retard. The factory standard ones pivot. You just loosen the risers. But you also know this, having ridden the bike, of course... Sat on my bob, if I rested my legs out over the pegs highway style, my heel would be only just past the peg, and I'm 5'11. And how does Bob feel about you sitting on him? I'm 5' 11" also, with a 33" inside leg and I dwarf the 125. Are you sure you're sat on the rider's seat and not the pillion pad, or do you just have legs like a stoat? The 650 drag is even longer, and my legs were basically straight out on the pegs, and I've ridden both a bobbed and stock version, so I'm quite happy to declare that one myth busted and bullshit called. I counter-bust your bullshit and call you a short-legged freak. Go on, give us your inside leg measurement. The reality is, a lower bike is actually HARDER to keep upright because there is less leverage, WHAT???!!! Do what, now? Seriously? What fucking "reality" do you live in? Did you have to take the red pill to get there? Utter bollocks again. I can stand directly over the 650 and simply push down on the right bar grip to bring it upright. Take a Honda M50 - Even a 10 year old child can get that upright and it's even lower than a Cruiser. Fuck your concept of leverage. You were clearly not paying attention in college! the greater fork rake creates something called "flop" at low speeds and a standstill, where it has a tendency to want to, sometimes rather violently, flop over onto the steering lock one way or another. In order for the bars to 'flop' on to the steering lock, you have to tilt the bike over in that direction. If you hold the bike upright, the bars stay level... unless your bike is fucked and abused which... oh, wait - yours is!! If your bars are trying to 'flop' while you're actually riding along (at ANY speed), perhaps you want to try riding upright and with your hands on the bars!! A taller bike has much greater leverage, so think like a socket wrench, you use a longer handle to create more torque at the socket, in other words, greater length requires less force, therefore it takes less force/effort to keep a tall heavy bike upright than it does to keep a short heavy bike upright. Errr.... you seem to be drunk, kid... or just blurting out random crap again. You've forgotten the weight behind the lever and that little thing called gravity, which applies as you're lifting a mass - The weight you're moving with this socket wrench is not at the pivot end, but further up towards the handle. The FJ's greater weight is even further up, so requires greater force to move it. Here's a quick virtual sketch for you: Cruiser: -^----------w--O FJ1200: -^--*W*--------O ^ = Direction of movement O = Pivot point W = Weight *W* = Greater weight But I suppose that will be the next thing that you'll chose to disagree with, because you're Ttask and that's what you do. With physics? Never... just your misinterpretation of it. I thought you were all smart and stuff?

Look at the ones on eBay and Bike Trader, follow their example. Parts - Also eBay. Plenty of info if you do a quick Google!!

650 Dragstar? Ooh, my 5' 4" Mrs rides one of them!! The 650 is actually pretty cramped for a low/mid-range Cruiser. My feet are almost below my knees on mine and most riders over 5' can reach them just fine. The bars pivot rearward for the reduced arm reach and all is well. But you've ridden one yourself a couple of times, so *of course* you knew that already!! Also - 510lbs, apparently... or 567 if you have a Classic.

Made of LEGO™...? Still waiting to hear about the Lotus bike...

Five - Those two, my Missus... and two short-arsed work colleagues of mine that I borrowed to test this technique out the other day!!

As mentioned - If you have to lean it beyond the angle of alignment just to get your foot down or swap feet (such as when dropping the sidestand), then it is going over.

Jeeeeeesus, it took three pages just to get you to tell us a tiny little bit about yourself? I notice also that this amazing short rider technique now features the term 'theoretical'... So, next question: How does a short rider who can only get one foot down on a tall, heavy bike SAFELY reverse it back up a slight incline? What's the (theoretical) technique for that? Switch off, dismount and lean it onto themselves while they try to stagger rearward, or just pull on the bars as hard as they can and hop backwards, hoping for the best? How do they manage with one foot what just about every tall and muscley bloke seems to have trouble with even though they can get both feet down with room to stand and straddle? >This is true, and for those things I wasn't really singling out this bike in particular. So where is your rant about the problems and design flaws about other bikes (Yamaha or otherwise)? Why is this thread entitled 'ATTENTION DRAGSTAR 125 OWNERS/FANS/POTENTIAL BUYERS' in a big, sensationalist warning style straight out of The Sun newspaper? What makes a bike special is surely in the eyes of the rider and nothing to do with anything beyond that? From the outset, My 125 Drag was the only 125 that fitted me, both in form and style. Nothing else measured up. It carried me all the way to Scotland and Cornwall, got me to London and back every Friday in all weathers and traffics, enabled me to get a new job, showed me parts of the UK I'd never have visited otherwise, taught me the value of proper care and maintenance, saw me safely through thousands of road hazzards and took another 24,000 miles on top of its existing 30,000 odd, all without once having a single issue. It never died on me, never failed to start, never spit me off unless *I* did something fundamentally stupid where the result would be the same on any other bike, nothing fell off, nothing rusted out and it was in near-pristine condition when I sadly moved on. More than that, it forced me to learn all manner of riding techniques and characteristics, from forward planning and observation, to countersteering, line variances, condistional braking and beyond. Aside from simply being a Yamaha bike discussed on a Yamaha forum - That is pretty special, that is the reason people here love them so much and that is what the hype is about. Every other 125 Cruiser rider seemingly can't wait to get something bigger, yet people still buy Drag 125s out of choice. Utter tosh. There will always be basic physical limitations for some riders. I physically cannot ride some smaller bikes because my knee stops the bars from moving properly. There's no safe way around that. Modding would destroy the bike geometry and altering my riding position would further restrict my control over it. I have a photo somewhere (if I can find it) of my 7' 2" friend trying to sit on the new Fireblade at the local dealership launch. It's purely comical, but even further highlights these sort of physical limitations. I'm sure you'd like to challenge that with the whole 'learning to manage garnering respect' idea or something, but sitting on a bike all twisted up and hunkered over as if you were on a kiddie's tricycle does NOT earn you respect in the real world! Well yes, it *is* what you're saying - "part of the learning process", "if short people you know can't support your FJ1200, then they're either legally a midget/dwarf or you're not teaching them properly", "Bike weight doesn't matter a great deal even if you are short", "It's not something everyone is cut out to do as some just lack the confidence", "riding a tall bike does not require you to be tall, it requires you to know the techniques", "There is no reason a short person cannot handle a tall motorcycle. It's all down to technique. Balance with one foot, counterbalance with the other, shift off the seat slightly. Once you've mastered it, no bike is too tall" Incidentally, a legal Dwarf is generally defined as being below 4' 10", where the shortest example of those I know who cannot properly reach around the FJ is 5' 4". So in order for your 5' girl to get her one foot down on a tall bike, she has to lean the bike over beyond that 'angle of no return'. On my FJ1200 that angle is passed before the extended sidestand touches down. So unless this 5' girl is supposed to drop the sidestand every time she stops, the technique (theoretical or otherwise) does NOT let her ride the bike safely... or at all, for that matter. Furthermore, even if she did drop the stand every time, she'd have to lean the bike the other way, past said no-drop angle in order to get her right foot down, flip up the stand and engage first gear before she could move off and once again you have a tiny 8st girl stuck under 42st of bike... and now probably with irate car drivers honking their horn at her! So between miracle midgets and a neglect-proof bike, you freaking crayz, bru!! He wasn't saying that... The concept to which my esteemed fellow Noisemaker was referring is that the greater response in a Sports is also prone to more pronounced reaction from road feedback. ie when a responsive Sports goes over a rut in the road the steering jerks rather notably, where a Cruiser by comparrison would have little more than a tangible twitch. Comparing my FJ to the 650, I wholeheartedly agree with Noisy. OK, the FJ may not really be a proper Sports by today's standards, but it's responsive enough that I notice how big the difference is. The Cruiser's rake angle does provide some specific handling characteristics that most uninformed Sporties seem to balk at, though, but they are just characteristics and not inherrently unsafe. Cruisers are designed to be comparatively slower than Sports, but that just means not blazing into corners like you're racing, which is what we've been saying all along. There's a lovely sharp hairpin on the road just into Boscastle that I insist on riding every time I'm down that way. The inside lane is on the uphill. My 125 and 650 Drags both handled that bend with greater aplomb than half the Sports and Tourer bikes riding with me, plus one Land Rover and a Mercedes C class. I remained a good 3' inside teh white line where other vehicles ran very wide (Landie bloke, I'm looking at you). It's all in how fast you enter and the lines you take. There are limits on the handling, but every other bike has its limits too. Whack open the throttle on an R1 as if it were a 600 Hoolie bike and see where that gets you! The differences between them are just factors that make us choose one over the other. I'm more into comfort than most Sports allow, so I opt for comfortable bikes. Depends how you define 'chucking around'... I've decked my 650 pegs out at about 10mph. It was that solid and that planted, whereas every other bike I've tried would (and did) fall over at such a low speed lean as there wasn't enough downward force to push against... actually, scratch that - The Police Deauville did scrape its extended panniers in a similar move, but it wasn't leant as far. No-one is saying one bike style is better than another, but they're also making sure this doesn't become a topic about one being so utterly fucking shit that no-one should buy it and a massive ranty warning against anyone who might even consider it, particularly when the rant is opinionated, skewed and simply one bad experience against the overwhelming number of fantastic ones. There's a reason they'll be that price, then... Expect to pay around £2500 for a decent nick 125 Drag and peace of mind. For a bike in the condition you stated in your thread, I'd expect no more than a grand, but drop that to perhaps £800 or less depending on how heavily modded it is and the quality of those mods. There's also a reason why unmodded 125s hold better value!! As merely the second owner of a pristine 650 Dragstar with fairly low mileage that I whacked on a hefty addition to and UTTERLY abused during the time I rode it, I can confirm with considerable authority that it IS down to the previous owner(s) and how well/badly they treat their bike. Mine was so far gone, people swore blind that it was a Rat project... towards the end, it kinda was. It held up damn well and refused to lie down to die, but it had a LOT to endure and even I was surprised how rarely anything failed. By comparison, I was the one looking after two other 650 Dragstars at the same time. One recently sold for £3500 and the other is so clean and shiny only the odometer proves that it ever sees a road! But in a very short space of time and with a fair amount of abuse, my own went from pristine to horrendous. In short, your bike was ABUSED!!! I know it may take time to come to terms with this, so if you'd like I can get you a counsellor who can talk you through this awful, awful experience...

>No. I live in a part of the world where we actually pay attention to the road and rarely have to emergency brake as a result. Oh, how nice and sedate for you. Can't be many cars on your road, then. Now go do it around, say, the Greater London border areas, where people change lanes without even looking, let alone indicating. Unless you are actually psychic, there is NO way your supposed paying attention will warn you. THAT is emergency braking! >See? Clearly you have the reading comprehension of a 6 year old. One foot on the peg, one foot on the floor. One plus one is two, retard. Oh really? Shit and here's me thinking the other foot was floating in the air... You want to get into name-calling over the fact that you lost the ability to actually follow the conversation, now? OK, for you and any other dumbfuck shitheads who don't know to walk away from an abused bike when they see it: Straddle bike. LEFT foot on the floor. RIGHT foot on the RIGHT footpeg. Apply weight to RIGHT foot, all 15 stone. Bike does not even lift up off the sidestand and I end up standing on the footpeg. It's now a balancing act, not lifting the bike up. How then do you you come to the conclusion that a tiny little girl can manage to hold this massive bike up with feet and bodyweight alone? The ONLY way to even lift it off the stand is to leverage your upper body against it, bracing the left leg against the floor. The right foot must be able to touch down, else the first gust of wind will take it over and you with it... and if you think you can hop on, switch your bodyweight across, lean off and touch the right foot down all in time to stop it, you are utterly out of it! >I never said "take my word for it" either, I said LOOK IT UP or PROVE ME WRONG. YOUR opinion, mistakenly stated as if it were fact. YOUR responsibility to prove it. You are also the ONLY one with this opinion, completely against the rest of the ownership. Fact is, we're NOT taking your word for it, but instead demanding that you substantiate the authority by which you make such claims to begin with. This you have not done out of some elitist feign of superiority. >You can't attend a track day without first attending track training. Oh god, MORE training??!! ALL this just to be able to hold a bike upright, now? You really *have* been ripped off at some point, mate... CBT, DAS, Roadrider, IAM, Track training and now Track, all so you can ride a bike that's too tall for your body? Or all so you can bitch about how you expect a Cruiser to be ridden like a Sports bike? >You learn things like chasing the limit point. You need Advanced training and trackdays just for that??!! Dude, I don't know who the fuck taught you to ride, but we get that on Day 1 of basic training!! We call it the Vanishing Point, by the way, as the corner actually vanishes around it, y'see... Avoids confusion with the more variable Limit Of Vision. >You know what the limit point is? Perhaps you can tell us since you know everything. Why should I tell you? Go look it up yourself, or fuck off and go pay for your expensive track day training to learn about it! But anyway, where exactly is the limit point on a dual carriageway of stationary traffic? In fact, where is the dual carriageway of stationary traffic on a racetrack? Where are the irate rush-hour drivers on a racetrack? Where are the drivers who, no matter how fucking bad-ass a rider you think you are, still pull out on/sideswipe you with NO chance for you to brake and crush you under their wheels? Good luck being all Advanced Trackday Rider with that one. I'm sure being able to ride a tall bike into your Limit Point will save you next time someone sideswipes you off the road... >The skills you learn on the track will help you in the real world, and you're kidding yourself if you think they won't. Tell that to the Cops. Not a single Police Motorcyclist here has recommended Racedays to me... strange, since Cops are typically THE most highly skilled Road Riders around. I mean, if this is all as good as you claim, why aren't they racing round tracks too instead of doing observed rides on real roads? >The track isn't all about pushing yourself, it's also about holding a line. Guess what - So is Basic Training!!! When you're not holding the line, the instructors call it 'thrupenny-bitting', which nowadays leads to an entertaining explanation of what a thrupenny bit is. >I dodge potholes, mud, narrow lanes and morons like you wish you could. Yawn... What was it you were saying about assumptions? >Again you prove how little you know and how many assumptions you make. Err... why do you think we asked about you and your riding history? You give us no context, then aside from giving zero credence to your rant, you leave just us with assumptions based on what you say. As is you just sound like an inexperienced kid ranting at us 'old donkeys' and the lack of substantiated evidence in your claims, which are totally contrary to the rest of the ownership here, just leave you with the picture you paint of yourself - Some sports bike fanboy (to use your terms) who hasn't a clue how to ride even a learner Cruiser... so much for all your advanced training! >I'm not a member of a 125 club, whatever the fuck that is, The clue is in the name. >Don't think I don't know what you're up to. OOOOHHHHH NOOOOO, I've been busted... confound you pesky kids!! You clearly have no idea what I'm 'up to', else you'd have seen sense from the first post. >What you're doing is you're trying to assassinate my character No, I'm pointing out all the bullshit you're spouting and how this whole rant of yours is biassed and unwarranted - The rest, with your further unrelated shouting, is just you digging your own hole yourself. >my point will cease to carry any weight if you bring my integrity into question. Err... yeah. That's how it works. You try this in a courtroom, you will get the same thing - Everyone turns around and asks who the fuck you are to spout such claims. You either step up and prove yourself qualified to assert thus, or your claim is of no substance. You STILL haven't stated anything to that effect, so yeah - your integrity is now in question thanks to your own lack of substantiation. >What you're actually doing is trying to dodge having to actually engage me intellectually because you obviously know you're not up to the task. I did that. You didn't like it and started further slamming the bike, its riding community and so forth. I don't really care to engage you at all, but you're just pissed off that your baseless slating of a popular bike on a Yamaha forum has been met with skepticism and overwhelmingly contrary evidence from everyone else's personal experience that far outweighs your own. From there, you spiralled into ad hominem yourself, so you're getting the same back in spades and as the forum's resident Troll-wrangler, I'm now just having fun at your expense. >So it's down to an ad hominem attack to do the work for you. I dealt with the lack of perspective in your argument. The rest is just response to your own attacks. So fuck you, boyo! >What's safe about riding a motorcycle designed for experienced riders with only a beginner's understanding? Everything, according to you... I mean, here we have your 5' girl who can hold a bike up with just one foot on one footpeg (the other on the ground obviously), even though she cannot physically reach the footpeg to get her foot on there... Give her all the understanding you want, she won't be able to do it... and even a beginner will be trained to recognise that a bike is physically too tall for them just from sitting on it in a showroom... yet you seem to think it's possible through all this training? >Lets see you hop on an XR650L and see what happens when you get to the traffic lights. Oh, you first. I mean, YOU'RE the 1337 one with all the experience and training and skillz, right? Why on Earth would I ride a bike that is physically unsuitable for someone even taller than me??!! You show me your miracle 5' girl riding it and handling it safely, I'll happily hop on one for ya! >You haven't even touched my argument with a barge pole because you know you don't stand a chance. I destroyed your argument from the beginning already. You'd have seen that if you weren't so intent on bullshitting us about how our bikes were deathtraps! >Bring it on. I've given you links, videos, proof of my argument. You've shown me little girls tottering on tippy toes trying to support a bike, that will topple over on them first time they stop on uneven road or get hit by a gust of wind, yeah... If that is somehow proof of your argument, you've already lost. I've yet to see ANY link that proves how dangerous a 125 Dragstar is, or how it fails to stand up against immense long-term abuse and neglect where any other bike would fare far better... >you're a raging, foaming fanboy who can't take a difference of opinion gracefully. Opinion now, is it? Bit of a backpedal... You stated this as FACT. Indisputable FACT, supposedly proven 100% by your opinionated rants and inexplicable expertise. I took your statement, challenged the 'facts' and am still waiting for you to answer that challenge. As for the term 'fanboy'... well, that's only what trolls say. Since you started off ranting about Harley wannabes in the first place, it stands to reason that you've only come here to troll. >They're not invincible! Whoever said they were? YOU slated them as god-awful fucking pieces of shit when heavily abused, to which we countered that this applies to EVERY bike. You seem to have forgotten even this very basic challenge. In fact, you have not answered a single challenge to your original argument, so until you do I refuse to even take you seriously.

Aww, picky picky... pot, kettle, fuck you. Your whole rant has been about your shitty, beat-up 125 Dragstar and how they kill people. Now you're trying to backpedal and claim that: ie the whole premise on which we called BULLSHIT on your rambling diatribe to begin with. Sorry, what does the article say there, again? "The victim, who was wearing a safety helmet, was driving too fast for conditions, police said". Police did not say 'He died coz the dumbfuck was riding a Dragstar cruiser, which is inherrently unsafe and should never be ridden'. Next stupid statement? I've personally known people die while riding Kawasakis, Nortons, Enfields, Hondas, Harleys and Suzukis. Does that make them dangerous too? You ride like a prick on ANY bike, it will spit you off and given how you seem to think Cruisers should be ridden, I expect we'll see your name in the paper soon! Oh, so what, you live in that part of the world where they have neither hands nor adverse cambers, then? You are taught from day one to ride with absolute perfection, to the point where you hold up 42 stone of bike (that's 588lbs, for those of you who cannot count) with one foot... utter fucking bollocks. PROVE IT. Get on a 42 stone tall bike and show yourself holding it up with just one foot... oh, that's right - You "have no need to justify yourself", isn't it... You're all-knowing and the rest of us are just dumbfuck country hicks, yet you don't have to prove any of it and we're supposed to just take your word for it... utter fucking bollocks. And what the fuck do I need a track day for? This isn't a racetrack. This is the real world. This is busses, trucks, cars, Chelsea tractors, narrow country lanes, potholes, rain and inattentive drivers. If you and your little 125 club buddies are riding on-road like it's a racetrack, I expect you all to die real fucking soon - See comment about riding like pricks! Also the reason for questioning your riding history to begin with - Now we know why you didn't want to go into detail, ha ha!! Advanced training? Again, why are you even on a bike that *needs* advanced training in order to ride safely? Are your bike schools really that inadequate? If you're needing all that just to ride, you're definitely a special case, mate... Countersteering is not some myth that you think only REAL bikers understand, by the way. Here, we're all taught it from day one, so you can drop your elitist bullshit with that too. You ain't special. So when did a fucking retard like you re-take *your* test, then? Ever? The fact that I'm nowhere near as old as you think either strongly suggests you're just a clueless kid ranting his childish little arse off and making a prick of himself. Seriously, your whole presence on this board has been nothing but slamming a bike you clearly cannot comprehend, despite it being a learner bike, with no basis other than having bought an utterly fucked example of one in the first place. In over a decade, you're the ONLY one around here who has had anything like these problems and your argument is meaningless.

Really....? Talking bollocks. I'm 5' 11", weighing 15 odd stone. I can straddle my bike and get both feet flat before I even sit down. Yet even I cannot get enough downward force when stood on one leg to counter balance 42 stone of bike! The only way is to use the hands. Fact is that having to emergency stop, then examine the road camber, pick a foot, slide over to one side of the bike, drop down and still manage to hold the bike up all in one fraction of a second simply does not happen. This is why people drop bikes. Real world physics, mate. If you need hours and hours of advanced training just to safely get on the bike, you've made the wrong choice!

So my missus is a 5' 4" midget who is not being properly taught by me??!! Where did I even say I was a riding instructor, much less was teaching other (more experienced riders) how to sit on my own bike? NSD is right - You do talk utter bollocks!! Also: Ninja 250r - Seat Height: 745mm FJ1200 - Seat Height: 790mm How is that anything near the exact same height? Plus the 1200 has a much wider seat, which shortens the inside leg reach. The 250r is nowhere near comparable. At 5' 4", she physically cannot get both feet down, not even on tiptoe and there's no way she can exert enough force on an opposite peg to counterbalance THAT amount of weight. That is not safe. That is just begging for a drop with four times the rider's own bodyweight slamming down on their leg. As for angles - It takes less lean angle than setting it on the sidestand to topple the FJ, which is why it's best suited to taller riders NO riding instructor of any worth should allow someone to ride like that and if you think different, you're a moronic twat who *deserves* to drop their bike!! Talk all the physics bollocks you want, the real world will chew it up and spit it out. First time you meet an adverse camber or uneven road surface and that physics will fall over... along with 42 stone of motorcycle on top of your rider's leg and/or hip. By the way, an NSR125 is a really unsafe motorcycle. People die on those, you know...!

Get some decent engine bars on it, straight away!!

What the hell does all that ramble have to do with the question? You said: "Learning how to use a tall bike is part of the learning process" I then challenged this by pointing out that if this were true, ALL learner bikes would be tall and short people would not be able to ride. As is, it's not true. Several shorter people cannot safely support the 42 stone weight of my FJ1200 and therefore cannot ride it (even with your oh-so-sagely approach), leaving them a choice of the lower bikes. Extra respect, you say... you are on a bike you cannot safely handle - How is that deserved of respect? As for the rest... What the hell are you even here for? This is a Yamaha owners club, yet you seem to utterly fucking despise everything about every single Yamaha you've so much as looked at!! If you love the Hondas and Kaks so much more, why aren't you riding one?

Welcome to the club, Dutch!! This bike is fecking AWESOME, in every flavour of the rainbow and all the in-betweens - You'll love it!!

Having to use ye olde >> marks instead of proper quoting as, apparently, I am now limited on how many blocks of text I can quote... okay, forum software... >>obviously you are all tremendously angry about the fact that I have an opinion that you disagree with. We may disagree. That is our right and nothing more. It's all part of the discussion. Testing our own opinions against others' and seeing how it turns out. The matter people *are* actually angry about is twofold: - Firstly that you bought a piece of shit and are tarring EVERY XVS125 with the experiences you had of that one example. - Secondly that you are criticising the performance of the machine using measures that are outside the scope of its particular purpose. These two aspects greatly affect the validity of your findings and reduce your report and advice down to basic opinion only. It's heavily biassed and nowhere near representative of the machine as a whole. Had you been an owner of several 125 Drags across the years and found the same true of every one you'd owned, it'd be a different matter. But as you have failed to offer further insight to your perspective of judgement, we must assume you have only ever tried this one individual motorcycle. Anyway, on with the actual discussion: The issues that I have with it are down to manufacturing and aesthetic decisions that impact the lifespan and performance of the vehicle. I agree that "looked after" there's no reason why it wouldn't last, unfortunately the condition of my machine has been largely out of my hands having 7 previous owners excluding myself. >>I imagine that there will be many people out there in the same boat looking at bikes with a large number of previous learner owners. Oh, most certainly! But they will not ALL be 125 Dragstars. I could right now show you a Suzuki VanVan that is as equally fucked as your Drag is/was. Same for a CG, Marauder, Intruder, Shadow, RS, YR, all fucked 125s... >>You could argue that a cruiser is not really a fantastic choice for a first bike. I'd argue straight back that it depends on the rider's preferred style of riding. If you're a Junior Power Ranger, then of course it's a bad choice. >>learning how to use a tall bike is part of the overall learning process Then why aren't all 125s insanely high Varadero types? Also, where does that leave the shorter riders who can't reach the floor on tall bikes? >>I'm just saying to all prospective buyers and current owners, if it's got a couple scuffs, your bike has probably been dropped, lowsided, and maybe even involved in a couple minor accidents. Possibly, not probably. Depends on the scuffs. Parking, road resurfacing, cleaning with a pot-scourer (yep, seen that happen)... But these words are true of ANY bike, not just a 125 Drag. >>Cruisers aren't exactly known for their ability when it comes to avoiding/getting away from a bad situation. Beg to differ, but on a personal level. My 125 Drag was quite a nippy little bitch. Brakes were adequate, manoeuvrability was wicked fun. Mostly it depends on the situation. >>Accidents happen on any bike, but the geometry of a cruiser can be a compounding factor. As above, it depends on the situation. If you find yourself needing power to escape from danger, chances are you've made a fundamental riding error just before you got into the trouble. It tends to be the power that gets you into these problems, ie cornering too fast, in which case the fault lies with your right hand and your brain not understanding the geometry to begin with. >>I think many of us have been cornering a bit too quick before and realised just how unresponsive a cruiser can be in this situation. So now you're learning not to corner too fast on a Cruiser... how is that different from learning not to corner too fast on a Sports, a Tourer, Off-Roader or even a Sidecar Outfit? The only basic differences between all of these is the speed at which it becomes unsafe and the different geometry of each bike. It's your choice whether or not you decide to rectify the handling, as there are things you can do to improve it. >>It's not bad for gentle riding, just go easy in the twisties unless the road is bone dry. You sound like you REALLY need a sports bike. Seriously, that kind of talk just makes me want to scream, "Do you know what a Cruiser even is??!!" at you. Cruisers are meant for relaxed riding. That is their whole purpose. Even most large-engined ones top out around 92mph. That is the point. If you're riding it like it's a flippin' Rossi-kissed Race Rep, then OF COURSE you're going to stuff it up. This is tantamount to bitching that your Ferarri Testarossa is a flawed design because the rusty old one you bought fell apart when you took it down the Range Rover™ off-road course in Mapledurham!! >>What I look for in a good learner bike is neglect-proof construction. Good fucking luck, boyo!! There's not a motorcycle out there that is neglect-proof, 125 or otherwise. >>It's more about how it holds up in the wrong hands. Again, every bike can be broken in the wrong hands... just like every car, every PC, every screwdriver, every mobile phone, every thing in existence. If you want a vehicle designed to withstand serious abuse, buy a Toyota Hilux or a fucking tank! >>Be prepared to be a fair weather rider. Or ride every day in all weathers and just put in the effort to look after it. Dry it off before you sling a cover over it, use ACF50 in Winter, clean the road crap off it at least once a month or even weekly, polish the chrome, lube the working parts, change the oil, lube the chain, follow the flipping instructions and don't abuse it... Standard fare for any Cruiser and indeed most bikes. Cars too, but drivers give less of a fuck about those - Some don't even know what the 710 cap is for!! >>These machines are not waterproof. Then how come they still start up and run in pissing heavy rain? >>I'm not really here to argue Then perhaps avoid presenting mere opinion as definitive facts that refute millions of pounds worth of mechanical design and as the one voice of discontent against hundreds of examples (riders and machines) that contradict supposed facts. People here have no problem with your individual findings, sharing of your own experiences, discussing and debating these things or anything else. Different riders, different bikes and different experiences all make for a colourfully active forum. Just don't tar everything with the same brush, particularly when that tar applies to all vehicles. It just makes you look like a ranty, malcontent fool and I'd much rather have someone as articulate as yourself on our side - The Yamaha Side!!

Not arguing, just questioning a serious conflict of information on quite a serious matter. Possibly depends on angle of lean. I sometimes use a touch of front when leaning a little way over, usually when coming out of a corner. The one time I hit the front when properly leant, I decked out and lowsided. This is the story I've heard from numerous riders, including some quite experienced ones. Ordinarily I'd just go out and mess around to try these theories, but my new bike is perfect and I don't want to risk fucking it up. I'd never get a replacement!