"Scooter Talk"

Actually I'm talk'in 'serious' scooters here.......How about that new Yammie "V-Max" ! I've always loved that bike but man what a re-do ! While I know the Suzuki Hayabusa has more legs up top, I can't imagine anything besting it in "Stop Light-to-Stop Light".

At 18k it's rather salty by Metric standards but with only 2500 slated to come to the States I suspect they will sell.

Link below to it's Gallery:

http://www.starmotorcycles.com/star/msite/micro_v1.aspx

I'd love to hear the other two wheeled gear heads on the forum comment.

I think the new design is aimed at the croud that is ready to move from crotch rocket to comfort cruiser.

I've ridden the elder Vmax design and boy was that bike a pure beast. Nothing comfortable but it sure got the jucies flowing with a throttle twist. Sometimes it was very scary because of the poor (antiquated) handling.

I kinda like my Victory Vegas 8 Ball a bit better. With it's stage 1 mods, mines at 93 hp, only 15 shy of the MAX, and at my advancing age (61) lol, I can do without the drama.

I do not like the looks.
$18,000 ouch!!!
I'm more of a Cruiser Bike Guy.
For that kind of money couldn't you pick up a Big Dog!


Girl not included.

DrJRapp said:

I kinda like my Victory Vegas 8 Ball a bit better. With it's stage 1 mods, mines at 93 hp, only 15 shy of the MAX, and at my advancing age (61) lol, I can do without the drama.

Click to expand...

Actually Jerry, you're 104 HP shy of the new "Max" !!!

theWB said:

I do not like the looks.
$18,000 ouch!!!
I'm more of a Cruiser Bike Guy.
For that kind of money couldn't you pick up a Big Dog!


Girl not included.

Click to expand...

Wayne...........oh now I see the motorcycle !!

As you know I'm a v-twin cruiser guy as well, but myself I can't stand those ultra fat tire bikes, to me they are a fad, that I hope dies quick. I think the Big Dawgs start somewhere in the twenties if I'm not mistaken.

twich54 said:

As you know I'm a v-twin cruiser guy as well, but myself I can't stand those ultra fat tire bikes, to me they are a fad, that I hope dies quick. I think the Big Dawgs start somewhere in the twenties if I'm not mistaken.

Click to expand...

Thats new, I've seen them under 20 used but looking new.

I actually like the look of the big tires, but it's a little more difficult turning with the really big back tires.

I'll bet the wife doesn't see much of you anymore since aquiring your new toy.

The new VMax is a mother, no doubt about it. I am definitely not a cruiser type of person (I rode a Shadow 650 once and it scared the hell out of me*), but I've always kinda like the VMax since it's just so much engine. Brakes and suspension, however, cost a lot more. I guess that's how the new one winds up at $18k. I don't think I could pay that much for a one-dimensional bike, though, even if I could afford it.

If I had to have something like that, I'd go with the original.

The first power cruiser, and it's a Honda so it'll go forever.

*I didn't like having the tiller up front that didn't effect steering, it hated to turn in, and scraped early.

Now you're talking my language! V65, Baby!!

Toad, I knew there was a reason I liked you!! Is that your V65?? Here's a photo of my bike... an 83.
I think the new Vmax is waaaay over the top.... It's about time they updated it... I like it, but it's just too big and WAY too expensive... and I heard it handles like the old one - it's a pig meant to go fast in a straight line... not to say the big Magna handles much better...

No, I've never had a cruiser, power or otherwise. I just respect the V65 as the first of the kind. I bought my first Honda last year, a VTR-1000F Super Hawk.
[/thread jack]

ahh. cool bike.. how was the Dragon? Never ridden it.

twich54 said:

Actually Jerry, you're 104 HP shy of the new "Max" !!!

Click to expand...

Kinda wondering where you got that figgure. My friend Steve who is a Star dealer said the new max books in at 108Hp. It's 200R18 rear tire would be consistent with that. At 197 hp as you claim a tire that small wouldn't/couldn't do the job off getting that much power out the door. Hell, I have traction issues with my 93 HP and a 210/18 in the rear

jerry, Your 'Star' Dealer has been living under a rock ! LOL ! Even the original V-Max from 23 plus years ago made well north of 100hp !

Here's the stats on the new "Max".........

1679cc
197 HP (crank)
175 Hp (rear wheel est)
123 lb ft trq

Stock rear tire is 200mm, swingarm room should allow up to a 240.

the above are published in...."Cycle World" and "RoadBike'

Don't confuse tyre width with grip

My 190 section copes comfortably with 170bhp and get's my 'plastic fantastic' up to silly speeds without too much trouble.

The new 'Max' ain't my 'cup of tea' but you have to admire Yamaha for having the balls to produce such a bike in the current climate

Even if you don't like V-twins, my Old '58 "Pan" (long gone now, sold it in '95) was my baby !

twich54 said:

jerry, Your 'Star' Dealer has been living under a rock ! LOL ! Even the original V-Max from 23 plus years ago made well north of 100hp !

Here's the stats on the new "Max".........

1679cc
197 HP (crank)
175 Hp (rear wheel est)
123 lb ft trq

Stock rear tire is 200mm, swingarm room should allow up to a 240.

the above are published in...."Cycle World" and "RoadBike'

Click to expand...

Yeah.. a 1679cc bike that only cranked out 108 HP would be REALLY lame. The specs Dave's posted are what I read too.. The old vmax put out 120HP.

TomDac said:

ahh. cool bike.. how was the Dragon? Never ridden it.

Click to expand...

The road itself is a bit overrated now. Not that the road is bad, it's just a teensy bit overpopulated. Mostly overpopulated with THP, more than once I've seen six or more of them over 8 miles of road. The surrounding area has plenty of roads to ride, though. We like to eat at the CROT because it's decent food, very bike-friendly, and there's always cool bikes to see in the parking lot. Plus you have to get a pic of your bike in front of the sign. (It's funny, there are 4-5 oil stains from people dropping their bikes in front of the sign!)

An internet group goes every spring, and many of us go in October, too. Thinking about it, it might be one of the oldest continuous international (counting Canada) internet-only gatherings. Last year was the tenth one.

[/threadjack 2]

twich54 said:

1679cc
197 HP (crank)
175 Hp (rear wheel est)
123 lb ft trq

the above are published in...."Cycle World" and "RoadBike'

Click to expand...

And those articles qualify their figures as "claimed" without saying who is doing the claiming, probably Yammi. I don't blame Steve for being conservative, he's not going out on a limb with potential customers, only later to be proven wrong. We won't know what is fact and what is fiction until a real review comes out with some bonafiable test figures. I'm sure the bike is a beast but that much HP out of ONLY 1700 ccs has to translate into peaky power. The high compression ratio hints of that also. So, the one thing we know for sure is that the bike won't be horsepower limited. What will be it's limiting factor.....the rear tire? the suspension?.... the rider's bxxxs ????...lol

Jerry the limiting factor will be the onboard computer, supposedly set to around 140mph.

FWIW, I've made (on the dyno) 215 Hp out of one liter of displacement, three cyl. snowmobile engine that ran on pump gas. This was 1990's technology. Todays technology is producing 270-300hp (race gas) out 1.5 liter motors.

Yammie has for years led in 4 stroke motor HP for both sleds and bikes, even if the 197 (claimed) is off, you can bet the farm it's by no more than 5-10%.

DrJRapp said:

..........but that much HP out of ONLY 1700 ccs has to translate into peaky power. The high compression ratio hints of that also.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. My CBR 1100xx Blackbird is about 165 hp and it's got a better power-to-displacement ratio than the new V-Max, and it's not peaky at all. It pulls hard from 4,000 rpm to redline; 11,000, and it's got lots of torque available from idle.
An engine's compression ratio isn't directly involved with "peaky" power per se; cam timing, injection, and ignition really have the say there, at least these days. The V-Max is very probably very flat in it's power delivery, and probably also has a good mid-range rush tuned into it as well, at full throttle. Probably a very entertaining bike, but not my cup of tea!

Compression ratio is the only thing that's beneficial to power over the entire rev range. The only thing that would correlate higher compression to needing higher revs is that to have high compression at low revs you need either more flywheel mass or more cylinders. Ignition timing in anything built since the '80s is tunable to the nth of rpm, so that's not a consideration.

The things that affect the torque curve, or whether an engine is "high rev" or "torquey," are combustion chamber shape, intake resonance, exhaust resonance, and cam timing.

IMO the new VMax's output is a little low for its displacement, at least in the bike world, but I think it'd make a neat engine for something like an SCCA D Sports Racer.*

BTW, if you're curious about engine tuning, Kevin Cameron has a great book on it, detailed but still accessible to the n00bs. Holy Sh--- I just found it complete in the intertubes. All Praise Google




*Except for it being almost twice the displacement limit. I just think it'd work well in a little racing cage.