| Author | Message | ||
     Silverbullet2005 |
ok new question- I still have not heard back from the guy selling the XB9R so I started calling around to my local dealers and found two 2003 model buells. one is a 2003 xb9s brand new for $6500 OTD. and the other is a 2003 xb9ls demo with 316 miles for $5795 plus tax,title etc. what do you think. what is the difference between the s and ls other than a lower seat? should I wait for the xb9r which I would prefer due to the overall styling. | ||
| Cruisin |
The low has shorter forks and rear spring - so technically it handles different. If you don't need the low, don't get one. Personally I love the R better anyway, and if you prefer the look, hold out for it or talk to Daves... (Message edited by CruiSin on May 03, 2005) | ||
| Bigeasy |
Wait and get what you really want. I think the ls has a lowered suspension also. If you like the R I would get that then. You wouldnt want to spend that much on something you really arent happy with huh? art | ||
| M1combat |
Definately wait to get what you want... As far as the low handling differently... It will ONLY sacrifice some lean angle and a little bit of antidive at the back (although it's already lower) and that's it. | ||
| Mesafirebolt |
the low model also has smaller 41 vs 43 mm forks, Buell didnt think they needed to be as strong since they are shorter, I was like you but I held out till I got my Brand new out of the box XB12R, Only Black would do. Flew 500 miles to pick it up and road back with my wife on the back in freezing cold! | ||
| Silverbullet2005 |
Mesafirebolt - that's what I call a real trooper, your wife I mean. my wife would have taken the flight back home. I want the xb9r so bad I can almost taste the exhaust in my system. I wish the guy would hurry up and get back with me about it. I think I will wait for the xb9r just for the style reasons, I also like the handlebars, seat position and comfort etc over the xb9s. | ||
| Mesafirebolt |
yeah she was GREAT, I offered several times to rent her a car along the way but she would have nothing to hear of it.  | ||
| Fran_dog |
In 2003, the fork tubes were the same(41mm)for a standard XB9S and a XB9SL "Low". I don't know if this changed for the 2005 XB12CG, but I would think that the fork diameter change was across the board in 2005 to 43mm. That would make sense IMHO. | ||
| Mesafirebolt |
the XB12SCG stayed 41 for '05. The reasoning was the shorter length was ok for the smaller fork tubes. My GT 650hawk has 41's no problems there either but I like the look of the 43's | ||
| Silverbullet2005 |
I rode the xb12s but was not impressed with the handlebars, seat or comfortability of the bike. I also don't like the 05' 12's with the gold wheels and emblems. I called another local dealer and they have a brand new XB9R in battle blue for $6595 and they also said they could match the $6500 OTD that the other dealer has but need it in writing, the other problem with that is that the other bike for $6500 is a xb9s not the r. | ||
| Bbstacker |
Hold out for the 9R, Silver. You won't regret it. I don't know how tall you are, but I am only 6ft even. I felt completely jammed up on the S models. While they give you a more up-right position (less fatigue) I didn't feel I would be able to control it the way I'm used to. Felt like the bars were in my lap. | ||
| Metalstorm |
For my thoughts on the S Low look at the post Metalstorm IS getting Buell. |
