| Author | Message | ||
     Ezblast |
Though the Blast is the bike I started on and my preferred, I have tried other bikes. A Dyna, a 620 Duc,SV650, an M2 , and an XB9S, and a Rebel - lol. The XB, Duc and Blast all felt more nimble in the corners than the rest - yet - and I know what I'm about to say may be controversial - and yet in the tight stuff around SF - Twin Peaks to O'shaughenessey to the 280 and then back to the top of Market back to downtown. the Blast felt more nimble than even the XB - by that I mean the ease in which you can correct corner maneuvers and maneuver around constant obstacles that populate the city in droves. Now the tubers are great bikes and if life ever allows - I really do plan to own an S1W - but why does the Blast, with the XB a close second feel so much more nimble - is it me or is there good reason for this? Really not trying to start a flame war - hey I'm just a everyday/rider who has no plans to see over a 100 mphs in the near future - I just like to ride at a good clip - usually 15 to 20 over the posted - lol - sometimes a bit more - not often though - my wife practically owns my car now - I never drive - even in todays rain I rode to and from work and delivered the office mail to a post office - I like to ride is all. Maybe I'm way off base - still why would that be noticeable - first to admit though the M2's torque was most noticeable of all of them. GT - JBOTDS! EZ  | ||
| M1combat |
Isn't the Blast lighter? I would guess that it also has less gyroscopic effect generated by the front wheel assembly. I'm pretty certain that the front wheel is heavier, but the disc mounted to the outside of the wheel on the XB generates a good deal of centripetal force. That's probably why it feels more nimble. I think that the edge of the envelope is most likely a bit further out on the XB, but only because it's capable (I think) of more lean angle, I don't think it's "much" heavier, and the tires are a much better size and shape (IMO) to maximize speed at high lean angles. | ||
| Aydenxb9 |
The reason is the blast is lighter, 360lb dry -vs- the XB at 385/395 (XB9/XB12) dry, and the Blast has narrower tires on smaller wheels. The narrower tires always makes a bike feel more flickable. The downside is that those narrower tires also have a smaller contact patch so as you push each bike closer to the limit, the Blast will lose traction first causing it to feel more un-stable. | ||
| Bcordb3 |
I am thinking you probably more comfortable riding the blast and certainly more familiar with the way it handles. The weight of the blast is part of the equation. Putting some more time on the XB would certainly change your mind. | ||
| M2nc |
The M2 is a torque monster by design. That is why you feel it down low. You will have to step up to an XB12 to match the down low grunt of an M2. The weight, seating position and size of the tires give an advantage to the Blast in in-town riding. Through the larger tires are better for knee dragging, they slow the "reactiveness" of the bike. That is why I dropped back to the 170 rear tire on my M2, my Nighthawk was more flickable. Flickable means the ability to react to instant change of direction. Narrower tires are better in this aspect so they do better in-town when dodging ability is more important than all out adhesion. | ||
| 99buellx1 |
I dont think time will change the handling of a bike. I had an X1, and now have an XB9SX, I have rode quite a few Blasts. If you are looking at low speed stuff the Blast is, hands down, easier to handle. Now that dosnt mean the same as handling better. Quick sweepers and sustained high speed manuvers, the XB for sure. | ||
| Ralphthe3rd |
Thank you all, for taking the time to TRY and Explain it to EZ ! *sighs* | ||
| Bcordb3 |
I dont think time will change the handling of a bike. Agreed, time won't change the handling of the bike. The bike will remain the same (excluding wear and tear). The rider will adapt to the new machine and make it work for him/her. | ||
| 99buellx1 |
True | ||
| Ezblast |
So the Blast would need a larger contact patch to be more stable at high speeds leaning over - but doing so would take away from its nimbleness in the city and slower stuff? GT - JBOTDS! EZ (Message edited by ezblast on March 19, 2005) | ||
| Littlebuggles |
I started out on a Suzuki GS500 (55 inch wheel base, 45ish horses). When I bought my M2 I was shocked when I first rode it in slower situations. I thought the wheel base meant the bike would handle the same. Smaller bikes (weight and general size) are simply easier to handle that larger bikes. I have verified this by the many 125 and 250cc bikes we run on the range for the msf courses I've taught. | ||
| Ravensmith22 |
Another factor in the Blast's flick-ability is that its center of gravity is lower than the XB's. The "tall" seat on a Blast is 28.5". An XB is 30.1 for the S, and 30.5 for the R. The Blast is definitely a nimble little bike, but I traded mine in because I'd snapped off my brake pedal twice, and my right side rearsets once while cornering. Hey, EZ, I found out that Kuryaken/Crossroads bought my Blast to turn it into a drag bike. Thought you'd appreciate that.  | ||
| Ezblast |
I didn't know those two had merged - makes sense though - lol - I thought they had already done one - we'll this ought to be interesting. GT - JBOTDS! EZ | ||
| Wyckedflesh |
Lets ask a better question for this handling comparo: How modified is one of EZ's Blasts in the handling department? Many things can affect how it would handle, like an aftermarket shock, semi-race/trackday profile tires, handlebars, footpeg and rearsets...all of these can affect the stability and the line holding of the bike. If EZ is used to a modified Blast and how it handles with those improvements then it is quite possible that his Blast would/could handle better then a stock M2. |
