Yamaha R3 Forums banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi forumworld,

I did an intro post in the main thread in this forum but my initial page said I was halfway done setting up my account and doing a separate intro post is part of that so yeah...here's another post to add to my count:)

I've been riding since 2004, mostly sport bikes at first then got into supermotos and dual sports around 2009 which has been my primary focus since. I've owned a ton of different bikes and have determined 2 main things. First, I would rather ride a slow bike fast than a fast bike slow any day of the week and second, I know I can have a ton of fun without mountains of power.

The current stable is as follows:

2009 KTM 690 SMC
Love this bike and have a lot of sentimental attachment to it, so much fun and have explored so much of the US with it. Bought the SMC in UT, have ridden half of Highway 1, ToTD, Jennings GP, all over PA with it.

2010 Yamaha YZ450F
Have the OEM knobby wheels and a set of 17" supermoto wheels for this beast. Since moving to NJ from FL I've been riding more trails than anything, probably selling it since I don't do MX and SM racing as much as I'd like.

2013 Ducati Multistrada 1200S
Beautifully performing machine but costs a mint to keep operating right. The valve check/belt change interval is pretty well spaced at 15k miles/60 months, whichever comes first, but it costs almost $900 :eek: There are also other regular services at 7,5k 10k miles, 15k, 22,5k and yearly after that which are not at all cheap. I got in a little over my head on this bike but it's paid for at least. While it performs amazingly when riding, it's tall as ****, heavy and I'm always worried about any little scratch since it's so damned expensive.

Why am I here? I'm selling my YZ, the Multi and possibly (but probably not, can't let go of it) the SMC to pick up a KTM 500 EXC + supermoto wheels and something else that is more fun and less expensive than the MTS. I'm considering a used SV650/1k or maybe an R3. I know those two are very different bikes but I think they each have their pros. I like the R3 for it's cost to own/operate, performance at the price point and riding position. I'd like to replace the Multi with something I can ride at some track days for fun, hit the NJ/PA turnpike for an hour to get home to my Mom's place on the weekends, is lightweight and can do some 3-5 day motorcycle trips around New England/NC and TN without major discomfort. I'd prefer to be able to ride to those places from NJ/PA instead of trailer taking my time on the scenic and more fun routes vs. highway when possible.

If anyone has positive or negative feedback on the R3, please provide it. I have no brand loyalty, I like bikes that are fun regardless of who makes them. The only brand I'm not a huge fan of is Kawasaki (and yes, I've owned a few). Oh, and I'll never own a cruiser. I think they look nice but the riding position and weight are not for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
I just sold a 2002 R1 to get an R3 and I find the riding position pretty uncomfortable at 5'6". Seeing where you are coming from this seems to be a slightly different stance, at least worth a mention. I found a higher wider seat with rear sets adjusted high felt much better to me. The suspension is just mediocre in the rear coming from Ohlins adjustable rear, and its punishing on the lower back, spine, and hips for me personally. I feel every bump in the road like I never have before in any other riding position.

I have a background of Honda dual sports, Suzuki GS750, 2002 R1, 1968 Honda CL175, 86 Ninja 600.

Positives you mentioned, cost of ownership and operation are low. It is very good in high wind and crosswind conditions, they clearly wind tunnel tested the heck out of it. Its very stable under wind load.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I just sold a 2002 R1 to get an R3 and I find the riding position pretty uncomfortable at 5'6". Seeing where you are coming from this seems to be a slightly different stance, at least worth a mention. I found a higher wider seat with rear sets adjusted high felt much better to me. The suspension is just mediocre in the rear coming from Ohlins adjustable rear, and its punishing on the lower back, spine, and hips for me personally. I feel every bump in the road like I never have before in any other riding position.

I have a background of Honda dual sports, Suzuki GS750, 2002 R1, 1968 Honda CL175, 86 Ninja 600.

Positives you mentioned, cost of ownership and operation are low. It is very good in high wind and crosswind conditions, they clearly wind tunnel tested the heck out of it. Its very stable under wind load.

That's all very interesting. I'm about the same height, weigh approximately 160 lbs. I find I like the upright riding position with as minimal bending of the hips/knees as possible the most so it sounds like I'll have to have a seat on an R3 when I get back to the US and get my own take on it. Looking at the ergo numbers on cycle-ergo.com it looks very similar joint flex/lean angle wise sitting on the bike to the Multi. My number one comfort gripe with the MTS is how stiff my knees get but that's going to be any bike without highway bars or floorboards really, all comes from keeping the same bend in the knee for too long and nowhere else to put the feet. Yeah, I try to move from heel to ball or let my feet hang but it still gets real old real quick. Other gripes as mentioned that are high on my list as far as riding is concerned is the seat height/CoG and pork factor of 530 lbs with the Ducati. The cost of ownership is definitely a huge con to me as well. At least I have the title in hand now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
I'm a long time offroad rider and I still ride motocross 1 or 2 days a month at the track on my yz450. I bought the R3 because it was street legal, only 4900 otd new and I figured I'd see if I like it. I didn't want to spend a bunch of money on something that I might not like. If I didn't like it I could always sell it and not lose too much. Well, I definitely like it. I've ridden every weekend since I got it 2 months ago and just did my first track day. Its a very fun bike after you put $200 dollars of new tires on it. It corners like its glued to the road. The main reason I bought it was because I'd rather have a brand new lower priced bike than a used bike with unknown history. The bike gets lots of complements from other riders , mostly about what a good job Yamaha did on the bike, making it look like a much larger bike. It doesn't really look like I'm riding my wifes bike either. Most people would think its a bigger bike. While on rides several other riders have come up and asked how I like the R3.

So anyways, alot of people say going faster with a slower vehicle is fun and it makes you a better rider / driver. For me I'll just admit that I'm cheap and I can't afford a bigger bike, I'll have fun riding anything. There I said it. The fun per dollar spent on this bike is probably the best deal out there. For track day cars, the miata is the most popular car out there for exactly the same reason, it's cheap to own, it teaches you how to carry momentum and choose good lines around the track, so when you do get the fast car you will be even faster. I had a track miata and it was fun passing all the porsches, bmw's and camaro SS cars at the track days in my $5000 dollar miata. The same is true with the R3, I didn't pass alot of people in the C group, but I'm sure the 600's and 1000's that i did pass in the corners were wondering how they got passed by a little R3.

Now for the big question, Would I get another R3? For me, now that I know I like sport bikes, I'd probably jump straight to the R6 next time. Around town and in the canyons its great if you are with other R3's , I don't think it would hang on a super fast 100 + mph run with R6's and R1's so it limits who you can ride with. ( I'm not into that anyways) At the track, I feel like I have to work extra hard to make up the 60 to 160 hp I am giving up to the other bikes. I'm also 240 lbs , so if I was lighter it wouldn't be as big of an issue. That is the only negative for me, it limits who you can ride with and at the track, guys that are worse riders than you will blow by you on the straights. As I get better, I think I'll like the R3 better at the track. Right now I'm not good enough to appreciate it. At this point I think I'd be 10 seconds a lap faster on a 600, because I'm a new track rider and the difference would be on the straights.
I don't do drugs, but some say marijuana is a gateway drug to bigger and badder drugs, For me the the R3 is like a gateway bike to an R6 or R1. Yamaha knows what they are doing with this bike, they got me hooked and now I want something bigger and badder. Because of my size I probably should have started off with the R6. Hindsight is 20/20.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
I've owned and ridden a bunch of I4s, I'll never own another one personally. I don't like the way they make their power or their character. I like the torque delivery of big singles and V twins if I'm riding something that's fast. Still, I love riding a slow bike fast and will take that over riding a fast bike slow every time. As far as speed/power on the straights, I'm not and have never been a drag racer, going fast in a straight line doesn't do much for me. I'd rather be able to go faster at full lean than squeeze a trigger and hold on. If I were looking for speed in a straight line, I'd just get a Vmax. That's the beauty of motorcycles though, we all like what we like for our own reasons and it doesn't matter what you ride or why you ride it, just matters that you do.

In the end, I'm still pretty on the fence between a nice used SV650/1k or a new R3. The fact that the R3 is going to cost almost two times as much as a used bike that weighs the same with more power and torque (but not crazy SS power levels) is what has me leaning towards the SV at the moment. Still, I'm very open minded.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top