Hey guys.
Been riding the GS for about 2 and a half years now, currently a student in Uni so getting a bigger bike won't be easy but I have been thinking about it for a while, though I'm not really in a hurry since the GS does pretty much everything I need it to do.

Now, I have some things I really like about the GS and wouldn't give it up, and some things I'd prefer, so I thought a list would be good

Requirements:
-A large fuel tank with a good range and decent MPG
-Cheap to run and maintain, as little fairings as possible
-A comfortable cruising speed of 140-150 KPH
-Good Low/Mid range torque, but a high rev ceiling for corner riding
-Comfortable rider and pillion seat (The GS is a goddamn couch and I love it)
-2 Cylinders over 4
-Easy to work on at home or at any random place if the bike does break down
-RELIABLE (In other words - Japanese)
-As minimalistic and simple as possible, I don't want rider modes or traction control. EFI would be nice, ABS is optional.
-Nimble at low speed traffic, can filter through cars at ease, "flickable".

Preferences:
-NOT an Adventure bike, preferably a naked/standard street bike
-Single headlight over twin lights
-Retro styling (love me some scramblers!) if possible

Now, I thought of a few bikes that could fit the bill

Yamaha MT-07:
It's fairly cheap to maintain, is more efficient on fuel than the GS, a real hooligan bike that has down-low torque and the cruising speed I want. I don't know how comfortable it is, especially for the pillion, and putting a top-box on an MT-07 would just look...goofy. Also, it looks a bit too modern for me and the XSR700 is noticeably pricier here (and they are rarely found on the used market)

Suzuki SV650:
I LOVE the way it looks, like a newer GS with steroids. I rode the Hyosung GT650, which is pretty much an old SV650 engine in a Korean-made bike and I really, really fell in love with it. It's a torque monster once you rev it to the mid-range and I really dig it. The big issues I have is that I've heard that the SVs don't make it to very high miles, and that the seating position on the newer model is kind of awkward (with your groin dry-humping the gas tank)

Suzuki DL650 V-Strom:
I'll start off by saying that I think this would be a very sensible bike for me and my requirements, if it wasn't so GOD.DAMN.UGLY. Seriously, there's only a handful of ADV bikes that I think look OK...ish, and the DL650 isn't one of them. Hell, I want to like the damn bike and admire it every time I take the cover off, not go like "...Meh, let's do this".

Honestly, if they imported Triumph bikes here I would take the T120 Bonneville or the Street Scrambler, no questions asked, but since they don't I think these are my best options.
What do you guys think?

If you want a nice power bump to about 65HP with no increase in weight, I've heard nothing but good things and read nothing but good reviews on the SV-650.  It takes regular gas just fine.  In 2003 the frame was lighted with aluminum, allowing a dry weight of only 370 lbs.  In 2007 it was upgraded to fuel injection.  2007-2008 are probably the best years.  Seat height 31.5 inches as of 2008 (good for shorter riders).  Here is a review on the 2008 model. 
http://www.topspeed.com/motorcycles/motorcycle-reviews/suzuki/2008-suzuki-sv650-ar45820.html

If you are happy with 46 HP, then the newish Honda CB500 also has nothing but great reviews.  It's after the same market as the GS500, but gets about 20% more horsepower with water cooling and fuel injection. Made from 2012 onward, for the price usually rated 10/10.  The CB500X mild adventure form came out in 2013.  But, look out for excessive oil burn on models 2014 and older.  Redesign with improvements came out in 2016.  Wet weight on the naked F is 419 lbs, almost identical to GS500.  All the versions are well regarded, but reviewers consistently like the X version best.  Best middleweight gas mileage, avg 66 mpg matches or beats the 250 to 300cc machines.  The taller suspension and wider bars improve the already excellent handling.  If the X windscreen is damaged and needs replacement, a new CB500X Honda original equipment two position windscreen is $410.  It's 2-3X the cost of aftermarket windscreens that could be used on the standard F, but not as bad as it could be for original bodywork.  The tires are just large enough to be available as radials.  Heated hand grips and guards are an option on the X, as is ABS.  The seat height on the X is 31.9 inches (note 33.1 on the Versys 650), on the F it is 30.9 inches.  It is noted that on the F that a guy 5 foot 8 can have his feet flat on the ground, though I saw a reviewer with 29 inch inseam reporting no problem on the X.  The valve adjustment interval is a long 16,000 miles, compared to only 4,000 for the GS500.  A review of the major update 2016 CB500X is given below. 
http://www.bikesandtravels.com/biker.aspx?ride=871 

The Kawasaki Ninja 500 and Ninja 650's also get excellent reviews.  These are technically sport bikes, but pretty relaxed ones that are more like a standard.  The 500, being water cooled, has a little more power than the GS500.

Thanks for the reply.
As far as 500s go, I'm past that. I really want more torque and a little more bite. You're right, around 70 BHP is more than enough for me.
As far as the Kawi 650 - not a fan. They look cheap and the Z650 is just...meh. plus, there have been many people in my country saying that the 650 engines used to randomly drop a valve into the piston and destroy the engine, so there's that as an issue.

I think I'll go with my heart and take the SV, they're fairly affordable here and I really dig the looks, plus I can always reupholster the seat for more comfort and 2 up riding. I've seen them with a top box and they look alright.

The SV650 is certainly an easy bike to love, as much power as you could ever really need but still as light and flickable as a 500 (the aluminum chassis versions actually lighter than the GS500), nice enough to be worth customizing (I've seen some beautiful ones), and with a user group at https://www.svrider.com.  The only complaint that could ever really be made is that the fuel economy at about 45 to 55 mpg is not quite as good as the similar weight 500's that get about 55 to 65mpg.  Technically speaking, weight and drag set required average horsepower actually used, and fuel flow per hour is a function of that used horsepower and not max horsepower, so the SV650 should match the similar weight 500's for MPG.  But, maybe people are enjoying that extra horsepower so much that they drive their MPG's down by getting on that throttle.  Here are some additional notes and reviews on it I had gathered when thinking about getting one.

http://www.visordown.com/road-tests-used/buyer-guide-suzuki-sv650/14713.html
http://www.visordown.com/road-tests-first-rides/first-ride-2003-suzuki-sv650-review/13994.html
http://www.topspeed.com/motorcycles/motorcycle-reviews/suzuki/2006-suzuki-sv650-ar1865.html
http://www.womenridersnow.com/pages/2007_Suzuki_SV650_Sporty,_Fun_and_Easy_To_Ride.aspx
http://www.motorcyclenews.com/product-reviews/parts-accessories/2008/sep2208-top-ten-sv650-parts/  (Recommended modifications for SV650.  Check suspension and brake parts, may be good for GS500 also.)
A.  Note the SV650S has a nice half fairing that looks like good wind protection with the full sport bike look.  But, the position is bent over and many riders report it is uncomfortable for long rides, and hard to see over cars in traffic. 
B.  The gas tank is hinged (!) to swing up for each access to the air box and fuel injection. 
C.  Dual front brakes are very good. 
D.  Some report a little buzzy at highway speeds, but most riders report it is just fine for regular highway commuting.   
E.  The aluminum frame and fuel injection were introduced in 2003.  Empty weight only 370 lbs. 
F.  Slightly lowered subframe and lower seat in 2004.  Colors blue, black, yellow. 
G.  In 2006 was named as Cycle World magazine's Best Standard Motorcycle and Motorcyclist magazine's Best Bang for the Buck.
H.  Further improved in 2007 with twin spark plugs per cylinder and ABS.  2007 and 2008 are probably the best years.  2008 colors are blue and grey, and dry weight was only 370 lbs.  2008 MSRP was only $5999 for the naked version, ABS was $600 extra.  The naked bike has a small flyscreen. 
I.  http://2wheels2nuts.blogspot.com/2012/04/sv650-convertibars-long-term-review.html
"Convertibars" higher handlebars for the SV650S.  Works nicely for a more comfortable upright riding style, but a job to install and get set right. 

Quote from: TundraOG on September 21, 2018, 12:07:43 PM
As far as the Kawi 650 - not a fan. They look cheap and the Z650 is just...meh. plus, there have been many people in my country saying that the 650 engines used to randomly drop a valve into the piston and destroy the engine, so there's that as an issue.

Never heard that one, but the Kawasaki 650 twin has been around the block more than a few times and it's definitely a solid power-plant.
I never personally considered Kawasaki in the past, but several of my co-workers are Kawi fans and it's getting harder and harder to NOT look at them.  Starting to drink the koolaid, liking a lot of what I see.


Anyway...
Any sort of 650/700 would be a good option, and I've ridden most so I can offer some insight.

The FZ/MT-07 basically has a cult following, and for good reason.  It's a great bike, and of the class it's the lightest and has the best torque figures, so it may be the most "fun" to ride.  However, it has a lot of "features" that make it less than ideal for a serious (regular) rider.  Namely, the seats are terrible, both the pilot and the pillion seat are awful.  Short commute or a quick fun-run are fine, but riding for an hour is a sure way to get a sore bum.
It also has a slightly smaller fuel tank than the others, and being plastic a magnetic tank bag won't work.  From my experience owning a Buell, strap-mount tank bags are rather few and far between, and something like an SW-Motech or Givi Tanklock bag which mounts to the fuel cap ring aren't exactly cheap.
It also uses a 180/55-17 rear tire, which is more expensive than the 160/60-17 of it's competitors.
Personal opinion, the turn signals are fugly, the key is in a stupid spot, and it suffers from a lot of superficiality.  For example, the "side pods" with the screens which look like ram air intakes are in fact just dead-bug receptacles.


The SV650 is a solid performer but it isn't without it's flaws.  Good balance of ergos, decent suspension, peppy engine, and it can use basically any piece of modern luggage.  Slightly more sporty riding position compared to the FZ07 or Z650, which may or may not be a good thing, and with an exhaust they sound amazing.  Still, as with most Suzukis, it seems the electrics aren't exactly stellar, and they somewhat notoriously dislike water.  The oiling of the engine isn't great, either, but shouldn't give you any issues unless you're constantly riding around with the front wheel off the ground.
Maybe good maybe bad, it's relatively unchanged from the 2nd gen when the SV first went fuel injected.  Other than a face-lift, frame tweaks, and some other minor updates it's still the same old bike, and it seems to be a fair balance between the Z and MT in pretty much every aspect.
It does have the longest wheelbase of the bunch which is confidence inspiring in turns but it doesn't twist from side to side as effortlessly as it's competitors.
Personal opinion, and I'm quite biased from owning a Ducati, it tries really hard to get the look and feel of a Monster but lacks all of the charm and most of the performance.  V-twin?  Awesome!  Trellis frame?  Cool!  But be unique with it.  I think the 2003-2012 era with the diamond shaped frame and separate pillion seat was sufficiently stylistically different from a Monster that it seemed to be it's own thing.  The modern one is just a wannabe Monster.


I'm interested in the Z650 myself, so I've been doing some digging into the model and brand.  The Z650 itself has only been around since 2017, but it's lineage is based on the Ninja 650 and ER6N, which have great reputations of being reliable, easy to work on, and fairly peppy.  Luggage isn't an issue, and as the Ninja650 is more or less a "sport touring" type of bike it has always been comfortable.  The 2017 update was mostly done to the frame and chassis, with an adjustment to the rake/trail for more flickable handling, and it shed somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 pounds making it the lightest of the three.  The engine has been slightly reworked; it's been re-cammed for more low end power and different throttle bodies are in there for better response.  That being said, it's still the weakest of the three.  It does have the best brakes, though.
The Z specifically has very upright ergonomics making it an excellent city bike, much like the FZ/MT, but it seems as though the seat is much more comfortable making it a potentially better commuter bike.  It also feels much smaller than the FZ/MT, you almost ride "in" the bike instead of on it.  The tank is close up to your gut, the pillion is close up to your bum, and the contour of the sides of the tank fit your legs quite nicely.  Might prove to be a little cramped on long rides, but very comfortable from my initial impression.
Personal opinion, I love the ergonomics and the style, and the dashboard is easily the coolest in the class.

It also has the largest fuel tank of the bunch, at 4 gallons, and interestingly enough, the engine gets by with only 2L of oil.  Like, exactly.  According to Bel-Ray's fluid advisor the service fill is 1.8L and the filter holds 0.2L.  You can get many oils in 1L size bottles instead of the slightly sub-liter "quarts", making service cheaper and less wasteful. 
Eh, the FZ at 2.9L isn't particularly wasteful if you're getting Liter bottles, but if you buy Quarts you'll be short if you buy three, and have lots of excess if you buy four.  The SV will screw you either way, 3.15L, you'll have to buy four and dump most of the fourth whether it's Liters or Quarts.


Plenty of "shootouts" exist for these three, with some others mixed in, from many major publishers, it's easy enough to do your own research instead of relying on anecdotal evidence.

Wild-Card suggestion, Honda CB500F or CBR500R.  Basically the "modern GS".  Not as powerful as the previously discussed bikes, but it's light, its cheap, it's incredibly fuel efficient, the one I owned was capable of giving my friends on 600+ccs a run for their money in the curves, the current generation has great style, and as with most things Honda it's reliable to a fault.  Also really easy to work on, cheaper than dirt insurance premiums, and surprisingly comfortable.  I've been on several-hour long rides without much to complain about.  I did have a Corbin seat for it that I inherited from the previous owner, and while the Corbin definitely beat the factory seat I often switched between the two for certain riding styles.  The Corbin was my long and straight seat, the stock seat was a little "stickier" and if I was going on fun-rides I'd usually put that one back on.  That being said, my fun-rides would often last hours so...

Quote from: Watcher on September 21, 2018, 11:48:16 PM
Personal opinion, and I'm quite biased from owning a Ducati, it tries really hard to get the look and feel of a Monster but lacks all of the charm and most of the performance.  V-twin?  Awesome!  Trellis frame?  Cool!  But be unique with it.  I think the 2003-2012 era with the diamond shaped frame and separate pillion seat was sufficiently stylistically different from a Monster that it seemed to be it's own thing.  The modern one is just a wannabe Monster.

There is a saying going around that I've heard that they are a "poor mans Ducati" for the reasons you've listed.

I also tell my mate that too but he has a Aprilia Shiver 750 with a V twin and a trellis frame. I am biased towards twins and I love my Ducati.

Sounds like you want an sv1000 to me.

Quote from: 1018cc on September 22, 2018, 02:07:40 PM
There is a saying going around that I've heard that they are a "poor mans Ducati" for the reasons you've listed.

I also tell my mate that too but he has a Aprilia Shiver 750 with a V twin and a trellis frame. I am biased towards twins and I love my Ducati.

There's a Shiver for sale near me for like $4300, I'm really tempted!

All I have to say is get a 5th gen Honda VFR. Get a 98 or even better a 99 year. Ask anyone who has ever had one and got rid of it.  They regretted it. They'll tell you they wish they kept it. I love my GS but my 99 VFR is a keeper. It is the best do-it-all bike ever made.

Quote from: Watcher on September 22, 2018, 06:46:02 PM
There's a Shiver for sale near me for like $4300, I'm really tempted!

It has a lot of power and it feels like it wants to spit you off in "sport" mode - very touchy throttle (maybe you'd get used to it over time). Nice in other modes. Forks are very firm stock so I hope you have good roads around you as they aren't adjustable. Nice looking bike though and it does sound good (he has akras).

Sorry about the thread derailment.

Sent from my F8132 using Tapatalk

Quote from: pliskin on September 22, 2018, 09:46:55 PM
All I have to say is get a 5th gen Honda VFR. Get a 98 or even better a 99 year. Ask anyone who has ever had one and got rid of it.  They regretted it. They'll tell you they wish they kept it. I love my GS but my 99 VFR is a keeper. It is the best do-it-all bike ever made.

Not a fan of the VFR at all stylistically, plus it's a V4 not a twin and fully faired bikes aren't my thing.

Thanks for the detailed replies, guys! I really appreciate it! One thing is bugging me...I have this fear of getting a bigger bike. I know how I ride and what risks I take, and although I ride safe 90% of the time I know a bigger bike will tempt me to push myself even harder. The question is...how really "scary" is, say an SV650 compared to the GS? The Hyosung GT650 I rode felt "bored" in the city, like it had so much more power to give and riding it calmly at low speeds wasn't it's thing. Honestly the only people I ride are a friend with a Z300 and my dad with a VN900, and I remember trying a friend's CBR650F, going 130 KPH at 4th gear not even close to the redline, thinking "god, how fast do I need to go on this thing in order to have some fun?". I know the SV has about the same top speed as the GS, I know I'm gonna try to get there at least once (although I'm not that into high speed runs). What worries me is a bike with an unforgiving nature. The GS can go into a corner at 120, screaming at 8K RPM pushing into 140 coming out of the corner and I feel perfectly in-sync with the bike and I know it won't throw me off guard if I twist the throttle a little too much. I just get these feelings while riding in between cars on a busy highway that "If I had a bigger (i.e faster) bike I'd probably kill myself". Is that an illogical fear or just me keeping myself in check? 

I had a worked 193hp 2005 zx12r that would power wheelie over 100mph, lift the rear wheel at any speed, and easily cruise to 160-170mph on it's way to a 189(gps) top speed (of me, I gave up before the bike did)

It also handled phenomonally well(minus occasional headshake) and got 2,000 miles on a back tire. It was too much bike for me at the time. Nine or so bikes later, I have a VN2000 and am about to put a gs500 beater on the road.

Getting to wring a bike out is fun. I seem to wring all my bikes out pretty frequently, so hyperbikes are unreasonable for me on the street.

No matter what you get, you will miss at least some qualities of your gs. I still think you would get a lot of chuckles out of a sv1000, but it's twice the forward thrust of a gs, and requires more precise discipline.

Quote from: TundraOG on September 25, 2018, 01:57:37 AM
I know the SV has about the same top speed as the GS, I know I'm gonna try to get there at least once (although I'm not that into high speed runs). 

I'm not sure who told you the SV650 has a similar top speed to the GS, because that simply isn't true. The SV tops out around 135mph (217kph), whereas the GS struggles to get above 95 (152). The SV pulls significantly harder to that speed as well.


Also, if your attitude is high revs=fun, just keep whatever bike you get 1 or 2 gears lower. That'll keep the revs up and have the bike screaming even if you aren't going jailtime speeds.

When my GS was totaled, I was debating a Monster, but ended up with an SV650. I wanted a Monster, but really only needed an SV. It's been great to me. I wouldn't worry about it being a death trap, I think the motor makes it a little more forgiving compared to some peakier inline 4s.

Tundra, there is a lot to know about sport riding that is not instinctive.  I recommend the book "Total Control: High Performance Street Riding Techniques" to get some idea of it, followed by professional coaching, if you really intend to get sporty.   For more general and safety information, "Proficient Motorcycling" is very good. 

As a private pilot, I've studied the literature of aviation accidents.  Pilot error is the most common cause, and it follows a distinct pattern.  New private pilots are carefully trained for about 100 hours of ground school and 50 hours of flight time, thoroughly drilled in safety, and have a relatively low accident rate when first licensed.   But, after a few hundred hours of flight time, they get to thinking they know how to fly and they start dialing up the risk with sporty low altitude flying (low and slow is the danger zone), and pressing forward into bad weather.  During that time the accident rate goes up quite a bit.  It takes them another few hundred hours and having a few close calls to figure out they better be more careful.  Then the accident rate goes back down, even lower than for new pilots.  I would guess we get a similar effect in motorcycling, except that for new riders without MSF training the accident rate probably starts out pretty high, not going down until they (hopefully) survive the first few hundred hours of riding, having figured out to stay careful and keep their head on a swivel.   

Quote from: MaxD on September 25, 2018, 08:40:36 AM
Tundra, there is a lot to know about sport riding that is not instinctive.  I recommend the book "Total Control: High Performance Street Riding Techniques" to get some idea of it, followed by professional coaching, if you really intend to get sporty.   For more general and safety information, "Proficient Motorcycling" is very good. 

+1

Also, Twist of the Wrist II is a great instructional video for sport riding, if you can look past the "acting" in some parts.

Quote from: qcbaker on September 25, 2018, 07:36:02 AM

Quote from: TundraOG on September 25, 2018, 01:57:37 AM
I know the SV has about the same top speed as the GS, I know I'm gonna try to get there at least once (although I'm not that into high speed runs). 

I'm not sure who told you the SV650 has a similar top speed to the GS, because that simply isn't true. The SV tops out around 135mph (217kph), whereas the GS struggles to get above 95 (152). The SV pulls significantly harder to that speed as well.

I'm sure an SV650 top speed is much higher than a GS500 due to more horsepower, plain and simple.

However my GS is quite lively at an indicated 80mph. HP peak is around 9K rpm which is about an indicated 100 or so. Maybe that's 95mph actual.

Quote from: mr72 on September 25, 2018, 09:31:51 AM

Quote from: qcbaker on September 25, 2018, 07:36:02 AM

Quote from: TundraOG on September 25, 2018, 01:57:37 AM
I know the SV has about the same top speed as the GS, I know I'm gonna try to get there at least once (although I'm not that into high speed runs). 

I'm not sure who told you the SV650 has a similar top speed to the GS, because that simply isn't true. The SV tops out around 135mph (217kph), whereas the GS struggles to get above 95 (152). The SV pulls significantly harder to that speed as well.

I'm sure an SV650 top speed is much higher than a GS500 due to more horsepower, plain and simple.

However my GS is quite lively at an indicated 80mph. HP peak is around 9K rpm which is about an indicated 100 or so. Maybe that's 95mph actual.

Yeah, I''ve had mine to about 110 indicated, but being that the speedo is ~10% or so off, I figure I was doing about 98-100. That's 6th gear, WOT.

To a first order, drag is proportional to the square of speed, and that's what horsepower must balance.  For an unfaired GS500 with 39 HP that can do 101 MPH and an unfaired SV650 with 65 HP, we would expect the SV650 top speed to be about 101 MPH X SquareRoot(65/39) = 130MPH.  The SV650 forum says from 125 to 135MPH.

Since I'm opposed to splattering on the pavement like a tomato, I won't be testing out these top speeds. 

Quote from: MaxD on September 25, 2018, 12:25:12 PM
To a first order, drag is proportional to the square of speed, and that's what horsepower must balance.  For an unfaired GS500 with 39 HP that can do 101 MPH and an unfaired SV650 with 65 HP, we would expect the SV650 top speed to be about 101 MPH X SquareRoot(65/39) = 130MPH.  The SV650 forum says from 125 to 135MPH.

Since I'm opposed to splattering on the pavement like a tomato, I won't be testing out these top speeds.