IS THE VALKYRIE A GOOD FIRST BIKE?
by Various Members of the Valkyrie Riders Cruiser
Club...
Posted By: oZ
Date: 7/30/2004 at 13:17:10
As webmaster of the VRCC I get the same question about twice a week and have never really responded before.
The question is "is the Valkyrie a good bike for a new rider?"
Well I am getting enough of these now that I should start answering these folks. My first draft answer so far is:
A lot of people say the Valkyrie is not a good starter bike. I have mixed feelings. In my club of almost 22,000 signed up I have members who started with a Valkyrie as a first bike. They made it and learned to ride just fine.
Here is the only reason for not having a Valkyrie as a first bike.
1. Biggest drawback... and hardest part of being a Valkyrie driver for me is slow speed maneuvering.
I ride an Interstate and it is a little top heavy AND I'm a small guy, 5' 7". It is much easier for guys 5'10" and over and basically not a problem for them I think. That's because of the length of their inseam there is a scientific reason having to do with angles of your legs extended from the bike but just believe me if you are over 5' 10" than the above is not a real problem.
Here is why I think the Valkyrie is a good starter bike.
1. Superb handling over 5 miles an hour. As easy to ride as any bike in my humble opinion
2. Excellent ease of handling, the clutch is light; the six cylinder engine is silkY smooth with torque very low in the RPM's which makes it easy to release the clutch and get going.
3. Maintenance although good on all Japanese motorcycles is great on the Valkyrie. It is more like the Honda car. You can let it sit for 4 weeks and just hit the starter and all is well.
Add to the above that the Valkyrie is has one of the longest wheel bases out there this lending to great touring abilities and here in Los Angeles were we have "rain grooves" cut in our freeways the Valkyrie is one of the few bikes that doesn't "wiggle" when riding on these grooves."
So that's my first answer but there is a lot of responsibility in advising people. I could be completely wrong.
Any advise or input greatly appreciated.
oZ
-----------------------------------
Posted By: Parisbiker <ball2089@bellsouth.net>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 13:34:31
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
Let me start by saying "this is only my opinion". The first street bike that I owned was a Kawasaki KZ400 and it had more than enough power for me as a new rider. If I was on a bike that had more power I'm thinking that I would have ended up hurting myself being new to the whole horsepower to weight ratio thing. I'm going to say that I feel that the Valkyrie is a bike for an experienced rider mainly because of the weight and the power band. I have moved up the cc ladder from the 400 to the Valkyrie and many times I have been thankful that I have the riding experience that I have due to starting with a smaller bike.
------------------------------------------
Posted By: BamaJack <jhhccs@bellsouth.net>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 13:43:16
In Response To: Re: Need your input. (Parisbiker)
The valk is an extremely well behaved machine but all that weight and power could get a beginning biker into trouble real quick.
Jack in Bama
-----------------
Posted By: smokey <smokey@wahco.net>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 13:41:03
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
My first bike was a 1954 Harley fl. Good first bike. Lots of exercise pushing it. Not too fast. Learned a lot about working on motorcycles on the roadside.
If someone's first bike is a Valk, they're going to miss out on this.
----------------------
Posted By: therapist <sheddron@pilot.msu.edu>
Date: 7/31/2004 at 05:34:11
In Response To: Re: Need your input. (smokey)
I'm "old school" on this one. I'll bet if many of the current motorcycle accidents could be researched, we would find that the rider was new and "bit off more than they could chew" bike-wise.
I started at 16 on a Yamaha 80, 2 stroke street bike (or as my friends called it,
"Yamaha-ha-ha-ha"). I then moved to a couple 250's, a 400, various 500's, an 850 and finally the Valk. I believe the reason I am still in one piece is because I never tried to handle a bike that was bigger than my size and skill level at the time.
I think age/maturity is an important factor as well. Giving a young and/or immature person a bike capable of 140 MPH is only asking for trouble. I remember some of the crazy things I did speed-wise on smaller, slower bikes...can't imagine what I would have done on a Valk. I would have been in big trouble fast.
-----------
Posted By: Skull <Skull@Valhalla-Six-Guns.com>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 13:44:33
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
They'll need to immediately learn how to pick it up after a drop. It's all in the technique -- brute force isn't necessary -- but it's a bear if you don't know the trick.
It doesn't split lanes well. You CAN do it, but it's REALLY WIDE. If they're picking it up to be a commuter bike in California, this is going to limit it fiercely.
It won't tolerate disrespecting its power -- the bike has plenty of it, and the rider has to be serious about learning. "Fooling around" will get you into trouble on anything, and the Valkyrie is no exception.
-----------
The Valk was my first bike...
Posted By: Mark@CAT
Date: 7/30/2004 at 13:54:08
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
After the moped when I was 14, which was a long, long time ago.
I would not really recommend the Valk as a first bike, even though I did it. It's a lot of bike and I think I would have been better off starting will something smaller, however I had that burning desire, and I'm known to be a little pigheaded at times.
If you do start with a Valk, the MSF class is a must, you learn things you had no idea existed. The whole push the direction you want to go thing can conceptually be hard to grasp, but when on the bike it makes sense. There are also a few things you learn by toodling around parking lots that can prepare you for the road.
One thing I learned the hard way, and I mean hard way, was when you come to a complete stop, don't have your wheel turned 90º, keep it straight, or bad things will happen to you.
In summary if you have the determination it is definitely do-able, but starting a little smaller, might be a better way to go.
----------------------
ANY bike MUST fit you !! ,,,
Posted By: '
Date: 7/30/2004 at 14:17:41
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
ie: legs touch the ground, arms reach the handle bars, feet reach the peddles.
after that the ONLY requirements are that while you are sitting on the bike, you are physically able to raise the bike off the side stand ,,,, and turn the handle bars, full lock !!! EVERY THING ELSE IS SKILL !!! these "skills" are learned by riding ,,,,,,,, ANY BIKE !!!
so ,, get a bike "YOU LIKE", and learn to ride it !!!
the Motor Cycle Safety Course is an excellent way to learn "some" riding skills, and its there bike you will be dropping, and when you pass the test, you will come away with a MC endorsement on your drivers license.
Just the facts.
shftr #666
ps: most everything else said here is also true
---------------
Posted By: Honest Henry <cnorwood1@cox.net>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 14:18:16
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
I started riding in Jan. 2000 and I was 49. Being older and wiser(?) starting on a big bike was not a real problem. I started on a 1980 Goldwing which has a higher seat but about 130 fewer pounds at 580lbs. I took the MSF course first thing and I recommend it to everyone I meet that is considering riding. If you are careful and very respectful of the weight and slow speed handling of the Valk for about a day you can get how to control the beast, at which time you will know that you always need to respect the weight and slow speed handling. If you do this you will have no problem riding a Valkyrie as you first motorcycle. As an experiment I will get my son, who has been riding for only about a month on a Honda Interceptor 500, on the Valk and see how long it takes for him to get comfortable on it.
Forgot to mention I'm 5'7" 170 30" inseam.
--------------
slow speed...
Posted By: joker <myvalk@hotmail.com>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 14:36:55
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
handling is the biggest drawback.
I’ve been riding for over 35 years, and it was hard for me to slow-turn in shopping parking lots. i think its a bit much for a first bike.
Specially if you’re going to dump one, it had better not be the valk.
which is a good topic for another time ....who's dumped the big girl yet?
--------------
Just an opinion, but from what I have observed
Posted By: csimmons <clsimmonsjr@yahoo.com>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 14:49:01
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
Watching new riders, it is too much bike. I ride a IS and sometimes I have trouble at slow speed maneuvering (5'9"). I will say I believe everyone should graduate up to a valk!
----------------
Posted By: saabfxr <gotfixed2@aol.com>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 14:51:32
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
I am a firm supporter in starting on a small bike to gain your skills. The Valk is a good bike but is way too big for a first time rider. I have been riding for over 30 years and see too many people getting the biggest thing they can afford ,just to "fit in". Why risk dropping a nice bike just to have the biggest? Get your skills then move up, you will have a better riding experience if you do. You wont worry about dropping the nice bike. Just my .02$. Doug.
---------------------
Posted By: Robert #17651
Date: 7/30/2004 at 15:46:48
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
I have read all the post till now. A lot of good points are made.
However I have to say the Valk is not a good first bike. I feel that the bike is just too big/much/powerful/heavy/cumbersome/scary for a future rider to start out on.
Yes you have to know not to twist too hard on the throttle. Yes you have to learn how to maneuver such a big bike. Yes you have to know that such a big bike takes a lot of respect to keep from getting hurt.
The idea of riding is to have fun. I just cannot see someone riding the Valk as a first time bike and feeling confident enough to have fun. I learned to ride on a Yamaha Maxim 400 special. I am 6' 2" and over 200#. That little thing scared me to death at times riding in traffic with all the cages running around etc. A new rider is not going to have the expertise it takes to manage this machine. Most likely they will wind up getting hurt or killed if they get into a situation with the Valk.
You have to crawl before you can walk. And no matter what someone decides as their first bike....TAKE THE MSF COURSE!
Just my opinion
---------------
Posted By: solo1
Date: 7/30/2004 at 16:04:11
In Response To: Re: Need your input. (Robert #17651)
Start with a lighter and smaller bike, especially if you are lighter and smaller.
--------------
Posted By: tomkat 14024 <tomkat@mobiletel.com>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 16:13:02
In Response To: Re: Need your input. (Robert #17651)
I bought my first bike at the age of 43 in November 2001. It was a black and pearl beige I.S. I did take a motorcycle safety class before buying it. The biggest issue I had was the weight. After I learned how to handle the weight everything was fine. My wife and I have put over 20,000 miles on this fantastic machine. So far we have taken two long trips, one of 1950 miles and one of 2300 miles. Looking forward to many more.
Tom
------------------
Posted By: Hog Killer <sammieboy888@hotmail.com>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 16:48:44
In Response To: Re: Need your input. (tomkat 14024)
I'm going to date myself here, but I started out on a new 4 cyl. Honda 550 cc. At that time, that's all was needed. You need practice and confidence to be a good rider. Four time through the ERC course over the years has been a great help as well. Start out slow. You can always move up.
---------------------
Posted By: Krockett <thburg@charter.net>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 17:20:40
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
I would say it depends on your age and level of maturity. This bike is big and powerful...enough power for someone who is young and foolish to do some real damage. This is a fairly heavy machine and while it handles great one must have respect for it. My 2 cents is that it is a bike that should be worked toward not started with if the person is young and has zero experience.
--------------
Not a good starter bike.
Posted By: Phrede <vrcc@insightbb.com>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 17:53:46
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
I took my riders test on a CB650 and that was a real challenge. I remember wishing for something smaller. I don't think I could have passed on a Valkyrie.
When I first got my V-65 there was a learning curve on how to handle the Hp. I think I may have got into more trouble if I had that Hp as a novice.
Then came the Valk. I have a real appreciation for this bike that I might not have if I hadn't had the experience of the others.
I think the MSF course should be a must no matter what bike.
You asked for an opinion, so there is mine
---------------------------
Valkyrie, my first trike
Posted By: Diana <diana.turner@duke.edu>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 18:50:06
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
My Valkyrie Trike
is the first trike I can call my very own. I am in my late 40's, took the MSF
course 3 years ago. I am 5 feet tall, 28 inch inseam. Rode my husband's Goldwing
and Harley Softtail Trikes just a little bit, the Honda foot controls are ok,
but it is a real stretch for the Harley and just not comfortable. So, from my
size, the Valk is a perfect fit for handlebars and foot controls, and because it
is a trike, I don't have to reach the ground, (haven't been able to do that yet
with any bike) and impossible to drop it! As for the power issue: my first car
was a 68 Camaro, so I have always loved power! I think my Valkyrie Trike is a
perfect choice for me. I couldn't ride the Valkyrie as a 2 wheeler, wouldn't
even be an option for me so gotta do what I have to do. Love my Valkyrie!
Diana
----------
No, not a good first bike.
Posted By: erikrichard
Date: 7/30/2004 at 19:59:41
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
I believe a first bike should be a piece of crap that costs no more than 500 bucks.
-------------
No, not a good first bike.
Posted By: 2weelz
Date: 7/31/2004 at 02:35:43
In Response To: No, not a good first bike. (erikrichard)
DingDingDingDingDingDing... You sir have the correct answer. I totally agree. This is a general question for the general public where the general rule is that you will lay down your first bike. the power is not as much of a problem as the weight. a common mistake is braking at very low speed when the front wheel is turned, a 400lb. bike is forgiving to most, a 700lb bike is going down with most. simply put take an MSF course and if you can duplicate what you did with the 250cc on a Valk then by all means it is a great first bike. A great site to visit is beginnerbikes.com
--------------------------
Slow speed handling
Posted By: Ostrich <tullynoon@msn.com>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 20:38:17
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
Is the only stopper to this question? Most people will gain a feel before they dump it at Safeway but enough will dump it slow to make this a risky step. This thing is like driving a stable and maneuverable safe at speed.
I went from a scooter to MSF to a Shadow 1100 (one year)to the Valk to advanced MSF. I'm 6-4 and I felt both challenged and satisfied all the way. I salivated over the Valk from day one but couldn't justify moving up any faster. Obviously one could and should omit the scooter.
-------------------
The Valk's terrible for a new rider
Posted By: mc <call@rochester.rr.com>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 21:12:19
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
Too big
Too heavy
Too frisky
Go small and work your way up.
So sez
MC
---------
Posted By: Zman <tzur@charter.net>
Date: 7/30/2004 at 23:08:46
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
My valk was/is my first bike. I knew I wanted it, back in '98, when I first saw it. I'm a big guy... 6'2", 225 lbs., but a friend of mine (at the time) still thought it would be too big for me as a first bike.
Well, I bought it, and have never looked back. I still love it today as much as- or probably even more than when I first go it. Everyone is different, however, but for me... it's been the best!
-------------------
Posted By: SnarkByte <snarkbyte@yahoo.com>
Date: 7/31/2004 at 11:15:33
In Response To: Re: Need your input. (Zman)
Glad it's worked out for you, ZMan, but my guess is you're the exception. A *few* people (probably large guys over 30 years of age) have owned Valks as a first bike success. But then, a few people have gone over Niagara Falls in wooden barrel and succeeded in living to tell about it. A few successes doesn't mean it's a good idea, the reported statistics are biased in favor of success stories.
The people you WON'T hear from hear are those who bought bikes that were too large and powerful as a first bike, had bad experiences and gave up riding (or were injured or killed and can no longer ride at all). As great as the Valk is, she is *not* a beginner's bike, for all the reasons others have mentioned. Too much weight and power is dangerous for beginners, far more unforgiving of mistakes, and more difficult to control in a situation requiring quick decisions and maneuvers.
I was over 40 when I started riding. I had been a competitive bicyclist for many years, and I understood all about being invisible in traffic; I figured I could handle a bike over 1000cc as a beginner. My first bike was an 1100cc Shadow Sabre, and I made my share of beginner's mistakes. If I had been 20 and bought a Valk, I probably would have been killed within the first six months.
The short answer, imo, is start with something 800cc or less - preferably a used bike (that way, you'll have more money left over for repairs and your next "step up" bike). If you want respect from other riders, show them you have enough sense to realize you have a lot to learn, even though you did pass the MSF course. The *real* test starts after you have a MC endorsement, and you have to take that test every time you get on a bike. The vast majority of beginners will not pass that test every single time (I certainly didn't, and I think most others here would admit the same thing), so get a bike that's less likely to make a beginner's failure a permanent flunk-out.
- SnarkByte
-----------------------------
Posted By: Valkyrie_Rider <rider_of_the_valkyrie@yahoo.com>
Date: 7/31/2004 at 01:22:22
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
I have an Interstate and I would hate to imagine trying to handle that monster as a beginner. True, some have done it and conquered her but the Valk' is heavy and cumbersome at slow speeds, very powerful and just not the “best” choice for a beginner.
I started on a Honda CB360, a bike I spent very little money on. All of the mistakes a new rider usually makes and some that we old riders make are less emphasized when you start with a small bike. For example, forgetting to make sure the kickstand is ALL the way down before tilting her over. A smaller bike can be caught easier before she goes all the way over and it's much easier to pick up if you don’t catch her. The Valk' on the other hand, once she starts leaning it's almost impossible to stop her. For me, it was impossible………twice now!!
Learning how to operate the clutch and throttle is much easier when you don't have a bike with so much power. Once you master it with a smaller bike it can still take a little bit to master the same combination of the Valk because she is so powerful. Again, if you make the mistake of giving her too much throttle, it's much easier to recover with a smaller bike than the Valk'.
Learning how to maneuver any bike through a parking lot can be scary when you factor in drivers that aren't paying attention. A new rider riding through a parking lot is more prone to make panic braking errors or maneuvering errors and could end up dumping the bike when someone pulls out in front of them or walks out in front of them. These errors would be more pronounced with a bigger bike like the Valk', and, again, a smaller bike is always easier to pick up after making one of those mistakes.
Riding through traffic laden streets or even lonely country highways, one always has to be cognizant of what is going on around them. A car pull out in front of you; an animal runs out in front of you; a child steps off the curb in front of you and everyone's going to experience the pucker factor. A new rider is more likely to make an error in judgment and decision making due to their lack of experience. Those errors are just less pronounced on a smaller bike.
Passing the riding test to obtain your motorcycle license is so much easier on a smaller bike as opposed to the Valk'. I'm sure some folks have done it and they are to be commended, but I'm not too proud to admit I'm glad I didn't have the Valk' as my first bike because I would not have passed the maneuvering tests due to the size and difficult low speed maneuvering of the Valk'.
It's not that the Valk "can't" be a starter bike but I think a smaller bike is a better choice to allow a person to become familiar with starting, stopping turning etc. Imagine learning to drive by starting out with a tractor and trailer rig!
And now, from a financial standpoint, the damage that can be done to the Valk when errors are made can be costly, and I have yet to see a Valk' rider ridding a “beater” Valk’ that is all banged up. We might drop our bikes, hit things or have things hit us, but we are always quick to get them fixed back to their original state before the damage was done. A smaller, less expensive bike a much better choice for a starter bike from a financial standpoint because those scrapes, scratches, dents and damage don’t necessarily have to fixed on a starter bike and starter bike parts can be easily and reasonably obtained from a salvage yard. The Valk’, on the other hand, must have the shiny chrome and color matched painted parts replaced with the same shiny chrome and color matched painted parts, and this can be costly.
An absolute "must" with whatever bike one chooses to start with is the MSF Course.
Valkyrie_Rider #3945
----------------
Posted By: F6BANGER <canelane@yahoo.com>
Date: 7/31/2004 at 09:08:18
In Response To: Re: Need your input. (Valkyrie_Rider)
The only thing he forgot to add was: starting on a smaller bike and upgrading to a bigger/better bike. if you start on a valkyrie you cannot upgrade to a BETTER bike
-------------------
IMHO, no, the Valk isn't a good starter bike...
Posted By: Firefighter Bob #16337 <wyvern@megahits.com>
Date: 7/31/2004 at 05:26:01
In Response To: Need your input. (oZ)
For all its good qualities, the Valk is just too big and too powerful to be a good choice for a starter bike. (Not that some people haven't started on a Valk and been perfectly happy, I just don't think that any bike that size is the best choice.)
A new rider should be concentrating on learning the basics of operating the controls, learning good seeing skills, learning basic evasive skills, and just getting comfortable with riding -- not mastering a very large, very heavy, very expensive cruiser.
FWIW, my opinion of a "best learner bike" is something used, inexpensive, light, and in the 350 - 650cc range. (and not a crotch rocket) There's less worry about damage if dropped; it's easier to pick up when it does get dropped; and it's powerful enough to run the highway but not so powerful that it's going to get a new rider into trouble too easily.
