SV 1000S

I've been interested in possibly purchasing the above mentioned bike.  I have read on this Forum as well as spoken w/ plenty of people who rave about the SV 650 but never have heard too much about this bike.  I would like to experience V-twin performance at a smaller cost than the Itailian bikes or even an RC51.  My only concern is that the bike would be too soft.  I just finished reading the archived article on this web-site but now I am even more perplexed in that phrases such as "the SV motor starts to run out of breath above the 9500 rpm mark...", "And while the SV may not be able to carve the tight lines of a supersport machine, it is agile and responsive enough to hold its own.", and "The downsized 310mm rotors were more than adequate up to an 8/10 pace...but any quicker than that and a bit of fade would creep into the picture.", seem to insinuate that this is more of a comuter bike that happens to be quick than a sportbike that happens to be comfortable.  I currently own a YZF600 and a GSXR750 and DO NOT want to purchase anything less sporting than my Yamaha. Does this bike have any competitors that share the same niche besides the Honda w/ the horrid looks and the flacid underpinnings? Any feed back would be appreciated.  

Well I went from an '01 YZF600R to an '03 SV650S and I can tell you the YZF is a good deal more comfortable.  The ergos on a SV650S/SV1000S are identical and are more along the lines of your GSXR750.  About the brakes, I want to say the calipers and rotors might be the same ones used on an '00-'03 GSXR750...but then again maybe not.  I know they're similar to that type of set up and I think they feel the brakes are weaker than a GSXR's because the SV is carring atleast 50 more lbs (weighs about the same as your YZF).  They say the engine starts to run out of breath above 9500rpms because they top end "hit" isn't as drastic as it is on an inline four.  You can kind of see it on a dyno graph but you feel it more just because of the nature a v-twin delivers its power down low and in the midrange.

I don't know what issue but Road Racing World has a good article on it when they first came out and I think they said it was one of the most over looked/under rated sportbikes out there for real world riding.  

I'd say you're reading a bit too much into the quotes you described. Labeling the SV1000S a "commuter bike" just because it doesn't have stunningly rave reviews on its handling and braking compared to supersport machines is a bit rash.  The fact that the SV "runs out of breath above the 9500 rpm mark" isn't a death knell; hell, the stock RC51 signs off before that point, and actually, you'd be hard-pressed to find a liter-size V-twin that revs past 10,200 rpm. The brakes appear to be previous-generation GSX-R spec, so they're definitely not bad; "a bit of fade" could easily be cured with aftermarket brake pads. To tell you the truth, I'd say they'd be a match for the stock YZF600 brakes.
It should also be noted that the '05 SV has a whole slew of upgrades to the engine (although none to the chassis). I think that if you're interested in big V-twin performance on the cheap, it'd be difficult to find a better deal.  

Sounds good.  I know the power delivery between a V-twin and a inline four is different in every aspect.  My concerns about the power drop off is that the bike redlines at 11,000 rpm leaving 1,500 rpms somewhat useless.  My main consern for the bike itself, having never ridden one before, was that it would not have quick reflexes or or be condusive to hard riding when compared to what I'm used to.  As you stated, I feel I would be hard pressed to find more bang for the buck in all of v-twindom.  Thanks for shedding a little light.  On more thing, when compared to the SV650 do you feel the performance gains outweigh the $2K price premium?  

I haven't ridden a SV1000 but I've had some seat time on a TLR and RC51.  The 650's a great bike but it is a budget sportbike, the suspension is only adjustable for preload (SV1K has fully adjustable units front and back) and the brakes are weaker (650 has 2 pot calipers, 1k has 4 pot).  The 650's a great little motor but it's a good a deal smaller than those liter twins, while it has more scoot than an inline downlow it likes to keep its revs up too.  Not banging off the rev limiter but above 5-6k rpms for sure.  A couple things the SV has going for it is it's price and how light it is.  It's as light as the newest 600s (or maybe a few lbs heavier depending what you read), combine that with its shorter gearing and more torque make it a fun bike to ride.

Some of the reviews of the SV1K were a little disappointed with it, I think they were looking for a TLS and forgot this bike is a TLS/SV mix.  Maybe its not as hardcore as a TLS or TLR but its definately not as soft as a SV650 either.  Again I haven't ridden it but I would guess a lot of the magazine testers who didn't like the bike were looking at it as if it was a sportscar, but really its like a big, powerful, fun sports sedan.  The SV1K isn't a race replica (sportscar), it isn't as light as most race replicas, it's still a nice bike, the motors kick ass and it's still fun to ride.  

Quote:

---

Thanks for shedding a little light.  On more thing, when compared to the SV650 do you feel the performance gains outweigh the $2K price premium?

---

I have the SV1K nekkid.  Its a hoot.  And yes the power delivery is very different.  Don't forget the SV650 has budget parts (some of it) the Sv1000 has a better, fully adjustable suspension, better brakes, steering damper, etc...  Probably not as "flickable" as a 600ss, but its sure fun in the twisties.

Go ride one.  You just might get hooked!  

Don't shrug off a good used TLR. More performance oriented and can be got for cheap these days.  

The TLR is what really got me interested in an SV, well, besides the mid-range grunt and the sexy exhaust note.  I have been unable to find one that hasn't been salvaged, ragged, or one that carries a decent price within a 100 mile radius of where I live. They seem to be pretty rare...