[indrasis_gun]

It is for purchase in India.

[Everlearner]

Originally Posted by indrasis_gun

I am just 5 feet 2 inches and height in 52 kg in weight. I want to know which bikes I can handle in my physique.

I'm 5'2 as well and used an Avenger for 9 years before selling off. I had absolutely no issues in handling the bike and was able to plant both my feet on the ground which will give you confidence to use the bike.

Regarding lean personality, skill and confidence matters more than body weight.

Test ride an Avenger and go for it if you feel comfortable. All the best

[KPR]

1. Get one used Honda Navi from OLX to learn biking. The scoot/bike is super fun.
2. After gaining confidence head to Bajaj showroom to get an Avenger.
3. Maintain both bikes.

[nitro.1000bhp]

Originally Posted by indrasis_gun

I am 25 years old, 5.2 feet height, 52 kg weight. I cannot ride a bike. But I have car driving experience of approximately 85000 km. Now I am looking to purchase my first bike. Here are my requirements:

Special requirement: I am just 5 feet 2 inches and height in 52 kg in weight. I want to know which bikes I can handle in my physique.
Budget: Maximum 2.5 lakhs ex-showroom not flexible
Biking skill: Zero. I will learn to ride a bike. I can ride bicycles.
Performance Required: Max speed of 110-120 kmph
Brand and Model: Open for anything

Check out the bajaj Avenger or the Jawa twins. Avenger is a tried and tested product while the Jawa is relatively new and has some qc issues. Test ride both and see which you are comfortable with.

[neil.jericho]

The Dominar 250 and 400 will also suit your requirements.

[McQueen]

Hi T-BHP, this is my first post on this site. I am planning to purchase a new bike in the next 6-8 months. Having only driven a borrowed commuter a few times, and an Ntorq several times, I'm seeking guidance in compiling my initial list of options for test rides.

I have only considered bikes that are currently in the market (except for the FZ 25). You may suggest ones that are going to be launched later this year.

I'll list my requirements:

1. Seat Height: Bike that suits a 5'4" rider. For reference, if I'm sitting (not to be confused with standing) on the edge, I can flat-foot on a TVS Ntorq which has 770 mm seat height. However, my most comfortable position would mean my toes and soles touch fully but not my heels.
   
2. Budget: Around 1.5 lakhs and can be extended till 2 lakhs. OTR, Delhi.
   
3. Purpose: Commuting and occasional tours. I don't know how many kms I'll log weekly - it'll either be my primary vehicle and/or my recreational touring vehicle.
   
4. Riding posture: Should not be very aggressive as that would make it less suitable for (occasional) touring/weekend trips or even for commutes.
   
5. Segment: Doesn't bother me as such as long as it's not a commuter or a commuter-looking bike like the Pulsar 220 F (unpopular opinion perhaps!).
   
6. Suspension: Shouldn't be too hard or too plush. The later will make it uncomfortable while the former will make it less practical or completely disallow going at high speeds.
   
7. Fuel economy and quality of pillion support do not concern me.
   
8. Reliability is important. Every company listed, including Bigwing, has its service centre/showroom within 2-4 kms from where I stay, but if I need to wait a few weeks for spare parts or source them myself, then the bike is not for me.
   
9. I would prefer something that's less common on the road but not at the cost of the "perfect" bike. Every second bike has the Pulsar badging - that italicized logo has become an eyesore for me. Still considering it!

Disclaimer: Everything mentioned is based on official specs and other's reviews. I have not ridden any of these bikes.

Sports Bikes longlist:

• Yamaha:
  • FZ 25 (FZS 25) - 795 mm seat height, relaxed riding position (upper body more than lower body), soft suspensions, dual-channel ABS. Cornering capability doesn't inspire confidence. However, it's no more in production and the seat height could be a problem given how it's built (For ref., the R15's 800 mm seat goes below FZ 25's 795 mm seat after you sit down.)
  • FZ-X over FZS-FI v4 due to its unconventional, neo-retro look (I loved it!) and more comfortable riding stance/suspensions/seats. However, the 810 mm seat height and low power are a matter of concern.
  • MT-15 v2 - Checks a lot of boxes but the riding quality is very stiff - not comfortable at all. The seat height is 810 mm which may be challenging (without a lowering kit for which OEM spares may not be available). Probably a reject.
• Honda:
  • CB300F - 787 mm seat height, dual-channel ABS, slipper clutch (yet gets stuck at 3rd/4th gear?) Gruffy and slightly less refined compared to usual Honda engines. Bigwing service another major issue I heard. Most probably a reject since there are better bikes in the same category/pricing.
• Bajaj:
  • Dominar 250 - Almost everything except for its seat height (800 mm), weight (180 kg) and looks goes in its favour. It packs in both comfort and performance. Considering this!
  • Pulsar N250/N160/N150/NS200/NS160 - God knows how to differentiate them. Be my God and guide me. Probably still won't buy a Pulsar - I mentioned why.
• TVS:
  • Apache RTR 160/200 4V - Probably a VFM bike but I have no clue about them. Can't figure out if they have an advantage over the Pulsars, Fazers and Gixxers.
• Suzuki:
  • Gixxer 155/155 SF - Lack of USD fork suspensions and dual-channel ABS, and presence of air-cooled engine (which may heat it up) makes me go for the 250 cc variant.
  • Gixxer 250/250 SF - Ticks almost every box it seems! Strong contender although service doesn't seem like what "Maruti Suzuki" is known for in our country. (I know, it's a completely different and wholly-owned subsidiary of Suzuki.)

Cruisers longlist:

• RE Hunter 350 - Suspensions setup is poor (risky going over a bump at high speed), hard clutch, seat not comfortable. Cool looks but still a reject probably.
• [Goes above my budget, still considering] RE Classic/Meteor 350 - The Meteor is a better highway muncher while the Classic is more practical (due to its suspension setup and slightly more engaging riding stance) for all types of roads. But I read somewhere that the Classic's Nitrox suspensions on the Meteor will make it better. (Someone please tell me how the change in suspension will help!) The weight, however, is a matter of concern while the height is not as the low-rider seat will reduce Classic's height to 773 mm. Need to check how good the weight distribution is!
• TVS Ronin - No clue!
• Bajaj Avenger 220 - Extremely comfortable but I wonder how that riding stance will play out in moderate/heavy traffic. The torque isn't good either. I doubt if it's a practical bike. Looks old-fashioned too.

Shortlist based on what I understand about bikes (nothing?):

1. Gixxer 250/250 SF - Maybe it's because of the suspensions, but the 800 mm seat height didn't seem very high on 5'3"-5'4" folks on YouTube compared to its 800 mm heighted rivals. (Someone please confirm that.) I learnt that the height can be reduced but don't know by how much and whether it affects its weight distribution.
2. Meteor/Classic 350 - Love the bike's character! Other than that, it's probably going to be a difficult vehicle for me to maneuver in traffic.

If there are good bikes that I should consider, please tell me. I'm also willing to consider second-hand bikes under 1 lakh and bikes that are going to release later.

[rahulcmoulee]

Originally Posted by McQueen

Cruisers longlist:

[list]
[*][Goes above my budget, still considering] RE Classic/Meteor 350 - The Meteor is a better highway muncher while the Classic is more practical (due to its suspension setup and slightly more engaging riding stance) for all types of roads. But I read somewhere that the Classic's Nitrox suspensions on the Meteor will make it better. (Someone please tell me how the change in suspension will help!) The weight, however, is a matter of concern while the height is not as the low-rider seat will reduce Classic's height to 773 mm. Need to check how good the weight distribution is!

I have been using the Meteor with Nitrox suspension for more than a year now, and it really does help improve the bump absorption and makes the whole experience much more pleasant. For starters, it is a lot softer than the stock Meteor suspension which is really stiff. The good thing is the softness doesn't come at the expense of stability or handling. It still remains sure footed and confident through the corners.

Coming to the bike itself, it is an ideal choice for shorter riders. The stock seat is already pretty low at 765mm and the low seat further reduces this. It is super easy to flat foot. The bike also has a low Centre of gravity due to its low slung stance. This makes it very easy to take it off the side stand or put the bike on the main stand despite the 191kg weight. Only time you will feel the weight is when you have to move the bike around by hand. Once on the move, the weight is very well masked and the bike is balanced.

With the nitrox suspension, it makes for a comfortable ride both in the city and the highway.

[ajay0612]

Originally Posted by McQueen

[*]Purpose: Commuting and occasional tours. I don't know how many kms I'll log weekly - it'll either be my primary vehicle and/or my recreational touring vehicle.
[*]Riding posture: Should not be very aggressive as that would make it less suitable for (occasional) touring/weekend trips or even for commutes.
[*]Segment: Doesn't bother me as such as long as it's not a commuter or a commuter-looking bike like the Pulsar 220 F (unpopular opinion perhaps!).
[*]Suspension: Shouldn't be too hard or too plush. The later will make it uncomfortable while the former will make it less practical or completely disallow going at high speeds.
[*]Fuel economy and quality of pillion support do not concern me.
[*]Reliability is important. Every company listed, including Bigwing, has its service centre/showroom within 2-4 kms from where I stay, but if I need to wait a few weeks for spare parts or source them myself, then the bike is not for me.
[*]I would prefer something that's less common on the road but not at the cost of the "perfect" bike.

Your requirements favor a roadster with good starting torque and mid-range, also a not so common model.

[i]Disclaimer: Everything mentioned is based on official specs and other's reviews. I have not ridden any of these bikes.
[*]CB300F - 787 mm seat height, dual-channel ABS, slipper clutch (yet gets stuck at 3rd/4th gear?) Gruffy and slightly less refined compared to usual Honda engines. Bigwing service another major issue I heard. Most probably a reject since there are better bikes in the same category/pricing.

Which are the better bikes in this price range (1.7L) having as much torque, good mid-range? None.

[*]TVS Ronin - No clue!

Ronin is also a great choice at around 1.5L. It is light, has good starting torque and mid-range, good fuel economy too. Its riding stance is a bit more relaxed than CB300F.

May test drive both and take your pick.

[McQueen]

Originally Posted by rahulcmoulee

I have been using the Meteor with Nitrox suspension for more than a year now, and it really does help improve the bump absorption and makes the whole experience much more pleasant.

For starters, it is a lot softer than the stock Meteor suspension which is really stiff. The good thing is the softness doesn't come at the expense of stability or handling.

Yes, yes! I read that the front suspensions are soft while the rear ones are stiff - and that's exactly what causes the mismatch. As a result, every bump or sharp joint on the road (like on a flyover) sends a jolt to your back and you get thrown off the saddle. After installing the Nitrox, did these issues get resolved?

Originally Posted by rahulcmoulee

Coming to the bike itself, it is an ideal choice for shorter riders. The stock seat is already pretty low at 765mm and the low seat further reduces this. It is super easy to flat foot.

I read that riding more than 40 mins is painful with the stock rider's seat and also read somewhere else that the low-rider's seats are less comfortable due to its reduced thickness. I plan to switch to touring seats (if at all I go for this bike). 765 mm shouldn't be an issue for me assuming the touring seats won't increase the height.

Originally Posted by rahulcmoulee

Only time you will feel the weight is when you have to move the bike around by hand. Once on the move, the weight is very well masked and the bike is balanced.

I don't know how well-balanced the bike is. I read somewhere that the weight distribution changes everything - he took the example of the 233 kg HD Street 750 and mentioned that it felt lighter than the Classic 350 due to its weight distribution. If you have anything to add to this (or an observation that you'd like to share regarding this), please.

This begs a question: If the Meteor 350 is given Classic's Nitrox suspensions and a touring seat, why would anyone prefer the Classic 350? What are the pros and cons of a Classic 350 over the modified Meteor 350?

[rahulcmoulee]

Originally Posted by McQueen

After installing the Nitrox, did these issues get resolved?

Yes, the Nitrox suspension resolves these to a large extent. The really sharp stuff still sends a jolt, but anything other than an ADV would do that.

Originally Posted by McQueen

I read that riding more than 40 mins is painful with the stock rider's seat and also read somewhere else that the low-rider's seats are less comfortable due to its reduced thickness. I plan to switch to touring seats (if at all I go for this bike). 765 mm shouldn't be an issue for me assuming the touring seats won't increase the height.

I have been on the touring seat since day 1. It in fact reduces the seat height marginally compared to the stock seat. I have done up to 400kms in a day and 200km at a stretch without any significant aches or pain. Cannot comment on the stock or low-seat as I don't have much experience on either.

Originally Posted by McQueen

If you have anything to add to this (or an observation that you'd like to share regarding this), please.

The Classic is also a well balanced bike. But because it is a taller bike overall with a higher centre of gravity, it makes tasks like putting it on the main stand a bit more difficult than the 4kg weight difference would suggest.

Originally Posted by McQueen

This begs a question: If the Meteor 350 is given Classic's Nitrox suspensions and a touring seat, why would anyone prefer the Classic 350? What are the pros and cons of a Classic 350 over the modified Meteor 350?

- The Classic has more neutral ergonomics compared to the slightly feet forward riding position of the Meteor. This allows for the rider to stand up on the pegs a lot easier to absorb bumps.

- The flatter seat on the Classic also allows you to move around on it and adjust your riding position compared to the dished seat on the Meteor which tends to lock you into a fixed position.

- The Classic has a far more spacious and comfortable pillion seat. There really is no comparison between the 2 when it comes to pillion comfort.

- The main thing that works in the Classic's favour is the design. When people think of RE, they are almost inevitably thinking of a Classic.

[McQueen]

Originally Posted by ajay0612

Your requirements favor a roadster with good starting torque and mid-range, also a not so common model.

So.. which one?

Originally Posted by ajay0612

Which are the better bikes in this price range (1.7L) having as much torque, good mid-range? None.

The price range I'm considering is slightly broader than that. I felt like the Gixxer 250/250 SF will be the better bike (or one of the 200-250 cc Pulsars). Don't know for sure, just speculating! Under 2.5 lakhs (OTR), which motorcycle will you suggest me? And under 2 lakhs (OTR), which one will you suggest me?

Originally Posted by ajay0612

Ronin is also a great choice at around 1.5L. It is light, has good starting torque and mid-range, good fuel economy too. Its riding stance is a bit more relaxed than CB300F.

I see. But I read on this forum that the mid range isn't good. Tell me one thing: Given it's a cruiser, why would I consider it over the Classic/Meteor 350? (Ignore the pricing for a while!)

Originally Posted by rahulcmoulee

..

Thanks a lot! You clarified a lot of my doubts.

Tell me:

1. Which bike feels more difficult to maneuver and drive in city traffic - the Classic or the modified Meteor?
2. After the Nitrox suspensions are installed, how do the two bikes fare over potholes and bumps? Is there still any difference - can you detail that part please?
3. Under 2.5 lakhs (OTR), which motorcycle will you suggest me? And under 2 lakhs (OTR), which one will you suggest me?

Thanks a lot both of you.

[ajay0612]

Originally Posted by McQueen

So.. which one?

The price range I'm considering is slightly broader than that. I felt like the Gixxer 250/250 SF will be the better bike (or one of the 200-250 cc Pulsars). Don't know for sure, just speculating! Under 2.5 lakhs (OTR), which motorcycle will you suggest me? And under 2 lakhs (OTR), which one will you suggest me?

Gixxer has a sporty engine (higher BHP lower initial Torque) which eggs you to rev and enjoy the rush.
CB300F has a liner power delivery and better than Gixxer for relaxed driving.

I see. But I read on this forum that the mid range isn't good. Tell me one thing: Given it's a cruiser, why would I consider it over the Classic/ Meteor 350? (Ignore the pricing for a while!)

Ronin is cheaper and lighter. Its initial and mid range is good and it has linear power delivery. It has better suspension also (USD front fork, Single adjustable rear shock).

Meteor is better for cruising on highways due to higher weight (stable), good initial torque, stiffer suspension and relaxed seating posture.

[*]Under 2.5 lakhs (OTR), which motorcycle will you suggest me? And under 2 lakhs (OTR), which one will you suggest me?

Under 2.5L OTR - I would suggest CB300F (Low seat height, manageable weight, linear power delivery, good fuel economy, good suspension and handling, bang for your bucks).

Under 2L OTR - Ronin

If you can stretch a bit to 2.75 L OTR, then Speed 400.

[rahulcmoulee]

Originally Posted by McQueen

1. Which bike feels more difficult to maneuver and drive in city traffic - the Classic or the modified Meteor?
2. After the Nitrox suspensions are installed, how do the two bikes fare over potholes and bumps? Is there still any difference - can you detail that part please?
3. Under 2.5 lakhs (OTR), which motorcycle will you suggest me? And under 2 lakhs (OTR), which one will you suggest me?

- In the city, I found the Meteor even without modifications a lot easier to maneuver. It feels a lot more agile and the acceleration is a bit sharper making quick overtakes easy.

- I think even with the Nitrox suspension, the Meteor is slightly more uncomfortable than the Classic. But that would be mainly to do with the seating position which puts your back right over the shock. If ultimate comfort is the goal, I would get a Classic 350 and upgrade to Nitrox shocks.

- For your bike recommendation, I would suggest getting a test ride of all options. That is the best and only way to realise what works for you. Different styles of bikes work for different people, so only test rides will help you decide what truly is the best fit for you.

[McQueen]

Originally Posted by ajay0612

Gixxer has a sporty engine (higher BHP lower initial Torque) which eggs you to rev and enjoy the rush.
CB300F has a liner power delivery and better than Gixxer for relaxed driving.

In the exact same manner, can you please describe the Honda CB300R and the Speed 400?

I checked the power and torque curves of all three vehicles - the Speed's torque at all rpms is much better. The rate of acceleration is also positive over the entire rpm range which is not the case with the two Hondas. That said, I'm hesitant about the Triumph since the total investment will go over 3 lakhs with accessories and riding gear. Will test ride it and take a call later!

Originally Posted by rahulcmoulee

..

Noted.

Technical query: Can someone tell me how to tag AND notify someone? For instance, we type @username on Discord and u/username on Reddit.

[ex-innova-guy]

Originally Posted by McQueen

Technical query: Can someone tell me how to tag AND notify someone? For instance, we type @username on Discord and u/username on Reddit.

For tagging someone you need to quote a post posted by the member. Just like how you have done above to reply to BHPian rahulcmoulee. Usually not quoting the whole post but just the relevant part which you want to refer/reply to.