Phil Tarman
Site Supporter
Yoda, you said you've got your 650 Burgman. Compare it to the 400 for us. Please!
Burgman 650 vs 400 ?
- Thread starter Phil Tarman
- Start date
Re: Give Us a Report
I picked up my new Burgman 650 last Tuesday at Oklahoma Honda-Suzuki, in Oklahoma City. I can wholeheartedly, enthusiastically recommmend this company. I flew in to OKC Monday and stayed overnight. Their sales manager, Shawn Bostwick, picked me up at my hotel Tuesday morning. Superb, friendly service! The price shown on Cycletrader for the 'Burg was as expected, the only addition a $60 document fee. Period. Why wouldn't either of our local Suzuki dealers match their price to keep the business here at home? I will never understand. After a quick wire transfer from USAA bank, I loaded up and left for Albuquerque before noon.
The big Burg actually weighs about 40 pounds more than an NT700, but feels lighter due to the very low c.g. It has a 638 cc engine, just 42 cc less than the NT, but only (an estimated) 50 hp at the crank. The first sensation is of a very smooth, solid ride. It is much quieter than the single cylinder 400 Burgman, and I believe even a bit quieter than an NT.
My previous scooter experience with CVT transmissions on the Honda PCX150, and Burgman 400 are completely different from the electronically controlled CVT on the Burg 650. The larger engine bike utilizes an automatic multiplate wet clutch that begins engagement at only about 2,000 rpm. The others use a dry centrifugal clutch that don't start hooking up until 3,500 to 4,000 rpm. At light throttle input, the 650's electronics maintain a much lower rpm during acceleration. But, with greater throttle, higher rpm is called for by the electronics.
I have not wrung it out for max performance yet, as I just finished the 600 mile breakin period on the trip home. Suzuki (and Burgman forum members concur) says to keep rpm's below 4,000 during the breakin period, while varying the load and rpm as much as possible. This is apparently as much for the kevlar / rubber belt and pulley faces as it is for the engine conformation process. I made every effort to comply.
I have read others affectionately call the big Burgman "Lardy", and compare it similarly to a Goldwing. Perhaps a mini-Goldwing is more accurate. Nevertheless, it is very comfortable for both riders, with large seats, excellent room for feet, and good weather protection. No navigation, sound system, or cruise control here, but otherwise an apparently good machine for touring. Time will tell. My wife says it has the best back seat of the few bikes she has ridden on, and especially likes the factory backrest. One promising aspect was the fuel economy on the ride home - about 55 mpg staying within the 4,000 rpm / 65 mph limitation during breakin.
Photos and more detail about the experience will be forthcoming. Stay tuned.
I picked up my new Burgman 650 last Tuesday at Oklahoma Honda-Suzuki, in Oklahoma City. I can wholeheartedly, enthusiastically recommmend this company. I flew in to OKC Monday and stayed overnight. Their sales manager, Shawn Bostwick, picked me up at my hotel Tuesday morning. Superb, friendly service! The price shown on Cycletrader for the 'Burg was as expected, the only addition a $60 document fee. Period. Why wouldn't either of our local Suzuki dealers match their price to keep the business here at home? I will never understand. After a quick wire transfer from USAA bank, I loaded up and left for Albuquerque before noon.
The big Burg actually weighs about 40 pounds more than an NT700, but feels lighter due to the very low c.g. It has a 638 cc engine, just 42 cc less than the NT, but only (an estimated) 50 hp at the crank. The first sensation is of a very smooth, solid ride. It is much quieter than the single cylinder 400 Burgman, and I believe even a bit quieter than an NT.
My previous scooter experience with CVT transmissions on the Honda PCX150, and Burgman 400 are completely different from the electronically controlled CVT on the Burg 650. The larger engine bike utilizes an automatic multiplate wet clutch that begins engagement at only about 2,000 rpm. The others use a dry centrifugal clutch that don't start hooking up until 3,500 to 4,000 rpm. At light throttle input, the 650's electronics maintain a much lower rpm during acceleration. But, with greater throttle, higher rpm is called for by the electronics.
I have not wrung it out for max performance yet, as I just finished the 600 mile breakin period on the trip home. Suzuki (and Burgman forum members concur) says to keep rpm's below 4,000 during the breakin period, while varying the load and rpm as much as possible. This is apparently as much for the kevlar / rubber belt and pulley faces as it is for the engine conformation process. I made every effort to comply.
I have read others affectionately call the big Burgman "Lardy", and compare it similarly to a Goldwing. Perhaps a mini-Goldwing is more accurate. Nevertheless, it is very comfortable for both riders, with large seats, excellent room for feet, and good weather protection. No navigation, sound system, or cruise control here, but otherwise an apparently good machine for touring. Time will tell. My wife says it has the best back seat of the few bikes she has ridden on, and especially likes the factory backrest. One promising aspect was the fuel economy on the ride home - about 55 mpg staying within the 4,000 rpm / 65 mph limitation during breakin.
Photos and more detail about the experience will be forthcoming. Stay tuned.
OP
OP
Phil Tarman
Site Supporter
Re: Give Us a Report
Thanks! We look forward to updates.
Thanks! We look forward to updates.
Re: Give Us a Report
Thanks Rich, I've wondered if your Burg 650 could replace the NT. You'll know over time. Let us know.
terry
Thanks Rich, I've wondered if your Burg 650 could replace the NT. You'll know over time. Let us know.
terry
Re: Give Us a Report
Ah, Rich - I see the farkle dollars floating away now!!! I suspect your first visit will be Kiwi Dave's for some luggage.
Congrats - I've only ridden the big Burg once, but I liked it a lot. From everything I've heard, you've got a great machine there.
Hope to see the Burg at Spearfish next year.
Ah, Rich - I see the farkle dollars floating away now!!! I suspect your first visit will be Kiwi Dave's for some luggage.
Congrats - I've only ridden the big Burg once, but I liked it a lot. From everything I've heard, you've got a great machine there.
Hope to see the Burg at Spearfish next year.
As someone who, like Chris, has owned both a Burgman 400 and (now) an NT, I can tell you that the reason I did not upgrade from a 400 to a 650 was because of the CVT failures. I now have over 57,000 miles on my NT, bought new, three years ago. At 50k miles or so, if I owned the Burgman 650, I would be looking at a CVT failure. The NT has been nothing but rock solid.
As to "400 vs NT", they are such totally different machines - it really depends on what you want from a bike. In my case, I had retired when I bought the 400 and found I had time for long touring rides. Deep South Texas to Las Vegas, Deep South Texas to Miami - you got the idea. The 400 was solid too, but not really suited for touring, especially in the west where the speed limits are higher. But, if you intend short trips and/or local fun rides, the Burgman is a great bike.
Initially, it feels as if there should be a 6th gear but eventually I stopped worrying about the RPM on the slab and just enjoyed myself. The NT's engine doesn't seem to care what it's taching at 70-75 mph and there are many on this list who live out west where they can ride much faster than 75 and they're not complaining.
Yup! On my recent trip to Spearfish, most of the time Traveller was cruising at 80-85 without complaint.
Mike
At RoadRunner event there was a couple who road 650, they where some of the best ridding couple I ever seen. Both were small people, amazing riding couple. He said when over in Europe,they rented a NT and found that a nice ride on a tour. I think they where in their 60's, and on twesties could keep up with any sensible rider (meaning no sport bike fools). I even told my brother he might look at the trike version (one leg), but he took vanity and got the H-D Pingel shifter.
Tonydtiger1971
Guest
What were the RPM set at? There are times when the RPM's seem higher than other times.
OP
OP
Phil Tarman
Site Supporter
At 85myh, rpm = 6,020. At 80, it's only 5,666. 70mph= 4,960. 708.333/10mph.
So, redline in 5th is 120mph. I've never been able to do that. 108 is my personal "best" on the NT. I got to 126.8 on the Connie and backed out of it when the handlebars started a slow waggle. I rode another 140 miles back to Ft Morgan at mostly 80...and found a 6" nail in the rear tire the next morning.
So, redline in 5th is 120mph. I've never been able to do that. 108 is my personal "best" on the NT. I got to 126.8 on the Connie and backed out of it when the handlebars started a slow waggle. I rode another 140 miles back to Ft Morgan at mostly 80...and found a 6" nail in the rear tire the next morning.
Phil is spot on with his numbers. But that is only throry. Consider wearing the tires down 1/8" and then recalculate. That 1/8" of tread translates to about 3/4" of cricumfrence which is a 10% decrease inspeed or 10% increase in rpm whichever way you want to look at it.
Most stock NTs will reach red line, but with the windscreen all the way down. And if they get there they are sure out of juice. Mine was able to reach red line, but there was nothing left. (I didn't say I was riding it at the time)
Most stock NTs will reach red line, but with the windscreen all the way down. And if they get there they are sure out of juice. Mine was able to reach red line, but there was nothing left. (I didn't say I was riding it at the time)
OP
OP
Phil Tarman
Site Supporter
In theory, Jim may be right with his calculations of increasing speedo/odo error with tire wear, but I sure never notice it when comparing speed to GPS.
Means the bike is "perfectly" geared.
What Phil said. You may "think" 6K rpm is high and the bike may be buzzy, but it is not. Honda's love to rev and at 6K Traveller is very smooth. After a long spell on the slab doing 85 when you have to slow to 70, it seems like you are crawling.
Mike
Tonydtiger1971
Guest
Ok, that sounds about right. I was noticing that at 60 the RPM's were between 4000 and 4300.
Macka
Guest
At 100kph (62mph) my tacho is showing 4200 rpm.
Recently I have been thinking seriously about a Burgy 650, not as a replacement for the NT but possibly for the Suzuki GS500F which I am now finding a bit uncomfortable.
I have been doing some research and as far as I understand it, if you replace the Primary Pulley bolt regularly there should be no CVT problems for at least 100,oookm (62K miles).
I have ridden one a few times in Japan and was very impressed except for the very heavy steering.
The B650 has many of the "features" of the NT which makes it appealing, such as storage (3 glove boxes and under-seat), weather protection and no chain maintenance.
Also available are several different options for panniers and top boxes.
If it had both, and many do, it would have a lot more storage than the NT but it could weigh it down quite a bit.
A bigger fuel tank would be nice too but it would be easy enough to carry a 5L fuel can or bladder to increase the range (we often need that hare in OZ).
Any further thought anyone?
Macka
Recently I have been thinking seriously about a Burgy 650, not as a replacement for the NT but possibly for the Suzuki GS500F which I am now finding a bit uncomfortable.
I have been doing some research and as far as I understand it, if you replace the Primary Pulley bolt regularly there should be no CVT problems for at least 100,oookm (62K miles).
I have ridden one a few times in Japan and was very impressed except for the very heavy steering.
The B650 has many of the "features" of the NT which makes it appealing, such as storage (3 glove boxes and under-seat), weather protection and no chain maintenance.
Also available are several different options for panniers and top boxes.
If it had both, and many do, it would have a lot more storage than the NT but it could weigh it down quite a bit.
A bigger fuel tank would be nice too but it would be easy enough to carry a 5L fuel can or bladder to increase the range (we often need that hare in OZ).
Any further thought anyone?
Macka