– Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

2018 Suzuki GSX-S750: MD First Ride

When Suzuki first introduced the GSX-S750 to the U.S. market back in 2015, we attended the press launch in Austin, Texas expecting an exciting ride behind local resident Kevin Schwantz. Instead, torrential rain prevented us from fully evaluating the bike. That original model entered a tough market against other reasonably priced alternatives. We are thinking specifically of Yamaha’s FZ-09.

Although we didn’t do a long-term evaluation of the earlier model, it received a lukewarm reception from the press, in general. To Suzuki’s credit, they went right back to work on improving the bike. The result is the 2018 GSX-S750 that we rode for the first time yesterday.

The fuel-injected 749 cc inline-four is derived from a 2005 GSX-R750 supersport model. For 2018, Suzuki worked hard to increase performance and smoothness from this engine. The new model features crankcase ventilation holes to reduce pumping losses … resulting in increased power and improved fuel economy, according to Suzuki.

The air box features larger capacity, as well, to better feed the more potent engine, and a newly designed exhaust system, with a large catalyzer, complies with emission standards while still allowing good flow. Note that the catalyzer design allows installation of an aftermarket, legal slip-on system (such as one from Suzuki partner Yoshimura).

Fuel injection mapping was refined to provide a smoother, more linear throttle response. The new bike also incorporates traction control with four rider-selectable positions including 1, 2 and 3 (1 being least intrusive and 3 being a low traction/rain setting) and Off. A handlebar switch allows the rider to easily adjust the TC settings (even while riding – with the throttle closed).

The front brake calipers get a big upgrade to Nissin four-piston monobloc, radial-mount units. Also new are the front waive-style 310 mm discs.

The unique steel frame combines a twin spar design with “tubular girder” reinforcements, and holds revised suspension … most notably a 41 mm inverted KYB fork (with the damping in a single leg) that is adjustable for spring preload. The single rear shock is also adjustable for preload, and is held by a new swingarm that is much more attractive than the prior model’s boxed unit. Suzuki claims a curb weight of 465 pounds (with the 4.2 gallon gas tank full).

Brand new 10-spoke aluminum wheels are wrapped with Bridgestone S21 tires designed to Suzuki’s OEM spec.

Suzuki has also incorporated its Easy-start feature (tap the start button and the starter runs until the engine fires) and low-rpm assist (helps prevent stalling when pulling away from a stop).

New styling this year offers a more aggressive look influenced by the big sibling, the GSX-S1000. Included are a new headlight nacelle and under-cowl. The tail light is an LED.

A revised instrument panel is loaded with information, including gear position, fuel economy and range. The display intensity is adjustable by the rider, and we found it very legible during our brief test. New details abound, including a large-diameter, matte black tapered handlebar, as well as a new black finish on the aluminum hand and foot controls.

We brought one of the new GSX-S750 machines back to our office for further testing, and only had a brief opportunity to ride the bike yesterday (less than 80 miles). A few things stood out, however.

The bike is a little less upright than some of the competition when it comes to ergonomics, with a good lean forward to the handlebars. Leg room seemed reasonable for the 5’11” frame of our rider. We need more time on the bike to judge seat comfort.

The pace of our test ride was not very brisk, so we can’t really comment at this point on how well this bike rips on top, but Suzuki claims an increase in peak horsepower this year to 112.6 at 10,500 rpm (up from 104.6 hp at 10,000 rpm), so we expect a healthy high-rpm rush. Trust us, this will be one of the first things we investigate with our test unit.

The mid-displacement engine did pull well at street rpm levels, however, and revised fuel injection mapping seems dead on … very smooth transition from closed to open throttle.

The GSX-S750 has very neutral handling, including excellent stability and easy changes of direction. The bike seems to hold a line well mid-corner, and the suspension settings did not have a problem with any of the bumps encountered on our short street ride, i.e., the stock damping seemed about right on a bike that combines comfort and sport.

Not surprisingly, Suzuki’s 6-speed transmission shifted easily and positively, and clutch engagement was progressive when pulling away from a stop. We will test the bike at freeway speeds and report back regarding 6th gear rpm levels on the highway.

We didn’t really tax the new radial-mount front brakes, so we will also report back on this after further testing. We did not note any braking issues, however.

So the 2018 GSX-S750 is practically a new bike, with significantly revised engine, chassis, suspension, wheels and brakes. Our first impression is that all of these changes have created a much improved motorcycle that could be an excellent all-around bike for riders at every skill level.

The 2018 Suzuki GSX-S750 is already in U.S. dealerships priced at $8,299 for the standard model (without ABS), which is available in two colors, Pearl Mira Red and Metallic Triton Blue/Glass Sparkle Black (both pictured). Also new this year is a blacked-out GSX-S750Z, which adds ABS brakes and Metallic Matte Black bodywork, as well as blacked-out exhaust and other components (MSRP of $8,899). Take a look at Suzuki’s web site for additional details and specifications.


See more of MD’s great photography:



  1. Dan says:

    I wish they wouldn’t put the pegs in such high cramped positions on these standard bikes. It was even a problem with my Bandit1200S. My FJ-09 is one of the few comfortable standards in this respect.

  2. xLaYN says:

    Holy ovens batman… Dirck riding half gear on 100+ degrees…

    Yay, the nice helmet again…

    Kudos to Mr. Enrico, that photo on the top is perfect!

  3. Grover says:

    I had a Suzuki GS750EZ back in the day and find the GSX-S750 to be a modern version of my old bike. Sit-up seating, decent handling and good power for a 750 (in its day). The new version would blow my old bike away in every performance category except comfort. The old bike had a generously proportioned flat seat that I could sit on for hours and made a pretty good touring mount. Suzuki is on the right track with this mid-sized bike and would make a great all around bike, especially for the price.

    • Sentinel says:

      “except comfort. The old bike had a generously proportioned flat seat that I could sit on for hours and made a pretty good touring mount.”

      If they can bring that back and drop some weight I’d buy one, but until then, I’ll have to pass.

      • Selecter says:

        You ride a Gladius, eh? 445 lbs. wet, this bike is a whopping 20 lbs. more. I think the tail rack and Givi case on my Super Tenere are heavier than the weight differential between this bike and what you ride.

        The constant deliberation regarding bike weight on these feeds (here, MO, etc.) boggles my mind. It’s not *that* big a deal. I’ve had every bit as much fun on my fat, 600-lb. Super Tenere and GPz1100 as I had on my 300-lb. WR250 or 420-lb. ZX-6R. It’s as stupid as the days of splitting 2 or 3 HP hairs during the supersport wars 10+ years ago.

        I guess I can only speak for myself, but the bike’s weight is one of the *least* reliable indicators to me of either how much fun or how much “work” a bike is to ride. I’m riding the godforsaken things, not bench-pressing (or bench-racing) them.

        • Sentinel says:

          To each there own, but please speak for yourself. 445 lbs. is the highest I will go myself. I will tell you that going from the SFV650 to the GSX-S750, the center of mass is much different, and the GSX-S750 feeling like every bit of that added weight is up high in comparison. So no, you may like it, but others don’t, me being one of them. It’s not a matter of if you can have “fun” on it in-spite of the added weight or not, but a matter of manageability, and at least being within the ballpark of the competition, leaving no reason for a customer to choose their product over it. Just watch how much this bike “doesn’t” sell like the others, without overstock being deeply discounted to move. Suzuki can’t seem to get anything right to save their own life these days, but the new version of the SV650 is pretty good, but still has some fails. For someone like myself, looking at the new SV650 vs the GSX-S750, or the Yamaha FZ-07, I, as the majority of people in the market have and still are, will go for the FZ-07 instead. But hey, if you are actually considering one of these bikes, and you love the GSX-750 more than any other, then by all means, go buy one and have fun.

          • mickey says:

            You wouldn’t go 446?

          • Dave says:

            This bike weighs more than a SV560 or FZ07 partly because it’s a completely different class of motorcycle. 2x more cylinders, 40+ more hp, higher quality brakes & suspension, etc.

            465lb is very reasonable for a bike in this class & price. To get much lighter would drive it’s price up into the 5-digit range, ala’ Ducati and MV.

            The real challengers for this bike are the FZ09 (lighter) and the Kawasaki Z900 (same weight, more power).

          • mickey says:

            this bike would seem like a supermoto next to my ST1300 (about 720 pounds) and my CB 1100 (575 pounds) lol

  4. Roadrash1 says:

    I like my 2013 FZ8 better. But, I see many similarities.
    My FZ has 25,000 miles on it now, and feels like it’s still breaking-in.

  5. Gary says:

    At long last, a headlight assembly that does not look like an afterthought or a sagging mammary gland. Nice looking bike. I still would like some sort of bikini fairing, maybe as an accessory.

  6. PN says:

    I like it a lot, too. I never could love Yamaha’s FZ-09, nor the Kawasaki Z900, nor the Honda CB650F either. The GSX-S1000 is more bike than I need as well. But I’ve always liked 750s. I’m going to give this bike real consideration.

  7. skortch says:

    I like it a lot. The way I look at it is that it weighs about the same as one of my favorite bikes from my past (original GPz550) but has twice the horsepower. There is a vast aftermarket of GSXR go-fast bits that could add a bit more oomph and the riding position is how I like it, with a mild forward lean and weight balanced between seat, pegs, and bars. I’d probably add a bigger screen, though I appreciate that the front fairing isn’t resting on the fender like so many bikes these days.

    Too bad the ABS version is only available in black. I’d take the blue or red any day.

    • Provologna says:

      IMO any reasonable dealer shall be more than happy to swap body parts for no or minimal fee, to get you the bike you want. Certainly it won’t hurt to ask.

    • cw says:

      Though based on, the orginal K5 and this motor have significant differences that might cause some compatibility issues with the old go-fast parts.

      I believe Holeshot is working on some for the 750, though.

  8. Sentinel says:

    The bike is still too heavy, and too top-heavy feeling along with that. The seating position puts you leaned over too far forward to really be comfortable. At least a new handle bar can cure the ergonomic issue, but it’s going to be up to Suzuki to get the weight down anywhere near the competition. I’ll have to say pass on this one.

    • Mgood3 says:

      Ah, I would not count on that handlebar rise if I were you. Suzuki has a habit of building zero slack into its handlebar / cabling configurations. I tried for over a year to raise the bar is on my 05 650SV. Couldn’t do it without a huge outlay of $$.

      • Sentinel says:

        That’s a real bummer. I have an SFV (Gladius) that I absolutely love. The bars are borderline for me, but have been comfortable enough. I haven’t gotten to ride since I was hit and run over last year, but I plan on getting back to it ASAP. Now that I have some lifelong injuries, what was acceptable as far ergonomics are concerned before have likely changed. Only time will tell.

    • joe b says:

      You rode one, tell us about it.

  9. Neil says:

    ABS has been proven to save people from crashing which lowers insurance rates. So it’s a good thing. I like the bike. But the one thing on my mind is how easy The KAW Z900 clutch is to pull. I am in traffic all the time. That being said, the GSXS750 motor is really nice and I think people should be riding these instead of race replicas. I’d be happy with lower pegs myself, but these are ok. I also like my hands low if my feet are high. It makes sense. I like the GSXS1000 seat better. It’s more substantial. THAT bike was a great test ride. I like torque on the street vs horsepower. But this gets my vote instead of race bikes. Perfect to just enjoy riding.

  10. Norm G. says:

    re: “We didn’t really tax the new radial-mount front brakes”

    bummer, as these pansy modern racers aren’t much for celebration STOPPIES any more. iirc i think CEII was the last of his kind…? not sure what those rambunctious kids are doing down in M2/M3.

  11. allworld says:

    This seems to be good bike at a good price. I would like to see a GSX S750F variant similar to the S1000F. If Suzuki would offer accessories like side bags, a center stand… heated grips.. it would make a great bike for one up touring, as well as a daily rider.

    • cw says:


      In addition, I’d like to see Suzuki follow Kawa’s lead from the Versys and make an easily adjustable/removable windscreen so you can commute/tour and easily switch modes to fun/cruising.

  12. bmbktmracer says:

    For me, it’s not modern vs retro styling. It’s just good styling. People aren’t buying new Mustangs because they look similar to old Mustangs. They buy them because they just plain look good.

    • MGNorge says:

      I think there’s a heritage thing there too. All the muscle cars pay heed to their earlier days.

      • Dave says:

        I think the “heritage” aspect was an accident. For a long time, American sports car design was so bad, that young people wanted old cars. The US auto industry just couldn’t come up with anything appealing.

        • cw says:

          NOW it doesn’t look so much like a 60’s/70s Mustang, but the design of the orginal re-introduced Mustang depended heavily on invoking the classic designs.

          I think the new ones look too much like they are trying to by Mitsubishi EVOs from 6 years ago.

  13. viktor92 says:

    The trend continues, naked bikes are uglier every year…

    • Brian says:

      The trend continues: 75% of comments on this site are the motorcycling equivalent of “Get off my lawn!”

      • Mgood3 says:

        Someday you’re going to have a lawn of your own. I’m going to have a good laugh. If I am still around ha ha

  14. Jim W says:

    Not a bad looking bike (excluding the high tail). Nice job in at least partially hiding the udder!

  15. Linus says:

    Just like the gsx-s1000, this is a disaster for Suzuki. And just like the previous iteration it won’t sell. Why? Because it sits in no man’s land. It’s too sportish wannabe to be practical (cramped, ugly, forward lean) and too bland and heavy to be taken seriously by the sports rider, who will look down his nose at anyone on a gsx-s750. There is no reason to buy this over the SV-650, not to mention the Yamaha fz-07 and fz-09. A 12 yo bike wearing cheapo new clothes.. Whoever has $9k to spend better buy a 2015 gsx-r750.

    • CB says:

      Truth spoken here…

    • 10m3guy says:

      I just bought a new Kawi Z900 but was seriously considering this bike as well. I like the looks of it. There was very little price difference and the Z just has lots more torque, a slipper clutch, and is actually 4 or 5 lbs lighter so I went with the Kawasaki. I am glad I did. It is a fantastic machine. But this Suzuki looks good to me too. Hopefully it will sell. As far as the SV650 comment, this bike will smoke the SV in every way. Only reason to buy the SV is purchase price and insurance.

      • linus says:

        And any GSX-R will smoke this GSX-S in every way… Riders either buy cheap, practical, well built, or buy high end. This is neither and won’t find many buyers. The Z900 falls in the same bucket. Give it three, four years and you’ll buy these for $3000K with very low miles. They’re for that type of ‘rider’.

        • 10m3guy says:

          I disagree. You didn’t mention the gsx-r, you mentioned the SV650. You can’t compare these naked bikes to a gsx-r. These bikes (Z900, gsxs, FZ, etc) are all cheap, practical, and well built. Cruisers are not selling at all and sport bikes are selling very poorly. Naked bikes are selling the best of all types. The problem with the gsx-s750 is the Z900 and FZ09. See Brian’s comment below.

    • Brian says:

      Forward lean? Maybe if you’ve only ever ridden a Goldwing, cruiser, or ’70s UJM.

      No reason to purchase over SV/FZ-07? Only if you wouldn’t notice 40 missing horsepower.

      As for “no man’s land”…that seems to be the fastest-growing segment of the sport battlefield lately. Super Duke, S1000R, Z900, Tuono, Monster 1200, Speed Triple, Street Triple, FZ-10, FZ-09, this…

      • 10m3guy says:

        I agree with Brian. Well said.

      • Sentinel says:

        Actually, it puts you leaning forward further than the SV650, and noticeably so. Where I find the SV650 to be about perfect, I found the lean on the GSX-S750 to feel like it would be too much for riding any distance beyond around town before I’d have some issues. If this bike were lighter, and would accept some slightly higher and further back bars, I’d consider it as my next bike, but as is, I’ll stick with my SV650. I think Suzuki would have been better off coming out with a new 800-1000cc SV than any of these new GSX-S models.

        • DucDynasty says:

          Sentinel, I agree. As an 08′ SV-650 owner (not my only bike), I have yet to find a replacement that would inspire a trade. Plus, I retain my lovely round headlight.

    • Provologna says:

      “…this is a disaster for Suzuki…?” Which definition of “disaster?” Hyperbole, much?

    • Stuki Moi says:

      This thing looks to have the perfect amount of forward lean for my taste. More like the S1000R and Tuono; than it’s 1000 sibling, the FZ10, Superduke and SV650. Much better for both knees and lower back than those more upright guys. The only time bolt upright makes sense to me, is on steep, twisty downhills.

    • cw says:

      Actually, it’s significant update to an 8/9 year old design (the original GSR was introduced as a ’10, no?).

      I’m suspicious that all those leftover ’15s & ’16s might end up doing the ’18 a favor in addition to the more definitively positive press this time around. The YooToobers are vlogging about the bike and liking it as an alternative to the FZ/MT.

      The are those, believe it or not, who are not partial to the more rambunctious nature and quirky styling of the FZs.

      When the SV came out, I assumed it would spell the end of the GSR/GSX-s750. Now I think the SV may be the one no longer produced (at least not imported to the US).

  16. JPJ says:

    Great to see Suzuki keep with this model and displacement. The updates should help sales. Suzuki builds great road going street bikes, naked and supersport models.

  17. Doc says:

    Not a big fan of Suzuki, but I have to give them credit. I like the idea of keeping the GSXR750 in the lineup without a racing class to support it and bringing out a “standard” 750. Always thought bikes in the 750-900 class were the perfect size. Good job Suzuki.

  18. beasty says:

    Pretty good looking bike in the red and the black. I suspect, judging by the pics here, that it won’t work for me ergonomically. I like the Kaw Z900 better.

  19. Jdilpkle says:


    • Jdilpkle says:

      I just noticed the blacked out muffler on the dark model – that’s pretty cool.

      • linus says:

        So the blacked out muffler turned the yawn in “I’ll buy one now” excitement?

  20. Gary says:

    I like the overall styling. Suzuki has gotten away from the beaked look that they’ve been turning out. I’m usually a fan of the lower “chin” spoiler/fairing, but not on this bike as it seems to put an emphasis on some lines on the tank that don’t need further emphasis.

    I’m excited that the manufacturers are putting so much effort into the 650-900 class bikes, and this one is right sized. I look forward to further riding impressions. 113hp from a mid-sized “standard” bike! These are the good old days.

    • Stuki Moi says:

      This is one bike I’ve been excited about as well. At least on paper, it’s got a 600’s top end, with a meatier mid and bottom. With a 600’s short stroke/crank throw for less gyro effect/more fluidity through s-bends. And nice ergos. Not too upright, not too racy. And it’s bigger and roomier than the 650 twins.

  21. ABQ says:

    Sorry, but I just can’t lift my leg over the high tail on most sport bikes. And, the pegs are positioned like a cramped up jockey in a fetal position. No.
    I do like the cut tails on Diavels and the mid-forward position for pegs.

    • Fred says:

      ABQ, The SV650 will fit you fine then. Another review site I just saw said Suzuki designed it for 5’3″ tall rider. The Tester was 6’3″and said he leapt over it, but he was very folded up around the knee’s, but fitted just, like a horse jockey, he remarked.

    • peter h says:

      So you like cruisers and this isn’t a cruiser. News at 11.

  22. Trent says:

    A nice bike, with upgraded brakes and suspension compared to previous standards. 4.2 gallon tank seems a bit small, still. Does it have a slipper clutch?

    • sbashir says:

      No slipper clutch.

      • Stuki Moi says:

        For what it’s worth, the very short stroke 2005 GSX-R750 motor it uses (essentially a bored 600), never really needed it. Or, at least, was less hampered by the lack of it, than virtually any big bike out there.

        • Dave says:

          Spec sheet feature… Almost nobody rides hard enough on the street to make use of one, especially not on these sport standards.

  23. austin zzr 1200 says:

    So, its either warmed-over 12-yo models with good fueling from Suzuki vs modern technology with crappy fueling and ugly-stick styling from Yamaha vs even uglier Kawasaki…I’m thinking I’ll pass on this whole segment.

    • Josh B. says:

      You forgot Triumph. Expensive would be your complaint for them, though. That said, Yamaha fixed the fueling for 2017 models.

    • linus says:

      The Suzs have the same crappy fueling issues .. There’s virtually no going around them because of emissions requirements and how manufacturers deal with them. How Triumph does it is a mystery.. They either cheat VW style or .. they’re way, way smarter..

      • bmidd says:

        The Triumph models cost more because they spend the time to get the fueling correct. No mystery, just like the crap suspension they put on every Yamaha.

        • Dave says:

          It’s much more likely that they cost more because they’re made in smaller batches, in a more expensive native market.

    • cw says:


      this is not a “warmed over 12 yr old model”.

      this is not a GSX-r750. At all. The connection stops at the brand and the motor (which also isn’t the same – and the differences aren’t just cosmetic).

      Why not just ride it?

      • austin zzr 1200 says:

        ‘Why not just ride it?’
        Because it is too heavy. It is too heavy because its a warmed over 12 yr old model.

        • cw says:

          Again, not a warmed over 12 year old model.

          And you don’t know what it is, because you won’t get on it.

          Enjoy your bench racing.

  24. joe b says:

    I wish they would take this bike, and make a retro looking version, in the style of the original first year Katana. I would buy one. One of the bikes I own is a 2012 Honda CB1000R, in flat black.

    • bmidd says:

      You would then be the proud owner of #1 of 1 bike sold.

    • Neil says:

      The first Katana was hideous. Wanting one is just wanting a time machine back to high school, back to the future. Marty McFly.

      • Bud says:

        I thought I was the only one who hated the GS1000 Katana. Thank you for validating my contempt.

      • joe b says:

        I was out of high school when the Kat came out, by ten years, kid. So many negative comments here, about the new GSXS hating this, hating that, “My bike” is better, blah blah, I still would like to see a new version of the Kat, with all the running gear of the new GSXS, with styling cues of the old Kat. I don’t need to “want a time machine”, I have them, CX500TC, VF750S, GS1100E, RE5, GT750, T500, X6, TA250, I would explain it to you, but you wouldn’t understand, be wasting my time. Neil, you are first and only person who thinks the first year Kat was “hideous”. What beautiful machine is parked in your garage?

        • Scott says:

          Aww, come on now, Joe. There are plenty of people who didn’t – and still don’t – like the Katana. We just didn’t have social media and the internet back then, so you didn’t have to hear from every single one of them…

          • Jeremy in TX says:

            Haha. So true. Otherwise he would have heard from me. Ugly bike.

          • joe b says:

            Oh, I know. When the Kat first came out, there were those that shook their heads and walked away. Never heard anyone call them “hideous”, Curious what it is you guys ride? Cue Neils reply, …crickets.

          • Jeremy in TX says:

            Joe, not sure what Neil’s choice of ride has to do with anything? How would that somehow make the Katana not ugly?

            (I tease a bit in truth. I do not truly consider it to be an ugly bike, but I do consider the design dated. I regard square headlights in the same way many here regard new-aged tail sections.)

      • KenLee says:

        Real Kat is “hideous” for you, “gorgeous” for me, but “distinctive” for everyone, and “remarkable” for those who knows anything about motorcycle history. I got model 1100 SD from 1983 and belive me: it’s not only a time machine. Understanding its behaviour I’m able to follow most of real life street riders on modern bikes on twisty roads. 140 mph is also enoug for straights- in real life. I would also considered new version. SUZUKI is also thinking about it sometimes- see Stratosphere concept.

      • todd says:

        I always liked the first Katanas, especially the fairing and choke switch. Of course I have a K75S and always liked the R65LS and many other bikes From Target Design like the Robotech Cyclone…

        • Tim C says:

          Agreed. The first ones were polarizing but kind of cool, as opposed to current design trends which are polarizing but not cool.

      • Tim C says:

        The swoopy Hurricane-look Katanas were a lot worse

  25. Tom R says:

    “Standard” model offered with no ABS. Are there really people still out there who think it is worth the relatively puny savings to buy a motorcycle without ABS brakes?

    • Dave says:

      Apparently the US is only coming around to the idea. The conversation used to be, “this bike gets ABS in Europe, why not here?”. Part of the answer is that most of the Euorpean pavement I have experienced in the wet is so slick, it is dangerous to try to run on, let alone ride a motorcycle.

    • dubbltap says:

      Never had a bike w/ ABS……and never had a accident that abs would have prevented!
      If I had to buy the matte black version to get ABS, then I would surely save the money and not look back.

      • Provologna says:

        This guy I know has made good money playing Russian roulette for a few nights, with no problems. He says he does not know what all the fuss is about, adding that it’s a great side job for extra money.

        • beasty says:

          Stop please. There are thousands upon thousands of bikes out there without ABS. They’re still upright and unscathed and statistically will probably remain so.

          • Tom R says:

            And those pesky seat/shoulder belts in cars. Statistically unnecessary, until you need them.

          • Dave says:

            There is a disconnect between the thousands of people who ride and the millions who don’t.

            “Never had a bike w/ ABS……and never had a accident that abs would have prevented!”

            This comment neatly summarizes why ABS hasn’t been a feature demanded by the existing US motorcycle user base.

            It’s absence is probably a smaller part of the reason that user base is stagnant or shrinking.

            New riders aren’t coming at least in part because they think motorcycling is dangerous. That notion is reinforced when they see that features they have perceived as standard for decades, are absent on new bikes.

          • Don says:

            “New riders aren’t coming at least in part because they think motorcycling is dangerous.” – Wow, this old rider started riding motorcycles because they seemed dangerous. I’m sorry to see this change in people. Maybe we should require an air bag on every bike. That should bring the new riders in droves!

          • Dave says:

            Ride naked with half flat tires and fuel leaks if that’s your thing, but every year these motorcycle makes continue to disappoint you with their offering, know that it’s because our market is shrinking because motorcycles are quickly becoming toys for old guys.

            Remember how cool being old seemed back when you were young?

          • todd says:

            I think the motorcycle market is shrinking because bikes are getting bigger and faster and only appeal to seasoned riders. What is getting new riders is old, used little Hondas and trail bikes. The motorcycle industry saw its largest growth back when it was perfectly acceptable to buy and ride a 90cc bike. Now people expect at least 100 hp in a bike so manufacturers need to start putting launch control and traction control and massive brakes that now require ABS. While all the while, what new riders want is a simple, unintimidating small light bike to learn and have fun on. Kinda like the Gromm or a S90.

        • dubbltap says:

          Why is it that some people think they know what is best for other people? With 300,000+ miles over 35 years of riding on and off-road, 6 years of roadracing and track days, I think I can make up my own mind and make a decision on what works for me.
          Yes, I’ve had 2 accidents, one on the track and one on the road(rear-ended). Again, neither would have been prevented by abs. Should a new rider get a abs equipped bike….??
          Probably a good idea.

    • todd says:

      Yep, I could care less if my bike had ABS or not. I don’t seriously think about safety when considering a motorcycle purchase. If I worried about safety I’d be better off curled up in the fetal position in my bed all day than to ride a motorcycle. Life is full of risks, get used to it.

      • Tom R says:

        Is a helmet OK?

        • linus says:

          Since his most recent crash he can’t remember…

        • todd says:

          Why not airbags on our bikes or maybe just make it one big hamster ball. Some things, like helmets and seat belts (only in vehicles that came with them) are mandatory and other safety items do reduce injury, that’s a fact. However, I’m not going to rely on safety items to keep me safe. You can die with a helmet on, you can crash with ABS. Nothing in life is known and you can never prepare for everything.

      • Brian says:

        Yeah, man. I don’t pay extra for stuff like seatbelts and airbags and crumple zones. Way I see it, if I can’t avoid the accident, I don’t deserve to live. Or I at least deserve to suffer more.

wordscape cheatgun mayhem 2 unblocked games