Has the Naked bike killed the Super Sport? | Page 7 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Has the Naked bike killed the Super Sport?

I don’t mind a naked bike at highway speeds. I find the “clean” air more pleasant then the buffeting I get from some bikes with fairings/windshields.

No fairing sucks when it’s cold out though.
 
Go ride a motorcycle that has a full fairing designed in a wind tunnel, then get back to us.

A full fairing that actually makes the bike and rider more wind slippery allows the builder to gear the bike taller, that ultimately results in a motorcycle that can potentially enjoy lower fuel consumption and produce less pollution in addition to speed advantage and rider protection from the elements.
I've had 5 SS bikes and the street ones all had double bubble screens (GSXR's btw which are arguably the most street-pleasant with larger fairings to get behind). Plod along the highway 120ish km/h my helmet would buffet the same as my naked bike. That screen was great in a tuck along the back straight at Mosport or Shanny but you're not in a tuck on the 401 if you want to actually be cognizant of your surroundings.
Keep trying to push the fairing argument all you want but you're trying to compare benefits of Goldwing fairings vs a naked when this discussion is really SS fairings.
 
Have a custom speed triple for a few years now. I ended up getting a windscreen two years ago.
I've done 401, 400, 404 runs over an hour. Toured with and without.
Speeds up to 120 aren't a big issue, but 120+ is where the neck starts to feel it over prolonged period.
Just rode up to Rosseau that nice weekend we had without a windscreen, wasn't comfortable but not the end of the world.
Fairings make no difference, my old gsxr1000 felt no different than this when the windscreen is on (wind and stone-wise)
 
Fairings aren't an argument, they are a real live motorcycle thing.
Can you tuck your legs behind your fairing? If not, you don't have much of a fairing.

Do you need to lay belly flat and elbows in on the tank to get any benefit from your windshield?
Then you don't have a very good road bike fairing do you, you bought a race bike.

You guys must think they put full fairings on uber small displacement race bikes just to make them heavier and have more room for sponsor stickers.
 
Not all fairings are created equal. My old goldwing looks like the perfect design, but it's far from the best. The sheer size of the front made for terrible buffeting for the passenger, and engine heat was really bad in city traffic for the rider.
BMW makes the best fairing. Their RT design is light years ahead of anything on the market. But a lot depends on personal preference. Some riders like to look thru a windshield, others like to look over it at varying heights.
Each to his own.
 
Moto Guzzi started wind tunnel testing their motorcycles in 1954. It works.
42e8092c7595d4298b19c034449e8736.jpg

BMW started doing the same years later. It still worked.

Some of the Japanese motorcycles were streamlined without a rider.
:/ That don't work so good, it's like trying to wing walk an airplane wing.
 
Isn’t it great that not all bikes are the same! Isn’t that what we live and ride for? The important thing is there’s a style you’re willing to put your cash down on and it’s perfect for you.
 
The debate was never about the fairing at all. It was about the bike as a whole.
its not the lack of a fairing that makes an MT09 a better street bike than an R6.
The FJR Makes a better street bike than the R1 and I would argue so dose the Tracer 900GT. The R series bikes and Super Sports in general are not good street bikes and the new breed of sport touring and adventure bikes are offering up enough performance that Super Sports are not needed on the street.
That said I’m glad the still are because I love to see them.
 
Isn’t it great that not all bikes are the same! Isn’t that what we live and ride for? The important thing is there’s a style you’re willing to put your cash down on and it’s perfect for you.

And it gives us something to banter about.
My car forum that I frequent has turned into a political forum hence I don’t go there to debate anything anymore.
 
And it gives us something to banter about.
My car forum that I frequent has turned into a political forum hence I don’t go there to debate anything anymore.
Unless covid boredom takes over :)
 
Weren’t the naked bikes of the 1960s and 1970s the original supersports?

6d4d858fd3285ccf4eda5ae2a372727d.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Weren’t the naked bikes of the 1960s and 1970s the original supersports?

6d4d858fd3285ccf4eda5ae2a372727d.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They were called "Standards". Now they give them mushy suspension a high front fender and a little windshield. Tada....ADV.
But yes, they were supersports.
 
Just cuz it's called "super sport" doesn't mean it is a "super sport"
Dodge made a "sport" front wheel drive minivan

AFIK the first bike called/marketed as a "naked" was a Honda RC31 Hawk, followed by the Ducati monsters.
 
When I think Super Sport I think track focused machines.
GSX-R
R1 & 6
CBR R
Panagali
RSV4 R
ZX6 R
full fairing, clip ons made for 1 purpose. Fast

Naked or Super naked
Super Duke
Tuono
790 Duke
Monster
MT09
Sport bikes with a more comfortable ergonomics and more street-able power curve.

That may not be how they started but it’s where they are now.
Like the roots of Adventure bikes were just a standard bike with knobby tires, hand guards and a small wind screen. But that’s not what they are now. At least not the good ones.

Hell choppers started as bike that people chopped off parts to make them faster,
they evolved into anything but fast.
 
Last edited:
To your original post, almost all these bikes are "too fast for the street", even beginner friendly bikes like an r3 or ninja 400 could easily break all the limits 50 over so is that too much for the street? You say you keep it 15-30 over at all times, why ride anything bigger than a entry level then?
There's never too much if you ask me and people should buy what ever they like not what makes sense, I'd get a supersport like a gsxr 750 if the insur wasn't crazy, and the rates for mt09s were comin in just as high so I guess they're catching on
 
Last edited:
...
Hell choppers started as bike that people chopped off parts to make them faster,
they evolved into anything but fast.
Um, that would be a Bobber not a Chopper.
 
Choppers came 30 years later and were the antithesis of performance motorcycles.

Bobbers did outperform the original stock bikes.
dc5bd2e4793e3052af28a7087f777ed7.jpg
 
To your original post, almost all these bikes are "too fast for the street", even beginner friendly bikes like an r3 or ninja 400 could easily break all the limits 50 over so is that too much for the street? You say you keep it 15-30 over at all times, why ride anything bigger than a entry level then?
There's never too much if you ask me and people should buy what ever they like not what makes sense, I'd get a supersport like a gsxr 750 if the insur wasn't crazy, and the rates for mt09s were comin in just as high so I guess they're catching on

I definitely hear what your saying and I’m not disagreeing. I just find it hard to believe that any mere mortal can even come close to using the capabilities of Super Sports on the street So much that one of the more comfortable nakeds or sport touring offerings couldn’t do the job just as well.
But if that’s the way you ride then good for you that is definitely the bike for you.
If I do decide to sell my 1190 Adventure to buy the Duke that I’m lusting over. It will likely be the 790 not the 1290. I do think the 390 would be a little underwhelming.

And for the record I spent ten minutes on a 1050 Adventure R on a test ride from GP. Then trade my 1400cc Harley for my 1190cc Adventure bike.
I honestly underestimated the power of what I purchased. Yes it is overkill.
It’s ridiculously fun But it is overkill
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom