Is Suzuki a "Cheap" Brand?

jjhoneck · Sep 12, 2010

I purchased a 2008 Suzuki GSX650F earlier this summer, new from the dealer. Thus far, with 600 miles on the bike, I couldn't be happier. It's everything I could want in a smallish sport bike, and more. In fact, it's reinvigorated my love of motorcycling, after nearly 20 years of semi-dormancy.

I also own an '86 Honda GL1200 Goldwing, and in the past have owned a Kawasaki 750 and an old '66 Honda 160. I've ridden all sorts of bikes, from dirt bikes to big cruisers -- but the GSX is my first Suzuki.

The other day I was talking with my 20-year old son (who rides a Yamaha FZ600), and made a casual comment about how I love the bike, but hate the horrible seat on my Gixxer. (I'm looking for a Corbin replacment, to save my butt!) His comment was "Well, that's what you get for buying a Suzuki." His attitude, and apparently that of his friends, is that Suzuki is inferior in some way to Yamaha, Honda, and Kawaski.

I have never heard this before, although my exposure to sport cycling has been pretty limited in the last couple of decades. I have not noticed any measurable, qualitative difference between this cycle, and any of my previous cycles. (I had to replace the seat on my Goldwing, because it was so substandard.) In fact, this bike is vastly superior to anything I've ever owned, in every measurable way.

Is his opinion a common attitude nowadays? Do people look down on Suzukis for some reason? Is Suzuki considered to be a "lesser" bike, or is my kid just nuts? :huh:

charrito · Sep 12, 2010

Your kid is just nuts.

Chirpy · Sep 12, 2010

They rule club racing, and they are built to be wrenched, they are far easier to work on than my Hondas were. The paint and general fit and finish might be a little inferior to the higher priced Hondas, but all the Japanese bikes look like agricultural equipment next to Harleys or Aprilias.

I'm kinda shocked that Suzuki's have no street cred, as I said, they rule club racing, and their dominance in the last decade of US road racing is staggering.

jjhoneck · Sep 12, 2010

Chirpy said:
They rule club racing, and they are built to be wrenched, they are far easier to work on than my Hondas were. The paint and general fit and finish might be a little inferior to the higher priced Hondas, but all the Japanese bikes look like agricultural equipment next to Harleys or Aprilias.

I'm kinda shocked that Suzuki's have no street cred, as I said, they rule club racing, and their dominance in the last decade of US road racing is staggering.

So...they really DO have no "street cred"? This seems bizarre to me, but then I've seen every possible prejudice, from Ford/Chevy, to Cessna/Piper. Sometimes these things take on a life of their own, for no apparent reason.

I haven't noticed anything inferior in fit and finish on my Suzuki, quite honestly. The paint on my GSX650F is nothing short of beautiful, if I do say so myself. Every person who sees the bike remarks on how great-looking it is...

HarleyMXR · Sep 12, 2010

son is nuts's. Its just ford vs chevy. The seat on kawa and yama is no better. Good friend has the same bike as you he is on his second one because of a lady hitting his first bike both have been rock solid and its a blast to ride.

BlueStreak · Sep 12, 2010

The gixxer's are at least as fast and handle as well as anything in their classes. I think quality and reliability is equal to anything comparable.

In general, I would say that fit and finish is superior on Honda's than on the other Japanese brands, but not by a lot.

As for the seat, the seats on the last two Honda's I had sucked, and they were supposed to be long distance bikes (ST1100 & ST1300). The 1100 got an aftermarket seat, the 1300 a Spencer mod. My son's CBR600RR seat might as well be made of cheese. Come to think of it, cheese would be more comfortable. He's got a Corbin on his. Heck, people even replace Goldwing seats with aftermarket ones.

Check out the Corbin, Sargent and Russell web sites. It would appear owners of all brands want better seats.

Suzuki invented the lightweight supersport class with the GS750, and reinvented it with the GSXR. Nothing personal, but your son's an idiot.

jjhoneck · Sep 12, 2010

HarleyMXR said:
son is nuts's. Its just ford vs chevy. The seat on kawa and yama is no better. Good friend has the same bike as you he is on his second one because of a lady hitting his first bike both have been rock solid and its a blast to ride.

The thing that's so bad about this attitude is that -- if it gains traction among young people (like my son and his friends) -- it can decimate a brand. Just look at what happened to Pontiac, when young people got it in their heads that "Pontiacs suck".

Was a Pontiac really any different than a Chevy? Of course not. But the brand is now gone. Perception is reality, when it comes to sales and marketing.

jjhoneck · Sep 12, 2010

BlueStreak said:
Nothing personal, but your son's an idiot.

Hey -- I've been telling my wife that for 20 years! :lol2:

(Actually, he's a junior at the University if Iowa, on a full-boat Army ROTC scholarship. He's a hard working, sharp kid, and we're very proud of him...

)

I don't think it's him, per se. Although he's been riding with me since his feet could reach the pegs of my Goldwing, he's new to sport bikes, and is (I fear) only parroting back what he's hearing in his peer group.

That's what made me wonder if maybe this attitude was widespread, and I was the clueless one. It wouldn't be the first time... ;-)

poser · Sep 12, 2010

Suzuki's have plenty of street cred, every pants sagg'n hat turned sideways wear g-dawg wants a streached out boosa (haybusa)

and like chirpy said they rule club racing, in multilple classes, the little SV650 is a fav for many racers.
Heck if you just got to a track day Zuks noticabley out number the other makes

kurt · Sep 12, 2010

Suzuki often uses dated looking components in a cost savings attempt, but they make good stuff.

terrebandit · Sep 12, 2010

I think the fit and finish are excellent on Suzukis. I've owned four of them since 1980 and all have been great.

Gilk51 · Sep 12, 2010

I am not familiar with the GSX650 but it seems it is a hybrid between the old Katana and an older, smaller Bandit. The nickname "gixxer" is usually reserved for the GSXR super sport series which has 600, 750, 1000, and 1300 (busa). Nothing wrong with any of those and I doubt a detractor will affect the brand, after all, there are still Fords, Chevys, and Mopars today, regardless of the bashing each has gotten in the last 50 years.

jjhoneck · Sep 12, 2010

kurt said:
Suzuki often uses dated looking components in a cost savings attempt, but they make good stuff.

???

What is an example of a "dated-looking component"?

jjhoneck · Sep 12, 2010

Gilk51 said:
I am not familiar with the GSX650 but it seems it is a hybrid between the old Katana and an older, smaller Bandit. The nickname "gixxer" is usually reserved for the GSXR super sport series which has 600, 750, 1000, and 1300 (busa). Nothing wrong with any of those and I doubt a detractor will affect the brand, after all, there are still Fords, Chevys, and Mopars today, regardless of the bashing each has gotten in the last 50 years.

The GSX650F is what I call an "old man's sport bike". The geometry of the seat/handlebars is such that you're not laying over quite so far, which means my old(er) wrists are mercifully less stressed. At anything over 60 mph, the wind on your chest takes the rest of the weight off your hands, and it's very comfortable.

The engine/drivetrain is less peaky than a pure sport bike, with more mid-range grunt, making it more "roadable" in normal, every day riding. The suspension can be set up sport-bike stiff, but it can also be set to a more comfortable "sport touring" setting. The brakes are sport-bike strong, and the engine is remarkably responsive.

I personally think Suzuki got this bike as close to perfect as any mid-sized bike can be. The fact that it's an almost perfect compromise is sometimes used as a criticism of the model (read the reviews), but I really appreciate Suzuki's efforts to get it right.

Never heard the origin of the nickname "Gixxer". Everyone, from the dealer to strangers on the street, have referred to my new ride as a "Gixxer".

tshelfer · Sep 12, 2010

Meaning no offense to your son, but he and his friends probably also don't like your haircut, your pants, your music or your car. Some things are just generational.

Street cred? Who decides that? Who cares?

jjhoneck · Sep 13, 2010

tshelfer said:
Meaning no offense to your son, but he and his friends probably also don't like your haircut, your pants, your music or your car. Some things are just generational.

Street cred? Who decides that? Who cares?

"Hair". I remember that stuff! :roll:

Yeah, I don't much care what he thinks of my ride -- heck, he's 1240 miles away. I was just curious if this was something that everyone knew about Suzukis but me! :eek2:

Glad to hear it's all B.S.

TWTim · Sep 13, 2010

jjhoneck · Sep 13, 2010

Tim Kreitz said:
A decade of American Superbike racing speaks loudly in favor of Suzuki's outright superiority:

2009 AMA Superbike Champion | Mat Mladin | Suzuki | 10 wins
2008 AMA Superbike Champion | Ben Spies | Suzuki | 7 wins
2007 AMA Superbike Champion | Ben Spies | Suzuki | 7 wins
2006 AMA Superbike Champion | Ben Spies | Suzuki | 10 wins
2005 AMA Superbike Champion | Mat Mladin | Suzuki | 11 wins
2004 AMA Superbike Champion | Mat Mladin | Suzuki | 8 wins
2003 AMA Superbike Champion | Mat Mladin | Suzuki | 10 wins
2002 AMA Superbike Champion | Nicky Hayden | Honda | 9 wins
2001 AMA Superbike Champion | Mat Mladin | Suzuki | 4 wins
2000 AMA Superbike Champion | Mat Mladin | Suzuki | 4 wins
1999 AMA Superbike Champion | Mat Mladin | Suzuki | 1 win

Suzuki rules, and this is coming from one of the biggest Kawasaki loyalists on TWT.

Interesting stats. Taking this thread down a different road, so what is it about the Suzukis that has produced such remarkable dominance in racing?

TWTim · Sep 13, 2010

jjhoneck said:
Interesting stats. Taking this thread down a different road, so what is it about the Suzukis that has produced such remarkable dominance in racing?

It was sort of a "perfect storm" of factors falling into place for the company all at once. They started producing what was (is) hands-down the fastest, best performing superbike platform, just as they were incorporating an astoundingly talented, cocky young Australian rider named Mat Mladin into their race program. All that, combined with a topnotch crew chief and team, resulted in what is now fondly referred to by fans as the "Factory Yoshimura Suzuki Era".

Don't let your kid beat you down with all that anti-Suzuki, pro-Yamaha propaganda. Yamaha's race results are pretty much an embarrassment compared to Suzuki's dominance.

That said, virtually all Japanese bikes are fantastically produced these days. Walk into any showroom, close your eyes and point, and you'll have picked an excellent motorbike.

tshelfer · Sep 13, 2010

Tim is dead right. The quality and engineering of the big four Japanese builders is so good today that it really comes down to personal likes & dislikes - and possibly a few tenths of a second in the 0-to-60 game, if that's really important to you. I've turned away from Honda, but not due to quality. They just don't have a lot of modern bikes that fit my shopping list.

kojack06 · Sep 13, 2010

jjhoneck said:
Hey -- I've been telling my wife that for 20 years!

(Actually, he's a junior at the University if Iowa, on a full-boat Army ROTC scholarship. He's a hard working, sharp kid, and we're very proud of him... )

I don't think it's him, per se. Although he's been riding with me since his feet could reach the pegs of my Goldwing, he's new to sport bikes, and is (I fear) only parroting back what he's hearing in his peer group.

That's what made me wonder if maybe this attitude was widespread, and I was the clueless one. It wouldn't be the first time...

Congrats on your sons scholarship. I earned my Regular Army commission in '82 with an ROTC scholarship.

I have NEVER heard of Suzuki being called a "cheap" brand. When I think of Suzuki, I think of their 170 lb open class factory works motocrossers, Roger DeCoster, Joel Roberts, etc. I am also reminded of the famous RMs and their 2-stroke PEs. Their 2 stroke "GT" series small bore street bikes were in high demand when I was a teenager.

I ride a DR and have been EXTREMELY pleased with it, having "returned" to biking after a 30 yr break(it was that Army duty...)

gospeed81 · Sep 13, 2010

tshelfer said:
Tim is dead right. The quality and engineering of the big four Japanese builders is so good today that it really comes down to personal likes & dislikes

This...heck, some of the bikes are almost identical in technology and setup...like the Kawi EX-500 against the Suzuki GS500F...the only Suzuki I've ever come close to owning.

About 5yrs ago I was looking for my first "modern" and "sporty" bike after growing up on old UJMs, and decided a tried-and-true sporting twin would be prudent, and also efficient and comfortable enough for my 100mile commute.

I didn't buy the Suzuki because it was much NICER and more EXPENSIVE. My wife and I could barely scrape together $2500, and only because the gas savings would pay it back in my first year at A&M. There were no Suzukis in that range at the time, but a slew of the Kawasakis.

Under the skin they're nearly the same bike, but the Zuk sure was the looker of the two...and I never got over the Kawi's "Pteradactyl attack" look. The Kawi proved to be beyond reliable, easy to work on, and loads of fun, but bet your bippy I wished it was the Suzuki every time I walked up to it.

My best friend also rides a DL650...which he beat the ever living crud out of and hardly maintained. It never let him down.

I do understand the mentality, and I think it is prevalent though. I've also heard it applied to Kawasakis. I still view the K company as one that invests in a stomping motor and then attaches a bike to it, although everything I've ridden recently shows the rest of the bike is just as much up to the task.

As far as Suzukis are concerned, they've well disproven any preconceptions I've had, I've just never had the joy of owning one. I have heard they make the better forks of the bunch though, and am looking for a set to graft to the CBX.

E.Marquez · Sep 13, 2010

jjhoneck said:
So...they really DO have no "street cred"? This seems bizarre to me, but then I've seen every possible prejudice, from Ford/Chevy, to Cessna/Piper. Sometimes these things take on a life of their own, for no apparent reason.

I haven't noticed anything inferior in fit and finish on my Suzuki, quite honestly. The paint on my GSX650F is nothing short of beautiful, if I do say so myself. Every person who sees the bike remarks on how great-looking it is...

It's just a local clique and what they have for a pack mentality. Ford vs Chey in heavy duty trucks etc etc.

Just a bit of personal preference bias with some embellishment on the side.
Enjoy your bike.
Of note..... calling the GSX650F "gixxer" will get you some looks from the GSXR 600, 750, 1000 group as that is the tag they most often use.

BlueStreak · Sep 13, 2010

jjhoneck said:
The thing that's so bad about this attitude is that -- if it gains traction among young people (like my son and his friends) -- it can decimate a brand. Just look at what happened to Pontiac, when young people got it in their heads that "Pontiacs suck".

Was a Pontiac really any different than a Chevy? Of course not. But the brand is now gone. Perception is reality, when it comes to sales and marketing.

The reasons for Pontiac's demise are far more complex than young people not liking Pontiac, which I'm not sure is true anyway.

Pontiac, in the US, consistently outsold Buick in the U.S. So why did Buick survive and Pontiac die? Largely for two reasons: Pontiac was having a difficult time differentiating itself from Chevy. As you say, not "really any different than a Chevy" (excepting the G8), but more expensive. That makes it a tough sell. Pontiac traded on a performance image in an era where most buyers see cars as appliances. The typical new car buyer isn't a young person; they mostly buy used cars. Middle aged buyers who wanted more luxury when to Buick, or Lexus or Acura. Middle aged buyers who wanted basic transportation when to Chevy, or Toyota or Honda.

So why did Buick survive if it's sales were even worse? One word: China. Buick is THE leading American brand in a country with a population of more than 1 Billion. Would you kill it?

bronco78 said:
Of note..... calling the GSX650F "gixxer" will get you some looks from the GSXR 600, 750, 1000 group as that is the tag they most often use.

True dat. The 650 would properly be called a "gixxef" if anything, as it lacks that all-important letter "R" at the end of the model name.

tshelfer · Sep 13, 2010

It's a fact - our kids are heavily influenced by their peer groups, and subjective opinions become absolutes. Actually, we do the same thing. Isn't that why we oldsters get on forums like this and ask questions that really have no absolute answers?

Ride what works for you and be glad the industry, the government, and your wife allow you to have a choice.