Yamaha XVS250 and Suzuki VL250

If there has been one reassuring constant for Yamaha since 1989, it's been the continued domination of the marque's kick-butt little cruiser, the XV250 Virago, at or near the pointy end of the Australian sales charts. And we're not just talking about a landslide in the entry-level segment of the market, but the audacity to take on the big boys in the overall sales figures. Sure, it's had a few threats along the way, with machines like Kawasaki's now-discontinued EL250 in-line twin and Honda's VT250 donning the trunks for a tilt at the XV250 crown - without any real long-lasting success mind you. But, irrespective of which bike has or continues to win the entry-level battle, one thing is patently clear - low-slung cruisers are a far more user-friendly proposition than old, clapped-out 250cc roadbikes and chook-chasers, the type of which should be found in the Saturday newspaper under an "old faithful" sub-head.

Probably the biggest surprise during the upsurge in interest of 250cc cruisers - particularly ones of the V-twin mould - has been hitherto the absence of Suzuki as a serious campaigner, considering that market saturation has seemingly been a catchcry of the marque in recent years.

Sure, over time we've seen 'conventional' steeds like the GF, GN, GS, GSF and GSX in single and twin-cylinder moulds, but never a V-twin - until now. Enter the VL250 Intruder as Suzuki's attempt at capturing a piece of the lucrative entry-level action. The 65-degree V-twin - the baby of the three-bike Intruder fleet that also includes 800 and 1500cc incarnations - represents a totally new model, and one that's seemingly captured the ethos of the market first time out.

Then again, it would have to, as it's up against the Yamaha - but not the XV250 Virago anymore, which has been superseded by the XVS250 V-Star, itself a 'baby' version of larger capacity siblings. Really, besides the addition of the S to the prefix for the 2001 model year, the changes between the old and new are minor, reflecting just what a stalwart the long-stroke XV has been for Yamaha.

So, that sets up a battle between the veteran campaigner and the new boy on the block - and it's one that will involve a switch of my thoughts back to novice mode. Now to the task at hand.

SUPERB PACKAGES
After a couple of weeks utilising the 250s in all manner of environments - city scrambling, some scratching through the mountains and freeway blasting - there's no denying that these bikes have got 'what it takes'. Comparatively-speaking that is, but if user-friendliness, comfy and low seating, light and easy brakes, uncluttered controls and unintimidating power delivery fall under your motorcycling prerequisites, then most of the job is done. Everything is designed with ease-of-use in mind. And much more than being pale imitations of their larger siblings, these bikes are superb packages in their own right - a must-see (or ride) option for any learner rider.

First impressions reveal the VL's seating position to be far more neutral that the XVS's, primarily as a function of the positioning of the footrests and handlebars. That's because the XVS's forward-mounted footrests are slightly higher, and coupled with the higher 'bars, consigns the pilot to a more traditional 'chopper' pose. That in turn makes the VL feel more contemporary, which does beli its custom-type styling.

That's not to say that the XVS is uncomfortable, but if there's going to be a hint of back strain, there's got to be a safety net provided by the seat. The XVS's wide seat does come to the party here, although the VL's has a more pronounced rise at the rear, which translates to a bit more support. But seats, like styling, are subjective, so in the words of Forrest Gump: "That's all I'm going to say about that."

I can say though that both bikes have the same claimed seat height of 685mm - in the XVS's case it's just a simple carry-over from the Virago days. The seats are very wide and plush, providing ample support that unfortunately the pillions don't get - that's unless intimacy is on the cards with the offsider or you're carting around a young child (or small furry animal!). Either way, the poor buggers sit high compared to the rider, so at least they can enjoy the feeling of cumulonimbus clouds in their hair.

GRINDING AWAY
Dry claimed weights for the steeds are 139kg for the XVS and 143kg for the VL. Really just superfluous numbers (with a combination of low seat heights and low centres of gravity, 200kg would still feel light), as the more important element in the handling equation is cornering clearance. Yes, I know that XVS/VL-type riders will probably not be too interested in the vagaries of ground clearance, but it's still reassuring to know that a fair clip can be set before the pegs start the grinding onslaught.

Both machines, with preload pumped right out, managed to hit the deck at about the same angle, with either machine failing to out-corner the other - although it's extremely hard to over-corner or over-indulge in anything on these bikes.

A word or warning - don't wear motocross boots on either of the bikes and expect to get out of the experience without a twisted ankle. I tried it on my way home after an 11.00pm deadline on the VL, and soon found out that ground clearance doesn't extend to allowing a tolerance for bulky boots. As to why I was wearing the motocross regalia on an entry-level bike, I'd prefer to keep that close to my chest.

With a rangy 1520mm wheelbase and kicked-out 31.7-degree rake, the VL certainly doesn't offer any frights for the uninitiated, and that also holds for the similarly docile XVS (1490mm).

Both bikes do bottom-out with pillions on hand, - that's not to say that the rear twin-shock suspension units are not compliat, but there's only so much fat you can wring out of a sausage. It's a limitation that you learn to cope with - just as you can make full use of the comparative advantages of both bikes.

With a little more initial bite and power, the VL offers a more refined braking package than the XVS - highly commendable considering that it's a single-piston set-up against a twin-piston job. On the rear the VL's domination continues with a drum that's just got a little more grunt - as much as a drum will allow. As for the XVS's rear brake pedal, it's H-U-G-E. Darrell Eastlake would be in heaven.

UNBREAKABLE DONKS
Both of the bikes are air-cooled, SOHC V-twins, with the XVS a 60-degree V configuration as opposed to the VL's 65-degree. Oh, and both are also unbreakable.

The tractable XVS, with its long-stroke 49mm x 66mm powerplant, gets moving from ground zero with real definition - whether in the city or on the open stuff. The five-speed gearbox is well matched to the engine, and also allows you to rev the beasty if the mood takes you - and a lot of the time it does, especially if you have come straight off a big-bore sportsbike.

Yamaha, like Suzuki, makes no performance claims, but the XV250 (which has the same engine as the XVS250) which AMCN tested wayback in Vol 44 No 6 - yes that long ago! - boasted figures of 18ps and 2.1kg-m of torque at 6000rpm. The XVS will pull from as low as 40kmh in top gear, but also motor well past 100kmh in fourth gear, before the climb begins to its 135kmh terminal speed.

The pearl black-only VL250, with its shorter stroke 52.0mm x 58.5mm engine, feels freer throughout the rev range - when it's revved hard that is. But when you ease it back a little, the bullocking XVS250 appears to have its measure. On that premise, the XVS's powerplant may just be the better proposition for city living with it's impressive midrange torque.

One thing's certain - there's no chance of being caught unawares and breaking the speed limit on these buggers. On the other hand, they are more than powerful enough to mesh in with the traffic - and help a new rider out of any tight spot.

Starting wasn't an issue on both with the assistance of the handlebar-mounted chokes - or without them on some mild mornings. However, they did take a while to warm up, and there were a number of stalling episodes after I turned off the chokes prematurely.

Fuel consumption during the AMCN sojourn was 18km/lt for both the XVS and VL, although the latter is going to eat the more kilometres with its 12lt tank as opposed to 9lt for the XVS.

PRACTICALITY ABOUNDS
As to be expected, there are some excellent touches on the bikes, including spoked wheels and chromed rear shocks, air-cleaner covers exhausts, blinkers and lights - interspersed with some smattering of plastic, such as the surrounds on the respective speedometers.

The fuel taps are both mounted just beneath the tank for easy access - on the lefthand side, where they should be. Speaking of left, that is where the ignition for the VL is domiciled, but way down near the base of the engine, which requires some slick body contortions to get to. That means there's a separate key to lock the steering - unlike the XVS, which is an all-in-one job at the top of the steering-head.

A lot simpler - and one less hassle for a learner to concern themselves with.

Both of the mirrors are excellent, although the lower-mounted VL jiggers offered a little more vision for me - and they are heaps easier to adjust than the XVS's.

Then there are the other nice touches to sprout on about, including the 5lt storage compartment under the seat on the VL, the easy access to the tools and battery on the XVS, and the four-way brake adjustment on the VL - practicality certainly hasn't been sacrificed for style.

QUESTION OF BUCKS
There's no doubt that these bikes epitomise entry-level machinery. Take another read over this scintillating piece of prose and you'll find that words such as user-friendly, comfy, ease-of-use, uncluttered, unintimidating, plush, reassuring and refined have been used on a regular basis. That's a sign of how well they carry out their respective briefs. Rock solid they may be, but there's also an element of surprise, particularly in performance and handling.

That said, numbers always tell a story, and the one here is that the XVS sells for $8199, which represents a $1709 rise over the outgoing XV250. The VL, however, retails for $6990. And from what I've seen and ridden, the former is not a $1209 better proposition, although it may have slightly better finish.

But I guess it all depends on how much you value money...