How are the old Royal Stars

[keithert]

I contemplated trading my 99 Venture for a 96 Royal Star many years ago. I rode the 96 for about 20 minutes and it seemed to ride much better than the reports led me to believe. The reports said the bike was underpowered and that forth and fifth gears were way too high. In that short ride I didn't find those to be an issue. I know the 05+ RSTD would be very much like my Venture was in terms of performance. But a older one would fit the budget better. What are the shortfalls of the older Royal Stars from those that have owned them?

[pegscraper]

If you didn't find it to be underpowered, well, to each his own. I sure found that to be the case. The cams and carbs are too small for the engine's displacement, and the thing is geared too high throughout the whole drivetrain, not just fourth and fifth gears. The VMX rear gear is all but mandatory in this bike. And 1300 ccs worth of V4 engine should have a lot more power than this thing makes. After all, it's basically a VMX engine. I've corrected most of my bike's non-complementary engine parts, but I'm still in the process of correcting other things. Yamaha ought to be slapped for what they did to this bike. But, if you're satisfied with it as is, then more power to you. Or is that less power to you?

 

One of my favorite things about the bike is the four mufflers. Not very many bikes ever had four mufflers.

[GeorgeS]

I would stay with the later years, model, that had the larger Carb, intake port size.

 

Gearing can be corrected with a V-Max Rear Drive Unit. I hear that fairly easy to do.

 

Main thing with these bikes, is to Keep the RPM UP, ie. more shifting then a Harley,

[pegscraper]

Keeping the rpms up does help, but they're geared so daggone high that that's hard to do. Then the too small cams and carbs don't let it make any high rpm hp either. If you're handy, it's not that difficult to swap cams and carbs for not very much money though. The VMX rear gear is an easy swap too.

 

Intake port size is the same on all these bikes, no matter what the year.

 

The '05 and newer RSTDs did have the too small cams and carbs and too high gearing issues corrected, same as the '99 and newer 2nd gen RSVs. If anything is slower than a 1st gen, it's the '96 - '01 Royal Star. That is a true statement. But not so with the 2nd gen RSVs.

[keithert]

It's been about 6 years since I rode the Royal Star so my memory may be faded. My current ride is an 01 1500 Kaw Vulcan. That bike is not known for stellar performance either, but I'm happy with it. The 0-60 and 1/4 mile numbers on a 99 Royal Star are slightly better than on a 99 Nomad. My main reason for thinking of a switch is that the Royal Star's size would fit me a bit better than the Vulcan and the Yamaha V-4 is reputed to be a more reliable motor than the Vulcan's.

[pegscraper]

This V4 engine is very reliable. A few around here have more than 100,000 miles on them. It's a very nice riding bike. I like mine a lot, really. I was just disappointed in the power level and wanted it to run like the XS1100 that I had owned before. But if the low power is not an issue for you, you might find the rest of it perfectly suitable too.