petem said:
I think the theory is the smaller engine has less rotating mass so the bike will be easier to turn, though I don't know whether you'd expect the difference to be as much as it would be on a bike with a conventional engine. With the mass all centralised, I'd have thought the difference in handling between engine sizes would be smaller than on other bikes. As you say, essentially the same weight so for things like braking I wouldn't expect much difference.
Sadly, I've only ridden the 450 not the 390 or 570 so I don't have any first hand experience to know for sure how different they feel, but when the 2012 models come out next year I could be due a new bike and I might well try a 570 as I'd expect it to handle similarly to my 450 but with some extra grin-inducing grunt when you want it.
Hello, new to the forum but not new to bergs, thought I would kick in my 2 cents on the subject
First, I utterly fell in love with the new 70 degree engine when i first tried it, before that I thought that all bergs made after 1999 was just not as good as my ole FE600E. Friend of mine got the 570 which I tried, and I wanted one of those badly ever since.
Then my dealer got a demo 390 for me to try out over the weekend, and out I went with my friend on the 570. I thought I give it a try, but a 570 was what I wanted really. Well that changed quickly when I got to try them back to back. It is really weird when you know that the bikes are virtually the same, they feel the same when you walk them around and you sit on them, but as soon as you let the clutch out, the 390 feels so much smaller than the 570. It feels lighter, it turns faster and I went faster on it on a technical track. Weirdest thing, the whole chassis feels physically smaller, like its been shrunk in the washing!
As for the less rotating mass, Husaberg actually made the crankshaft slightly heavier with the 390 compared to the 450 atleast, maybe someone can confirm how it is with the 570. Reciprocating mass shouldnt matter so much either as the 390 have a longer conrod compared to the 570 to offset the bigger piston (same bore as on the 450).
So, is it just down to smaller engine not being so revhungry because of the increased mass in the crank, and not as powerful due to the less capacity, that turns tricks and makes it feel smaller and lighter?! Dunno. But it does something completely different to the 570.
So, in my opinion the differences between the 390 and 570 are bigger than what the numbers suggest. Where the 570 just tries to get the frontwheel as fast and far away from you as possible, you feel really connected to the same frontwheel on the 390. Where the 570 brutes its way forward like a runaway tank, the 390 nips along like a carbon fibred mountainbike (well almost anyway :wink: ). And now is the time to write the 570 up, but since I bought the 390 that wouldnt be approriate. Ha!
No matter what you get, you get a great bike. Just make sure you get the size that suits your need the most, and dont worry, you can do everything else too no matter what size the engine is
(and now I just said the differences is not that big after all, when they really are). Hard to describe as my ranting above suggests what the differences really is, but they are more than noticable.
/chris (Who is very happy and pleased with the 390, but still has the ole 600 for those days when there is no substitute for cubes)
And in the light of CodeMonkeys post above: Nope, you dont have to be a very good rider (I'm for sure am not), nor do you need to take them out on a specific terrain to feel the differences.
