2013 FJR - Product announced!

[gregory]

That is one of the worst translations i have every tried to read..........

R

+1

Although I did enjoy this line

An hour and a half turns later, the first few minutes of concentration gives way to the banana under the helmet and eventually fatigue will occur even once arrived safely.

 

[carlson_mn]

Review is identical to last review you've read but the bike will maintain speed for you and it has fancier gauges. It probably will have finicky first year drive by wire too, ha. I wonder if they changed 5th gear or not, that's been speculated on. No real need to on Gen 2's it's about perfect, <4k at 75mph.

 

[gixxerjasen]

That is one of the worst translations i have every tried to read..........

R

I quit after the first sentence, although from gregory's post maybe I should have continued.

 

[xcsp]

That is one of the worst translations i have every tried to read..........

R

So much for Google Translate.

 

[AlleyCat]

I don't know if a link for the promo video was posted (not the one of the guy taking Polaroid pics of himself)... I really like the gauges in action.

Here is a link via Youtube :

 

[xcsp]

The review on "ashonbikes" has been posted.

https://www.ashonbikes.com/content/yamaha-fjr1300-2013-review

 

[wheatonFJR]

The review on "ashonbikes" has been posted.

https://www.ashonbike...300-2013-review

I felt that the RR contained a lot of personal bias BS and blather. meh.

 

[Fairlaner]

Admin Note: The poster didn't read this personalized copyright announcement on the website:

Written content on this site is copyright Kevin Ash. Images are copyright of the credited photographers and are used with their permission. Feel free to link to this site, with quotes or teasers if you wish, but please do not steal from it. Copying entire features or images for your own site is theft - get in touch instead, maybe I can help.

So, the wholesale copy and paste of the article has been removed. Folks, please respect intellectual property of others and not make us have to add it to the list of of our rules and use common sense. Here's a link instead as they asked.

 

[chivvalry]

I think he's got some pretty fair thoughts there... There are certainly some improvements that mammy yammy could have made but didn't and I think it's fair to call those out.

Wait... :angry:

I mean...

SCREW THAT STOOGE!! THE FJR ROOLS!!! :yahoo:

 

[xcsp]

I felt that the RR contained a lot of personal bias BS and blather. meh.

Waiting for Fairlaner to get his new bike and read his ride report........

 

[snackbauer]

It's better than it used to be but still you need to put pressure on the inside handlebar to keep the bike on its line in a corner

Huh? I don't think so!

 

[ndivita]

The review on "ashonbikes" has been posted.

https://www.ashonbike...300-2013-review

I felt that the RR contained a lot of personal bias BS and blather. meh.

I've read this review several times. There are two takeaway points to me. First, the steering, while "better than it used to be" (I did not know there was a deficiency) still requires one "...to put pressure on the inside handlebar to keep the bike on its line in a corner, which after a long distance on twisty roads gets tiring." Though I am a simpleton, I thought pressing on the bar to lean was inherent in executing turns. And I am used to being (pleasantly) tired after riding long distance or on twisty rides. I guess I don't understand.

The second takeaway is that the bike does not have enough torque under 5,000 RPM to avoid excessive (my word) shifting riding on sinuous or aggressive roads: "Below 5,000rpm, which is where the motor will be used most of the time, there's simply not enough thrust, especially compared with a really torquey engine like the Triumph Trophy. To overtake or up the pace when a road gets temptingly snaky you constantly need to work the gearbox, which is not how a bike like this should be. It's like this solo and two up the problem's exacerbated." Again I guess I am missing something. This has to be a function of how you ride. It is difficult to imagine that the powerband on this bike is so very different from the Gen I FJR I know and love. Speaking for myself, when I am riding though challenging roads, I try to shift as little as possible, preferring instead to find a gear that allows me to keep the revs at a point that minimizes braking and matches the safe and necessary road speed to the topography ahead so that I can - wait for it - have fun and live to ride another day. If that means riding in third versus fourth, or second versus third, that's what I will do, and it usually has me over 5,000 RPM. Again, with 102 ft/lb torque at 7.000 RPM I am not sufficiently well versed in dyno charts to know if the torque curve has been significantly altered in this 2013 species.

I sense Mr. Ash is partial to the Triumph Trophy. It also sounds like he might be picking nits while offering up some faint praise for good measure.

The FJR has always been more toward the sport end on the sport touring continuum.

I will need to read some more detailed reviews and comparisons to older FJRs and other sport tourers.

 

[HotRodZilla]

Richard,

Where did you get the review you posted? Is that yours or did you copy or paraphrase what someone else said? Just seems to me to be a lot of info for a bike that has only actually been ridden by very few.

 

[wheatonFJR]

Richard,

Where did you get the review you posted? Is that yours or did you copy or paraphrase what someone else said? Just seems to me to be a lot of info for a bike that has only actually been ridden by very few.

That's a cut and paste from the linked review...

 

[HotRodZilla]

Richard,

Where did you get the review you posted? Is that yours or did you copy or paraphrase what someone else said? Just seems to me to be a lot of info for a bike that has only actually been ridden by very few.

That's a cut and paste from the linked review...

Oh...I thought that other poorly translated post was from the linked review. Thanks!!

 

[wheatonFJR]

I've read this review several times. There are two takeaway points to me. First, the steering, while "better than it used to be" (I did not know there was a deficiency) still requires one "...to put pressure on the inside handlebar to keep the bike on its line in a corner, which after a long distance on twisty roads gets tiring." Though I am a simpleton, I thought pressing on the bar to lean was inherent in executing turns. And I am used to being (pleasantly) tired after riding long distance or on twisty rides. I guess I don't understand.

The second takeaway is that the bike does not have enough torque under 5,000 RPM to avoid excessive (my word) shifting riding on sinuous or aggressive roads: "Below 5,000rpm, which is where the motor will be used most of the time, there's simply not enough thrust, especially compared with a really torquey engine like the Triumph Trophy. To overtake or up the pace when a road gets temptingly snaky you constantly need to work the gearbox, which is not how a bike like this should be. It's like this solo and two up the problem's exacerbated." Again I guess I am missing something. This has to be a function of how you ride. It is difficult to imagine that the powerband on this bike is so very different from the Gen I FJR I know and love. Speaking for myself, when I am riding though challenging roads, I try to shift as little as possible, preferring instead to find a gear that allows me to keep the revs at a point that minimizes braking and matches the safe and necessary road speed to the topography ahead so that I can - wait for it - have fun and live to ride another day. If that means riding in third versus fourth, or second versus third, that's what I will do, and it usually has me over 5,000 RPM. Again, with 102 ft/lb torque at 7.000 RPM I am not sufficiently well versed in dyno charts to know if the torque curve has been significantly altered in this 2013 species.

I sense Mr. Ash is partial to the Triumph Trophy. It also sounds like he might be picking nits while offering up some faint praise for good measure.

The FJR has always been more toward the sport end on the sport touring continuum.

I will need to read some more detailed reviews and comparisons to older FJRs and other sport tourers.

Yeah...pressing the bar in a turn is tiring...wtf.

keeping the revs down below 5k rpms (cuz that's where it's supposed to be)...I mean wtf kinda crap is this?

His intro was a bunch of hooey filled economic blather as well.

Hey, I guess he must make a living at it...or something.

But as far as an insightful look at a new gen of a bike? Forget it.

I give him zero stars for pretending to be able to communicate something worthwhile.

 

[bramfrank]

I made my comments there in-topic - he's very biased and much wrong . . . . then again reviewers have always been biased. He's a Brit. He likes the Triumph because it flies the Union Jack.

 

[MCRIDER007]

This isn't a bad review considering the author who seems to be extremely biased against anything made in Japan....take a look at his Tenere review. Even so he admitted that the suspension actually was better than his beloved Trophy, which he called the best Triumph ever. He also admitted the engine was very smooth and had good fuel economy so what you end up with is a smooth, fuel efficient engine with a really nice ride to go with very good traction control, easy to use cruise control, and exceptional build quality. I think it took him an extra day to write the review because he was having trouble finding things to find fault with.

None of us has ridden the new Trophy and can't compare its engine to the FJR but I would put my money on the FJR when someone does a comparative dyno run, I think it will have more torque everywhere in the rpm range and the Trophy's (claimed) low end grunt will actually be the result of lower gearing.

I'm looking forward to an unbiased review.

 

[phroenips]

I'm looking forward to an unbiased review.

Good luck with that

 

[SouthernCruizer]

from the article >> "That means a genuine 260 mile range from the 5.5 gallon (25 litre) tank, which is impressive considering the power".

Had the author bothered reading the owners manual, he would have learned that the Gen III has a 6.6 gal capacity, as do the Gen I and Gen II bikes. Makes me wonder about the credibility of his review.

EDIT: never mind, my point is incorrect..5.5 gal is correct as it equates to 6.6 US. My bad.