kindofblue
Well-known member
30 mpg? 30 mpg? That's terrible. I've never gotten less than 44 mpg on either of my FJRs and even that low mpg was at some, ahem, spirited riding in Nevada.
C14 and FJR comparison
- Thread starter FJRMGM
- Start date
Help Support Yamaha FJR Motorcycle Forum:
Thug
A shy retiring flower in a Thug's exterior
2WheelTiger
Chief Executive Carnivore
The MPG really depends on how hard you flog them. My lowest average was 19.7 mpg on the FJR during a recent track day. I normally get about 40 mpg when commuting and doing grocery runs here in Seattle. My high was 52 mpg during a run north into Canada. 19.7 to 52 is one hella range and it's all dependent on throttle position.
red2kcbr
Well-known member
I don't know Fred personally, but he's come up with some useful modifications that ACTUALLY SOLVED REAL PROBLEMS. All you Fred bashers can tuck one up your tailpipe.
How about one of you whiney gashes try to engineer a solution to a problem. Then you might actually have a kick stand to prop up on. (Sorry about that one, couldn't resist)
Go on, Fred. Don't listen to them.
OK, I'm done now.
How about one of you whiney gashes try to engineer a solution to a problem. Then you might actually have a kick stand to prop up on. (Sorry about that one, couldn't resist)
Go on, Fred. Don't listen to them.
OK, I'm done now.
James Burleigh
Well-known member
Ahem.... If we can get back to the subject of this here thread.....
Just got my September Cycle World in the mail, and they talk about the C-14 under the banner, Super-Tourers 2008 Hit the Road--High Speed, High Tech: Kawasaki Concours 14.
So now I'm gonna get me a nice glass of wine and go read aaaaaaaaaalllllllll about it.
Jb
Just got my September Cycle World in the mail, and they talk about the C-14 under the banner, Super-Tourers 2008 Hit the Road--High Speed, High Tech: Kawasaki Concours 14.
So now I'm gonna get me a nice glass of wine and go read aaaaaaaaaalllllllll about it.
Jb
Hit the Road Jack
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2007
- Messages
- 656
- Reaction score
- 4
Bingo! and Gunny too.
I came to the '06 FJR after having a 27 year old CBX. Very neat and exotic bike, but compared to the FJR it felt like it was made of wood. And it only got 27 mpg! Had to refuel every 125 miles. Also had an original '86 Concours and it was by far, much hotter than my FJR.
Fred, thanks for your contributions. Just remember: Opinions are like ********. Everyone has one and they all stink!
Zorlac
Well-known member
I'm Sooo glad I ran across my 05 FJR locally at the end of June!
This is INSANITY!!! At least the valve check interval could have been 50K!!!
https://www.concours.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=33633
This is INSANITY!!! At least the valve check interval could have been 50K!!!
https://www.concours.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=33633
Wicked Webby
Right is Harder than Wrong.
Well All you C14 Converts.....
What do ya make of this(From THE other FORUM):
Posted - 08/01/2007 : 20:04:55
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am afraid I have a bit of bad news. While the air filter will be relatively easy to replace, the valves are going to be a BIG problem.
Remember the guy who posted that you have to remove the engine on the ZX-14 to check/adjust the valves? Well, from what I can see, the engine is gonna have to come out of the bike just to even get the valve cover off, let alone remove the cam to change a shim. And with a 15K mile interval on valve checks, this could make engine removal a yearly chore on this bike for some. Granted, many will probably find that the interval can be doubled (or more) but still, to have to take the engine out just to check the valves is going to be a MAJOR pain, especially first time. The way the frame is wrapped over the top of the head, I just don't see how else it could be done.
I could be wrong, there may be a way, but on first inspection, I sure don't see how. There is some space on the right side, and if everything that could be removed was taken off, you *MIGHT* be able to squeeze in between the frame and head to get the cover off, but I wouldn't bet money on it. There is very little room between the bottom of the frame and the top of the valve cover.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred H.
Fort Worth, TX.
WTF is Kawi thinkin??????????????? They go on to talk about how changing the spark plugs looks to be just as HARD!
Sounds like a wonderful plan for the STEALERSHIPS to make $$$!!!
WW
What do ya make of this(From THE other FORUM):
Posted - 08/01/2007 : 20:04:55
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am afraid I have a bit of bad news. While the air filter will be relatively easy to replace, the valves are going to be a BIG problem.
Remember the guy who posted that you have to remove the engine on the ZX-14 to check/adjust the valves? Well, from what I can see, the engine is gonna have to come out of the bike just to even get the valve cover off, let alone remove the cam to change a shim. And with a 15K mile interval on valve checks, this could make engine removal a yearly chore on this bike for some. Granted, many will probably find that the interval can be doubled (or more) but still, to have to take the engine out just to check the valves is going to be a MAJOR pain, especially first time. The way the frame is wrapped over the top of the head, I just don't see how else it could be done.
I could be wrong, there may be a way, but on first inspection, I sure don't see how. There is some space on the right side, and if everything that could be removed was taken off, you *MIGHT* be able to squeeze in between the frame and head to get the cover off, but I wouldn't bet money on it. There is very little room between the bottom of the frame and the top of the valve cover.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred H.
Fort Worth, TX.
WTF is Kawi thinkin??????????????? They go on to talk about how changing the spark plugs looks to be just as HARD!
Sounds like a wonderful plan for the STEALERSHIPS to make $$$!!!
WW
Last edited by a moderator:
ionbeam
2 FUN
Fred H. C14 Report Spoiler Warning:
.
.
.
.
The link in the previous post leads to a picture report of the new C14 by Fred. Fred, in character, decided to remove body panels and see if the C14 actually had an engine ('cause it wasn't visible from any angle). After a dozen or so pictures with all kinds of body panels removed the engine was seen in only one picture and at that, it was just an upper 1/4 RH side glimpse. Fred probably accurately surmised that to check the valves the engine must come out - every 15k miles Fred also notes that the engine will most probably need to come out to change spark plugs :blink:
Man, pulling the engine at least once a year? :glare: If Fred's speculation turns out to be true I'm pretty sure I can stop saving for a C14 right now. Hope Yamaha gets the '08 FJR FI correct this time because it looks a '08 is in my future.
.
.
.
.
The link in the previous post leads to a picture report of the new C14 by Fred. Fred, in character, decided to remove body panels and see if the C14 actually had an engine ('cause it wasn't visible from any angle). After a dozen or so pictures with all kinds of body panels removed the engine was seen in only one picture and at that, it was just an upper 1/4 RH side glimpse. Fred probably accurately surmised that to check the valves the engine must come out - every 15k miles
Fred also notes that the engine will most probably need to come out to change spark plugs :blink: Man, pulling the engine at least once a year? :glare: If Fred's speculation turns out to be true I'm pretty sure I can stop saving for a C14 right now. Hope Yamaha gets the '08 FJR FI correct this time because it looks a '08 is in my future.
Last edited by a moderator:
dbvolfan
Well-known member
If Kawi engineers designed that bike to where an engine has to be PULLED to do a valve check/adjustment they should be fired and sent back to work at Pontiac/GM! If true, that is insane with a 15k mile interval.
Heck, with that kinda arrangement Kawi should base their business model on the razor and the razor blade or printer and the inkjet carts with as much as you would spend on service.
Heck, with that kinda arrangement Kawi should base their business model on the razor and the razor blade or printer and the inkjet carts with as much as you would spend on service.
I believe MaKaw didn't design and build the C14 on a form and function premise only. The additional (potential) maintenance requirements/expense may be just an added "benefit"...
Seems like a nice bike (except that afterthought black box on the tank).
Thank you MaKaw...
Seems like a nice bike (except that afterthought black box on the tank).
Thank you MaKaw...
Last edited by a moderator:
black mamba
Well-known member
What's the name of the forum upon which Fred H. posted his comments about engine removal?
ionbeam
2 FUN
BrunDog
Well-known member
Uh-oh...
I always wondered about that on the ZX-14, etc. The Kawi monococque chassis seems like a great idea except for this minor issue. I am certain you don't have drop the engine to access the head - makes no sense. It is a stressed member, so I just don't see them making that part of normal maintenance. But, I've been wrong at least once before.
-BD
Last edited by a moderator:
black mamba
Well-known member
Slightly off subject....but still in the spirit of this discussion...
I once had a '77 Ferrari 308 GTB. A major service was coming up at 24,000 miles. To get to the plugs and all else they had to do required an engine drop. The dealer quoted me a charge 0f $2350.00, with more charges that could be due if they found additional things that needed attention. Shortly thereafter, I sold that sucker. It was a quirky car anyway.
I once had a '77 Ferrari 308 GTB. A major service was coming up at 24,000 miles. To get to the plugs and all else they had to do required an engine drop. The dealer quoted me a charge 0f $2350.00, with more charges that could be due if they found additional things that needed attention. Shortly thereafter, I sold that sucker. It was a quirky car anyway.
Last edited by a moderator:
charismaticmegafauna
Well-known member
Agreed BD,
When I first saw a ZX 14 at a show several years ago it appeared obvious the the monocoque chassis was going to make access to the upper part of the engine difficult, if not impossible. Historically, engine access has been going in this (negative) direction for decades. Used-to-be, much maintenance and repair could be performed with engine in-situ. A few decades ago many service manuals began starting their engine component repair sections with the words: "Remove the engine." Valve clearance checks on many modern (Japanese) sport-bikes requires all-but removing the engine (remove everything else and loosen and tilt the engine) -- not to mention what would be required to actually change any clearances (remove camshafts). Many automotive service incidents now require pulling the engine -- actually, it's (more-often-than-not) dropped out the bottom with the car raised off the engine. In many cases, IMO, a much better job could be done with the engine on-the-bench -- but, who's gonna pay for it?
Consequently, much scheduled/required/desired maintenance just doesn't get done anymore.
I think what we're witnessing here is "A new world order" in maintenance -- little-to-no preventative maintenance done along with longer term warranties purchased (maybe, too, service contracts?).
Along with black mamba's:
When I first saw a ZX 14 at a show several years ago it appeared obvious the the monocoque chassis was going to make access to the upper part of the engine difficult, if not impossible. Historically, engine access has been going in this (negative) direction for decades. Used-to-be, much maintenance and repair could be performed with engine in-situ. A few decades ago many service manuals began starting their engine component repair sections with the words: "Remove the engine." Valve clearance checks on many modern (Japanese) sport-bikes requires all-but removing the engine (remove everything else and loosen and tilt the engine) -- not to mention what would be required to actually change any clearances (remove camshafts). Many automotive service incidents now require pulling the engine -- actually, it's (more-often-than-not) dropped out the bottom with the car raised off the engine. In many cases, IMO, a much better job could be done with the engine on-the-bench -- but, who's gonna pay for it?
Consequently, much scheduled/required/desired maintenance just doesn't get done anymore.
I think what we're witnessing here is "A new world order" in maintenance -- little-to-no preventative maintenance done along with longer term warranties purchased (maybe, too, service contracts?).
Along with black mamba's:
....
Last edited by a moderator:
Zorlac
Well-known member
"I think what we're witnessing here is "A new world order" in maintenance -- little to no preventative maintenance done"
I've owned a 2000 sienna minivan since it was new, it's got 101K on it, Toyota recommends a valve check at 60K? or so, it didn't happen, and it's not going too as long as I own it! Valve adjusts on new Jap cars are ********!
I'm sure there's quite a few bikes that have been scrapped for a lot of other issues and component failures other than valves or valve seats that burnt from never getting adjusted.
With the labor cost, and the short mileage interval, it might be cheaper to just roll the dice and ride the **** out of it.
I've owned a 2000 sienna minivan since it was new, it's got 101K on it, Toyota recommends a valve check at 60K? or so, it didn't happen, and it's not going too as long as I own it! Valve adjusts on new Jap cars are ********!
I'm sure there's quite a few bikes that have been scrapped for a lot of other issues and component failures other than valves or valve seats that burnt from never getting adjusted.
With the labor cost, and the short mileage interval, it might be cheaper to just roll the dice and ride the **** out of it.
OrangevaleFJR
R.I.P. Our FJR Riding Friend
All this discussion makes me like my '05 even more. I really hope that Yamaha does not go in the direction of touring rather than sport. At this point, the one thing I would change about my FJR would be to give it more clearance in the lean.
The thing that intrigues me is that Fred likes the turn in capability of the C14 so much, where in my comparos when I bought my '05 the FJR pretty much blew away like competition with its turn in ease. I know the Gen II went to a longer swing arm and I think this may have negatively impacted turn in ease while adding stability (as if the Gen I needed more stability?). I believe HIGHLANDER commented on this in regards to his Gen II when he switched from his '04.
Smoothness of engine and drive shaft competitions may push Yamaha to a more refined tourer rather than a capable super sport tourer. I hope they don't go that direction. If I wanted a K1200LT I would have bought one.
The thing that intrigues me is that Fred likes the turn in capability of the C14 so much, where in my comparos when I bought my '05 the FJR pretty much blew away like competition with its turn in ease. I know the Gen II went to a longer swing arm and I think this may have negatively impacted turn in ease while adding stability (as if the Gen I needed more stability?). I believe HIGHLANDER commented on this in regards to his Gen II when he switched from his '04.
Smoothness of engine and drive shaft competitions may push Yamaha to a more refined tourer rather than a capable super sport tourer. I hope they don't go that direction. If I wanted a K1200LT I would have bought one.
v65
ouch
Gunny! Gunny! Gunny!
"Improvements" have a way of adding weight, ala the Gen II revisions. Something to be avoided at all costs if Mama Yamaha is listening.
05fjrBluedevil
Well-known member
Hmm,
leave forum for a while come back and then with in days weeks etc....And to run and and buy the connie and then get to come back and sign it praise is priceless don't you think!!!!!!
:lol: 
