Looks like they got the price right...... Too bad they didn't get the styling right. :lol:
Looks like they got the price right...... Too bad they didn't get the styling right. :lol:
Have to see it with the bags off before I pass judgement there.
lolThat muffler looks really bad until you take the bags off and then it is HORRIFIC!
My thoughts exactly! Totally removes the bike from ever being considered.That muffler looks really bad until you take the bags off and then it is HORRIFIC!
I like the frontal. Looking directly into its eyes (headlights). I’m imagining, :innocent: for decorative purposes, a set of sinister looking eye brows :mace_rune: just above each headlight and perhaps a menacing set of fake teeth with fangs, kinda like some of those long-haul truckers (18 wheelers) have on their radiator grill, located just below the headlights...........I can't find an angle I like on that thing.
Yeah, but you still promised me a test ride! By the way... Might I suggest a visit to Jenny Craig to help offset the weight gain you are about to experience? :lol:Thinking freely here. Bout 2 ½ hours from D & H.
TWN thinks I’m a traitor; :no: however, I’m figuring his spell check s/w failed him. :yes: It’s “trader”.
:bike:
It's heavier and the power difference ain't enough to overcome the pork. Plus, it's down on range.If the bike manages to be as nimble as the FJR but with all the extra power and features, I could look past the styling.
- Mark
Based on what? Kawaski hasn't published any weights. While it looks like a slightly bigger bike than the FJR, it's also a six-year-newer design and they could have easily matched or even bested the FJR's weight. And while they're down 0.8 gallons on gas, I'd bet a dollar to a donut, they get an easy 5 mpg better than the FJR with the VVT and more advanced engine management system. That would make range about a wash.It's heavier and the power difference ain't enough to overcome the pork. Plus, it's down on range.
Enter your email address to join: