Cycle World Feb 2011

[blueman]

After what I have seen come out after I purchased my 05 in the sport touring market,I can't be happier with my ride. Leaner meaner, bestest,fastest, and of course the best looking.

 

[BIODSL]

Here's another great KLR forum link: https://www.stromtrooper.com/

:lol: Now THATS effin' funny! Zing!

 

[wabill]

Here's another great KLR forum link: https://www.stromtrooper.com/

:lol: Now THATS effin' funny! Zing!

At least I didn't link the guy to hdforums.com.

 

[Fred W]

Well, Variable Valve Timing -- for one. Toyota's had it on almost everything since the FJR came on the scene. The FJR's 100 HP/Liter output is pretty old-skool by today's standards.

(carrying around a large engine -- when one about half the size could do the same job -- is your grandfather's technology) Cutting-edge engines, in the future, will need outputs in the neighborhood of 150 ~ 200 HP/Liter. The automotive scene is also encouraging forced-induction (finally...).

I'm sure that you, being a technically savvy guy, already realize that the major advantage of a larger displacement lump is not in the horsepower that it can produce (though that is often a side benefit), but rather in the bigger TORQUE it can grunt out. The FJR's engine was intentionally tuned in a more tractable nature.. People that ride these kind of bikes (sportTOURING) could generally give a rat's *** less how much horsepower the bike makes, for the most part. Instead favoring the neck snapping acceleration available with higher torque engines.

There are only two way to make (more) torque. Increase displacement or forced induction.

Variable Valve Timing can't make torque from the ether, but it can be used to produce more horsepower, while retaining the full available torque of a given displacement, by advancing the valve timing at higher rpms, in effect it is the best of both worlds. In most cases, for the complexity of the system that effects the valve timing changes, the end result is less than spectacular, as is the case for the 1400cc Concours.

But you never really answered my question...

PS - My 1995 BMW 325i cage had V.V.T. It was no big deal...

 

[MCRIDER007]

Variable Valve Timing can't make torque from the ether, but it can be used to produce more horsepower, while retaining the full available torque of a given displacement, by advancing the valve timing at higher rpms, in effect it is the best of both worlds. In most cases, for the complexity of the system that effects the valve timing changes, the end result is less than spectacular, as is the case for the 1400cc Concours.

I think if you rode a C14 that was bypassing the secondary butterflies (either by removal or an electronic TRE) you would find that the end result is spectacular.

 

[charismaticmegafauna]

I'm sure that you...already realize that the major advantage of a larger displacement lump is not in the horsepower that it can produce (though that is often a side benefit), but rather in the bigger TORQUE it can grunt out. The FJR's engine was intentionally tuned in a more tractable nature.. People that ride these kind of bikes (sportTOURING) could generally give a rat's *** less how much horsepower the bike makes, for the most part.

I think that's a gross generalization.

Horsepower is a function of torque (torque and RPM) and horsepower does the work.

Instead favoring the neck snapping acceleration available with higher torque engines.

For those who wish for 'tractor' engines, there are many M/Cs to choose from.

I once met a fellow riding a 1400cc v-twin cruiser in a mountain road environment and he said: "It has so much torque it makes you sick...!"

Torque biased engines may not be the desirable choice for sporting riding? :huh:

There are only two way to make (more) torque. Increase displacement or forced induction.

And VVT can move the available torque (and horsepower) around.

Variable Valve Timing can't make torque from the ether, but it can be used to produce more horsepower, while retaining the full available torque of a given displacement, by advancing the valve timing at higher rpms, in effect it is the best of both worlds. In most cases, for the complexity of the system that effects the valve timing changes, the end result is less than spectacular, as is the case for the 1400cc Concours.

Modern engines will have both VVT and forced induction (and be smaller...).

But you never really answered my question...

I'm trying... :blink:

PS - My 1995 BMW 325i cage had V.V.T. It was no big deal...

There are many things that BMW hasn't/doesn't do well -- that doesn't mean that other companies aren't eminently capable of accomplishing the task...

 

[bikerkash]

The FJR is a great bike which is in need of a real update. Yamaha needs to wake up and address this issue very soon.

 

[str8]

The FJR can go at least 60 miles further on a tank of gas than the Connie. And on regular gas. IMHO, that in itself makes the FJR a better choice. On cold mornings with luggage and heated gear, the FJR is marginal for range, especially when the right wrist gets going. I can't imagine dealing with the Connie in those conditions.

 

[LAF]

Was gonna refrain from a comment but what the heck.

I came off a 10 year old platform in the BMW K1200 LT onto another 10 year old platform. I have no regrets and only a few things I miss. Cruise, heated grips, and Xenon head lights. All of which can be addressed on the FJR. Audio system is blue tooth I-Pod so I don't miss the external speakers as I never used them on the LT anyway.

I did loose all the worry I had about the LT. I had a spare Final Drive boxed every time I went on a trip so it could be mailed to me in case of failure. I had the privilege of visiting probably one of the top 5 people in this country who know how to shim and set up a LT FD. Last summer I ran my brand new FD to him and it was out of spec using two technical ways of measurement. Brand new from Germany! No worries of one of the 3 seals failing and taking out my dry clutch. Seems I am going to fight the poor tire life/wear as the LT suffered the same.

I did loose 200 pounds plus of bike. I gained a bunch more horse power. Nikasil verses the Ceramic liners of the FJR have no idea but seems the FJR goes the distance as well. Spider bite prevention from one of the two kits from forum members cost less then the plastic fuel line connectors I had to replace on the LT with metal quick disconnects, as the plastic ones failed at will drenching the right side of your boots and bike with gas.

Not sure what everyone wants on a new FJR? More power? A 6 speed? Spider fix would be good.

Suspension on any car or bike never suited me anyway. On the LT 2300.00 worth of Hyper Pro shocks and steering damper did the trick. On the FJR I had to settle for a Penskey rear shock and a spring kit from Traxion.

I went to the FJR after looking and riding a Concourse. I liked the feel of the FJR better. I was not aware of the Spider Bite at first but had a kit before the bike, and the suspension also from reading this Forum and knowing what I like in a bike. Yep I see a need to do the spline lube at least once here pretty early, and from installing the rear shock saw there is not much grease in that rear dog bone areas and that will be a maintenance point.

Oh yeah the BMW cost me 22,000.00 plus, cash out the door, plus farkels.

I guess the long way around but what the heck does everyone wants a new FJR to be?

 

[FJR Bill]

I really enjoyed LAF's post. I think the only issue for Yami is to fix the spider bite.

On a humorous note, I've had BMW LT top heavy bikes fall over toward me in parking 3 times. The first one luckily rolled forward and missed, the second nearly ripped my sidebag off. Seems the silly little side stand and weight of the LT beast won't tollerate the slightest forward incline. The third time the rider lost foot traction and the bike was coming at mine. Luckily I was able to catch him before he took my bike out. I'll never park to the left of an LT. Bill

 

[BBAR]

Variable Valve Timing can't make torque from the ether, but it can be used to produce more horsepower, while retaining the full available torque of a given displacement, by advancing the valve timing at higher rpms, in effect it is the best of both worlds. In most cases, for the complexity of the system that effects the valve timing changes, the end result is less than spectacular, as is the case for the 1400cc Concours.

I think if you rode a C14 that was bypassing the secondary butterflies (either by removal or an electronic TRE) you would find that the end result is spectacular.

Yes, removing the secondaries (or butterflies)and adding a fuel processor such as a Power commander, makes a big difference in the bikes low end power between 2,000 & 4,000 RPM's. But it also gives you a very abrupt throttle response. The addition of a G2 Throttle tamer helps smooth it out a little. But the on/off transition can be pretty abrupt. (and yes it doesn't matter how well you adjust your throttle cables) It can be a handful at times. But IMO the extra power on the C14 is worth the terrible throttle abruptness. But you now have another failure point to worry about with the fuel processor. And the Power commanders do go bad (I had one).

The C14 in stock configuration lacks the low end grunt that the FJR has. But is also very smooth in stock form. So if you ride very conservative. Leaving it stock might be a better option. If you like the low end grunt and can put up with an abrupt throttle, then pulling the flies may be a good option. But IMO, just riding the FJR is a way to have good low end power without modifications.

A lot of people on here are under the illusion that the C14 is a much better bike. I can tell you first hand, that it's not. It's better at some things, and worse at others. IMO the stock FJR is a better motor in terms of power band and maintenance. And contrary to some peoples thinking. You don't need the sixth gear. The sixth gear is basically an overdrive on the C14. My FJR has better roll on in top gear over my C14 because of only using five gears. You normally have to downshift out of sixth gear on the C14 for anything other than a lazy highway roll on. It can be pretty slow when you crack the throttle in sixth!

 

[BlueRidgeFJR]

As far as I'm concerned, the best bike out there is the one that's currently parked in my garage. Just very happy that it's an FJR at the moment.

+1 :clapping:

 

[2006FJR]

I love my FJR but I would love the C14 too. What would I buy now? A K1600GT, followed by the C14 then the FJR. I have no plans selling my FJR but the other guys are making the changes and the updates needed to stay on top. It would not take much for Yamaha to keep us in the fold and have us running to dealerships to buy a Gen III.

 

[03HiYoSilver]

...well then that must make me an odd man out...the '03 FJR is doing everything I could want and then some. Already it takes severe restraint to handle what I got...of course it may be better if I lived off the Autobahn, but I don't.

 

[Dr. Bones]

Is it just me, or is this forum starting to sound like to COG forum before the C14 came out? Is the FJR the Concours 1000 of the new decade? :evilsmiley03:

Exactly!

If I ever need to replace my 05, it will be with an 04.

Mine's for sale for $15,000. You ready to buy it?

At least the '05 is the fastest, but still one year behind the '04!

 

[na1g]

It's interesting that there is so little chatter comparing the FJ to Honda's ST1300. They were introduced the same year, have the same engine size, came with the same features (ABS, electric windshield, etc.) and originally at least were priced about the same. Both are as reliable as a motorcycle gets. They have somewhat different slants on the sport-TOURing genre with the ST being a touch on the obese side but smooth and comfy, and with excellent weather protection. The FJR is lighter, offers a bit more horsepower but not torque, has a little of that classic in-line four buzz, and less rider protection. The ST has tip-over wings; the FJ has mirrors to replace after a tip-over. The ST price has gone up-up-and away in spite of a warehouse full of '09 and '10 models; the FJR price has been pretty steady. You get the picture. They are both great bikes and, in my experience, most folks would be very happy riding the other brand.

So why is neither H or Y out with a new ST? Good question! I'll betcha both have a new model just about ready to roll on short notice. But I have this picture in my mind (such as it is) of the Yamaha and Honda engineers sitting around in a pub on Friday after work, talking about Kawasaki's C14. "Yeah, we had the Ki-Pass thing ready to go on our next ST but it's been such a disaster for them that we tossed the idea." "Sure, and look how fast they had to do a major up-grade. Big-time heat issues - sound familiar? And they really torpedoed their early buyers with that quick switcheroo." "The beancounters at our shop are sure glad we waited to let them sort out the market." "Yep, a couple of easy changes and we are ready to roll!" "Now about the BMW..."

Meanwhile, I'm sitting here tapping my foot and waiting...

pete (formerly '03 ST1300, currently '09 FJR)

 

[FJR Bill]

..."The ST has tip over wings; the FJR has mirrors to replace"...

Ha! LOL and very true. The FJR doesn't fair too well during a drop. I shared a trip with A BWW LT and watched it fall down twice in one day due to its skimpy little sidestand and down slopes. But the LT with its bumpers didn't get a scratch on it. Don't try that with an FJR even with sliders. Actually this is about my only gripe concerning the FJR.

Keep the shiney side up. Bill

 

[Fred W]

Bah!! Anyone that parks their bike pointed down hill deserves the scratches.

The truly talented among us can drop their bikes with great aplomb, on totally flat ground, just by forgetting to deploy the side-stand at all.

 

[08FJR4ME]

Sounds like the voice of experience Fred.

My only gripe with the FJR is the transmission. Sure could be a lot smoother. JMO

Dave

 

[mailmanbob]

Have a subscription.

That article made the Triumph Sprint GT sound pretty appealing, eh?

So I have been working on aquiring a sport touring bike. I was debating the ST1300 or FJR. I actually checked out the Sprint GT at the local Triumph shop. Very nice, but...

When I compare the two I note the following

weight(wet)- Sprint about 590, FJR(gen1) about 600(so I read)

drive line -Sprint chain, FJR shaft

windshield Sprint fixed, FJR electric adjustable

seat height Sprint 32, FJR 32

Heated grips Sprint extra, FJR inc

Top box Sprint extra, FJR inc

cost Sprint about $15K OTD, FJR (used of course) $7500

I know it is not really apples to apples but for half the price it is an easy decision for me.