If Yamaha stepped up and included cruise control, heated grips, 6sp gear box, and get those damn mirrors properly positioned they would get more new and repeat customers. What's the hold up??
Last edited by a moderator:
Cycle World Feb 2011
- Thread starter Spud
- Start date
Help Support Yamaha FJR Motorcycle Forum:
If I ever need to replace my 05, it will be with an 04. I like the color, and my seat, shock, CC, grips, windsheilds, and the rest of the crap I've attached to it will bolt right up.
At 93K it does not appear that I will ever need to replace it.
I don't want inverted forks (they leak), or fly by wire, or k-piss...
If they put a 6-speed in it and dropped 100 pounds, there is a possibility I could be swayed however.
The latest and greatest, or the most recent MC article is not enough to convince me that newer is better. Look at the VFR. My '99 VFR (also w/ 93K) is a better bike, in my mind, than the 1200.
I'm not really the target market though am I. I've only bought 2 new bikes in the last 12 years, and they are still the 2 best bikes you can buy. New or used...
I'd like to see an ST comparo where they piled 20K on each of them.
Yamaha did good with the original FJR, and made me a believer in the brand. I hope they don't cave into the magazines when they update it.
LancasterFJR
Well-known member
2011 FJR has heated grips as standard. None of the Japanese sport or ST bikes come with CC, only BMW K and R ST bikes come with it. To be honest, I rarely use my Audiovox CC, which works flawlessly by the way. I like twisty back roads for my riding, and there isn't much need for CC there. Same goes for the O/D 6th gear; nice to have for logn highway stretches, but not a deal braker.
Another important point: complex technology adds weight, price and increased mentainance frequecy cost. The DIY'ers won't be able to work on their bike or fix them if problems insue.
Yamaha could play the game and add a few cosmetic tweaks that might appear substantial to the non-scrutinzing observe. Why bother? The current FJR is a fine machine, albeit not cheap.
Another important point: complex technology adds weight, price and increased mentainance frequecy cost. The DIY'ers won't be able to work on their bike or fix them if problems insue.
Yamaha could play the game and add a few cosmetic tweaks that might appear substantial to the non-scrutinzing observe. Why bother? The current FJR is a fine machine, albeit not cheap.
I see these kind of posts a lot, but I really do not understand the sentiment. Just because a bike hasn't had an update doesn't mean the bike is not competitive in its market segment, EXCEPT in the clouded eyes of the bike rags, and anyone that buys into their "newer is always better" non-sense. Those other bikes in the magazine "shootout" weren't even in the same class of bikes as the FJR and Connie (super sport TOURING - emphasis on TOURING) . They were selected for the article just because they are all new models, not because they are in the same class. Yeah, the Triumph and Ducati look like nice new models, and the Honda has some interesting high tech features, but none of them are the same kind of tools as the Connie and FJR.
As for adding new standard equipment to the model, just because you want cruise control, doesn't mean that all potential owners want (or would want to pay for) cruise control. Part of the FJR's allure is its reasonable price tag. Adding standard "options" would raise the price of the bike for sure. What would a 6th gear get you other than a chance to shift more often? The bike already cruises at 70 mph at a lazy 4,000 rpm in its overdrive 5th gear. The fuel mileage and range is NOT suffering for not having another gear. Or are you reaching for 6th when you're topping out at 150 mph?
To summarize, the FJR is already quite competitive in the market without changing a thing. Who is its real competition? Concours, BMW K1300GT or R1200RT and Honda ST1300. That's pretty much it.
As of this moment, the FJR has not fallen behind anyone, IMO. Kawasaki has tried to come out with a bike with more wizz bang features and is failing pretty badly in the execution, and BMW continues to price itself up in the stratosphere, probably for the snob appeal, which eliminates the majority of the market. The Honda's performance has been substandard from inception. Given the choices today, I would still likely choose the FJR if I were buying in this category.
And then there's the whole "style" thing...
Last edited by a moderator:
networkguy
Well-known member
2Bull
Active member
I want to weigh in and say that reading magazines needs to be considered for what it is, a chance for marketers to reach an audience and get them revved up to buy new stuff. It's like a cat hanging around a bird feeder. No one can ignore marketing, it doesn't work like that. It gets in your head and works on you from the inside. Care must be taken when interacting with all media sources. Know what you are getting into before you open that mag. That is why these forums are so important. Caveat Emptor. Never mind what they're selling, its what your buying.
wheatonFJR
...
charismaticmegafauna
Well-known member
While you're certainly entitled to your opinion, I don't think it's widely shared -- especially by perspective buyers in the sport-touring market?
It may be more true that the FJR hasn't improved much since its introduction 10 years ago?
(Magazine editors weren't universally favorable in their critiques even back then...)Suffice to say, future FJR sales may only be to those who are willing to accept/settle-for a bike built to decade-old ideas/concepts. :blink:
Last edited by a moderator:
gumba
Well-known member
I don't think I have seen a FJ beat in a comparo when it was shod with BT-020s.
Knifemaker
Not me
I'm with Fred on this, there seems to always be that sector of folks that just want the newest/latest stuff. We saw it happen with PC's. A decade ago whatever PC you bought was considered "outdated" within two years..or sooner.
But now, they kinda reached the top of the curve, your 3 year old PC is likely still viable and usefull and not that outmoded compared to a new one.
Now the current technology of "smart" cell phones is the new techno wave. Likely soon they too will reach their plateau.
I kinda think the recent crop of ST bikes has reached that plateau also. Yes the Connie has a few things that make it more "modern" than the FJR...but not by much. Most seem to be just techno padding...K-Pass, tire monitors...stuff that might make one bedazzled by the technology, but really adds little to the performance of the machine. The Connies one techno wonder seems to me to be the variable valve timing thing...but 1/4 mile times, overall weight and rider comfort don't seem to be much off from the FJR.
I guess what I am saying is the C14 may be "better" in some areas, but it's not miles ahead there, just a advanced enough to get the vote on it being "better" in some ways. There is more to a bike than just horsepower or techno gizmos. Folks still like Triumph Bonnivilles ....and , gulp... Harleys.
If Kawasaki offered an even up trade of a new Concours for your beat up FJR, how many on this forum would take the trade?
I love the FJR for more than its stone age technology, it has a look and feel that still stirs my soul every time a toss over my leg and start it up. In ten years some new boy might corner the market in the world of Sport Touring bikes, making those that care trade in their Connies for the next new thing.
I hope to still be riding my FJR.
KM
But now, they kinda reached the top of the curve, your 3 year old PC is likely still viable and usefull and not that outmoded compared to a new one.
Now the current technology of "smart" cell phones is the new techno wave. Likely soon they too will reach their plateau.
I kinda think the recent crop of ST bikes has reached that plateau also. Yes the Connie has a few things that make it more "modern" than the FJR...but not by much. Most seem to be just techno padding...K-Pass, tire monitors...stuff that might make one bedazzled by the technology, but really adds little to the performance of the machine. The Connies one techno wonder seems to me to be the variable valve timing thing...but 1/4 mile times, overall weight and rider comfort don't seem to be much off from the FJR.
I guess what I am saying is the C14 may be "better" in some areas, but it's not miles ahead there, just a advanced enough to get the vote on it being "better" in some ways. There is more to a bike than just horsepower or techno gizmos. Folks still like Triumph Bonnivilles ....and , gulp... Harleys.
If Kawasaki offered an even up trade of a new Concours for your beat up FJR, how many on this forum would take the trade?
I love the FJR for more than its stone age technology, it has a look and feel that still stirs my soul every time a toss over my leg and start it up. In ten years some new boy might corner the market in the world of Sport Touring bikes, making those that care trade in their Connies for the next new thing.
I hope to still be riding my FJR.
KM
Last edited by a moderator:
Besides it having been designed 10 years ago, what can you point to that identifies the FJR as being a "decade old concept"?Suffice to say, future FJR sales may only be to those who are willing to accept/settle-for a bike built to decade-old ideas/concepts. :blink:
FJRMGM
FJRMGM
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2005
- Messages
- 2,098
- Reaction score
- 45
I for one do not want or need the latest and greatest g-whiz crap that comes on a new bike and only adds complexity and another potential point of failure.
My '05 FJR suits me fine thank you.
My '05 FJR suits me fine thank you.
networkguy
Well-known member
I agree 100%. I dont think technology for technology's sake is a valid argument for the FJR being *cough* outdated. Take styling for example. The latest "trend" seems to be...well, vanilla. The Connie and the VFR are just...plain. The BMW is plain with a boxy twist. IMHO, of the ST genre, the FJR is as modern as it ever was. Maybe some *like* the smooth vanilla look...I dont personally.
Technology? The only thing the FJR doesnt have that others do, when you get down to it, is cruise, tire pressure monitors, and a KPass type system. I will admit having cruise standard (or as an option) would increase sales. KPass is a flop and a PITA, and the tire pressure monitors are not without their troubles. Thing is, technology adds weak links, or more possible points of failure for the bike. I personally like the fact the FJR is the easiest to work on, and the most reliable. I would rather spend a Saturday afternoon with a jar of Mother's chrome polish and a rag than staring at an electronic readout showing me a tire pressure monitor that has hijacked it.
Aside from that, the discussion could turn to suspension and transmission. Again, the FJR is sport tourer...NOT a sports bike. If I wanted a sport bike suspension I would have bought an R1. and as others have mentioned, cruising along at 70 at a lazy 4k RPM is just fine. Remember, thats only about 44% of redline.
Anyhow. I know this is an endless debate, but I also know the ST market IS a niche. A ST bike is a compromise between a pig of a tourer and a crotch rocket, and the FJR does it nearly flawlessly.
IMHO of course.
lnewlf
Well-known member
My FJR gets 46+mpg. C14 is not better, even with the dopey econo mode. Neither is the need for high test or the smaller tank. The greater weight is not better or the complexity. The shaft drive setup is cool looking but more complex than the FJR's which is seamless. Only one ugly can ? [as Leno told Dolly once-"two is good"]. The C14 looks like Mamma Cass- the FJR like Milla Jovavich.
https://www.millaj.com/home.shtml
https://www.millaj.com/home.shtml
ehc0720
Well-known member
I have an Infiniti and the fob battery died, it is replacabele got a new one for $3 replaced it had no issues.
charismaticmegafauna
Well-known member
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.Besides it having been designed 10 years ago, what can you point to that identifies the FJR as being a "decade old concept"?Suffice to say, future FJR sales may only be to those who are willing to accept/settle-for a bike built to decade-old ideas/concepts. :blink:
(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...).
The motorcycle scene has often led in technology -- now, there seems to be an acceptance to follow.
It seems older riders embrace nostalgia -- which can work for sales (up to a point)?
Eventually, the marker must be put forward in order to capture new sales... :blink: :huh:
Last edited by a moderator:
networkguy
Well-known member
I dunno. Even the Busa is sitting at 147HP/liter...so perhaps the entire motorcycle world needs to catch up and not just the FJR...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.Besides it having been designed 10 years ago, what can you point to that identifies the FJR as being a "decade old concept"?Suffice to say, future FJR sales may only be to those who are willing to accept/settle-for a bike built to decade-old ideas/concepts. :blink:
(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...).
The motorcycle scene has often led in technology -- now, there seems to be an acceptance to follow.
It seems older riders embrace nostalgia -- which can work for sales (up to a point)?
Eventually, the marker must be put forward in order to capture new sales... :blink: :huh:
bikesniffer
Well-known member
In my book Yamaha was ahead of it's time by at least 5 yrs in terms of build quality, exceptional good looks and reliability. Not to mention easy access for performing essential services. The small but important improvements (ECU fix,ignition fix,throttle spring fix, new shift cog design,new CCT design) make it still an excellent and very desirable platform.
Magazine comparisons are very subjective and often colored by ad placements (e.g. BMW in German mags/Beemers always come out on top)); there are hardly ever consistent and fixed parameters that do not rely on gut feelings of the test riders.
I don't believe that adding a ton of electronic gizmos makes riding a bike like the FJR more enjoyable; and I know that I will never be able to really take full advantage of this bike's capabilities.
I'm a believer for the rest of the time that remains for me to ride.
Alfredo
Magazine comparisons are very subjective and often colored by ad placements (e.g. BMW in German mags/Beemers always come out on top)); there are hardly ever consistent and fixed parameters that do not rely on gut feelings of the test riders.
I don't believe that adding a ton of electronic gizmos makes riding a bike like the FJR more enjoyable; and I know that I will never be able to really take full advantage of this bike's capabilities.
I'm a believer for the rest of the time that remains for me to ride.
Alfredo
charismaticmegafauna
Well-known member
Or, is going back-ward...? -- '84/'85 Yamaha RZ350 = 250+ HP/Liter...I dunno. Even the Busa is sitting at 147HP/liter...so perhaps the entire motorcycle world needs to catch up and not just the FJR...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.Besides it having been designed 10 years ago, what can you point to that identifies the FJR as being a "decade old concept"?Suffice to say, future FJR sales may only be to those who are willing to accept/settle-for a bike built to decade-old ideas/concepts. :blink:
(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...).
The motorcycle scene has often led in technology -- now, there seems to be an acceptance to follow.
It seems older riders embrace nostalgia -- which can work for sales (up to a point)?
Eventually, the marker must be put forward in order to capture new sales... :blink: :huh:
Soon to come out will be another sport touring shoot out including an FJR. At least one tester picks the FJR. He liked the handling of the FJR over the others. Not all publications will exclude the FJR
just because it hasnt received any major revisions as of late. It is still a very capable machine in the sport touring market and as long as it is still available I would think most journalists would want it included
in a comparo.
The latest and supposed greatest doesnt always equate to being better and shouldnt result in a tried and true design unworthy of head to head competition. The FJR should have been included in the test
at least for the purpose of educating riders who are possibly thinking of entering this segment of the mc market and who have limited knowledge of the "old" FJR
just because it hasnt received any major revisions as of late. It is still a very capable machine in the sport touring market and as long as it is still available I would think most journalists would want it included
in a comparo.
The latest and supposed greatest doesnt always equate to being better and shouldnt result in a tried and true design unworthy of head to head competition. The FJR should have been included in the test
at least for the purpose of educating riders who are possibly thinking of entering this segment of the mc market and who have limited knowledge of the "old" FJR
