FJR Dead Last?

[Thug]

Gentlemen...It's all about the money...sponsorship dollars talk...

 

[tripletango]

I have an 05 speed triple. It is lively and corners intuitively. My FJR is wooden as one columnist described it when cornering. So what do you expect. The FJR is a great touring machine. You can ride for miles comfortably. When called on to corner it does just fine

It will blow the doors off all of those other test bikes.

 

[GunMD]

They did the test over a particularly hot weekend in Ontario. It was the heat that caused them to drop it to the bottom.

Just for the sake of those of us who live and ride in the desert southwest every day, what exactly constitutes a "particularly hot weekend in Ontario"? I've had some pretty hot days in Ontario, California, but even that doesn't outweigh all the good that the FJR has to offer.

Of course, this is just my opinion.

 

[FJRblue#5]

And the FJR has always had handling issues, so it's not surprising that newer designs like the RT and Sprint are rating better on chassis areas.

FNG

 

[FJRblue#5]

...  And the FJR has always had handling issues, ...
- Mark

In most of the comparison articles in the past the FJR rated "better" than the ST and the K1200GT (Motorcycle Consumer News March 2003).

Anyway what are the handleing issues?

(I am not really sure my FJR is still in the shop waiting for a new wire harness... I will update all when it is fixed)

 

[charismaticmegafauna]

Anyway what are the handleing issues?

I think it centers on the quality (or stock set-up, ie. spring rates, etc) of the suspension on the first U.S. models? When the FJR first came here ('03) Mitch Boehm of Motorcyclist wrote "Yamaha screwed the pooch in the handling dept." I think that mainly stems from the bike dragging hard parts when ridden in a spirited fashion on a mountain road. If it's used in a more touring mode, the point may be moot?

Which may beg the question -- "How do Americans like their sport-touring bikes? More sport or more touring?"

 

[FJRblue#5]

the 04 upgrades addressed some of this. I have an 05 and the limited riding I have done on it, it seems to handle OK. But again only 100 miles in the sadle...

 

[Groo]

Now that I own mine... I could give a rat's patoot what any magazine thinks about it....

 

[Bounce]

Boehm rode it like a hoon and paid the price. He was pissed that, in spite of all the ink he slings, he didn't seem to grasp that a S-T bike is neither sport nor touring in nature. On top of that he was pissed that he got in over his head on a bike because he didn't take the time to appreciate that each bike is different and has different strengths and weaknesses. He road outside the envelope and then blamed the bike for it.

Oh... and it wasn't a Honda.

 

[outrace]

Handling issues......

1) The FJR bobs and weaves in every corner with a bump in it.

2) The spring rates are unbalanced between the front and rear, even with the "hard" setting selected.

3) The "convertability" of the bike makes it imprecise when hauling larger loads.

4) The brakes are passe'.

5) Deceleration headshake plagues them all after the first tire change.

6) The lack of compression adjustment on the stock shock is deplorable.

There are almost as many "handling fixes" for this bike as there are "heat fixes". Heat doesn't bother me, wobbles and weaves do. That's why I'm trying to get a $700 shock dialed in.

If the FJR didn't have THAT MOTOR, sales of ST1300s would be up.

Don't misunderstand guys.... I love my FJR and I'll keep it forever, but its nuts to think that a 6(?) year old design is going to keep up with the latest whatever from wherever. If production length was a good indicator of product superiority, the Kaw Concours, 500 Ninja, and 250 Ninja would be the best bikes in the world.

(But I do find myself wondering if I can find a place to install cruise control on my R1.)

 

[markjenn]

My $0.02 on this subjective handling subject is that the FJR's handling is okay for the intended mission and probably about as good as any 650 lb sport tourer can be expected. It does have a severe cornering clearance problem in stock trim, but this is generally fixable with preload, springs, and/or a shock.

So you can whiz around corners pretty good. My big issue is that the bike simply doesn't feel very good anywhere near the limit - the word "wooden" has been used to desribe the bike's handling feel and this matches how it feels to me. It just feels odd - it doesn't have a "planted" feel. You corner hard on this bike more on faith than feel. The limits are high, but the bike doesn't encourage one to explore them. It reminds me of the way a Corvette corners compared to, say, a 911 or M3.

When the bike first appeared, a couple publications said the same thing, and while the better springs have helped, I think there's something deeper going on than spring rates; the odd forward location of the battery has been mentioned as one possible reason. I haven't tried aftermarket shocks yet. Perhaps that's the solution, but I like to wait a year or so before sinking big bucks in a bike to see if it's a keeper.

I've dinged the chassis, but OTOH, motor, weather protection, comfort, etc. are nearly faultless in my book.

- Mark

 

[Bounce]

3) The "convertability" of the bike makes it imprecise when hauling larger loads.
4) The brakes are passe'.

5) Deceleration headshake plagues them all after the first tire change.

There are almost as many "handling fixes" for this bike as there are "heat fixes".  Heat doesn't bother me, wobbles and weaves do.  That's why I'm trying to get a $700 shock dialed in.

If the FJR didn't have THAT MOTOR, sales of ST1300s would be up.

Don't misunderstand guys....  I love my FJR and I'll keep it forever, but its nuts to think that a 6(?) year old design is going to keep up with the latest whatever from wherever.  If production length was a good indicator of product superiority, the Kaw Concours, 500 Ninja, and 250 Ninja would be the best bikes in the world.

(But I do find myself wondering if I can find a place to install cruise control on my R1.)

IMO it's nuts to expect a S-T design (even when new) to keep up with a true sport bike design that's 200 pounds lighter and dialed in for performance at the cost of distance.

Just like it's nuts to expect a full-on luxo-tourer to compete with a S-T bike in the handling department for the same reasons.

3) if it wasn't "convertable" it wouldn't be a sport-tourer. perhaps there remains some confusion about the intent of the genre?

4) they seem to do well enough for those who want to stoppie or lock up the rear.

5) I differ with you on the "all" having the headshake problem.

"fixes" on any bike are a matter of choice and the result of designing to an average. check the cost of a factory custom that is built to the desires of one rider some time. not everyone wants (or sees a need for) all these "fixes". to roll them into the basic design would bump the msrp up to that of a BMW (albiet with a result that would be astounding when compared to any other s-t bike). the difference is that few would opt for an fjr at those prices because of the lack of cache that comes with the bmw.

I think your last sentence says it all. If you bought the FJR expecting an R1 with bags it's no wonder you're dissapointed. I wouldn't buy a cruiser and expect the FJR or I'd also be dissapointed.

 

[spine60]

There are issues with the feejer however dollar for dollar it is still the tops.

 

[outrace]

3) The "convertability" of the bike makes it imprecise when hauling larger loads.
4) The brakes are passe'.

5) Deceleration headshake plagues them all after the first tire change.

There are almost as many "handling fixes" for this bike as there are "heat fixes".  Heat doesn't bother me, wobbles and weaves do.  That's why I'm trying to get a $700 shock dialed in.

If the FJR didn't have THAT MOTOR, sales of ST1300s would be up.

Don't misunderstand guys....  I love my FJR and I'll keep it forever, but its nuts to think that a 6(?) year old design is going to keep up with the latest whatever from wherever.  If production length was a good indicator of product superiority, the Kaw Concours, 500 Ninja, and 250 Ninja would be the best bikes in the world.

(But I do find myself wondering if I can find a place to install cruise control on my R1.)

IMO it's nuts to expect a S-T design (even when new) to keep up with a true sport bike design that's 200 pounds lighter and dialed in for performance at the cost of distance.

Just like it's nuts to expect a full-on luxo-tourer to compete with a S-T bike in the handling department for the same reasons.

3) if it wasn't "convertable" it wouldn't be a sport-tourer. perhaps there remains some confusion about the intent of the genre?

4) they seem to do well enough for those who want to stoppie or lock up the rear.

5) I differ with you on the "all" having the headshake problem.

"fixes" on any bike are a matter of choice and the result of designing to an average. check the cost of a factory custom that is built to the desires of one rider some time. not everyone wants (or sees a need for) all these "fixes". to roll them into the basic design would bump the msrp up to that of a BMW (albiet with a result that would be astounding when compared to any other s-t bike). the difference is that few would opt for an fjr at those prices because of the lack of cache that comes with the bmw.

I think your last sentence says it all. If you bought the FJR expecting an R1 with bags it's no wonder you're dissapointed. I wouldn't buy a cruiser and expect the FJR or I'd also be dissapointed.

Is somebody doing stoppies with an FJR? I wanna see a pic! I can't believe they're getting the ass of this pig in the air! With or without bags?

The Feejer's brakes stop fine with a mighty and long-travel tug, but they're not as immediate, progressive, or stunning as those on the R1, GSXR, or ZX10. Vehicle weight has nothing to do with feel, and the FJRs brakes feel "old style". Upgrading the FJR to braided stainless lines might make them feel close to the stock R1, but I doubt it.

320mm radial brakes are simply amazing and the FJR doesn't have them. It also doesn't have a USD fork assembly that might eliminate some of the wooden feel and/or need for a brace that many users have installed. The stock shock SUCKS and its spring rate is completely wrong for the bike in full touring mode. In addition, the shock isn't adjustable enough to make it suitable for full touring mode.

FWIW - I didn't buy the FJR in hopes it would be an R1. I bought an R1 for that. I also didn't buy the R1 hoping it would be as comfy, useful, and utilitarian on long trips as the FJR. I bought an FJR for that. But I've gotta tell ya, the FJR could stand to be a little closer to the R1, while the R1 doesn't need to be any closer to the FJR. Yamaha charged us a premium for this bike and its next iteration needs some premium parts added to the package. (I won't go into the paradox of motorcycle pricing right here.)

I'm merely pointing out the fact that while the FJR is a very good bike for its purpose, somebody MIGHT have designed a better mouse trap in the half dozen years since its inception. Time marches on, and very very few of us here have ridden all the bikes in the BIKE article.

(Conversely, I fail to understand how Honda's (essentially non-convertible) S.O.S. ST1300 came out ahead of the FJR.)

 

[MsLilly]

Editors need to sell their magazines and they need something new to get people interested enough to buy. The triumph is new and British, and this was a British magazine. Old Dog is right, it's what "you" like that counts. We have 4 bikes in the garage, all different manufactures, and I love riding them all. Different bikes for different types of riding. The thing I love about my FJR is I can fly with my husband when he is on the Busa OR cruise when he is on his Wing. I've done the "sport touring bike" before and hated the bike (it will remain nameless) so when my husband tried to talk me into selling my Ninja to buy an FJR I was so against it. UNTIL, I rode one. I fell in love immediately. So, if the Brits want to ride a Triumph, great! I'll just keep riding my "hot" FJR!

 

[Windjammer]

Is somebody doing stoppies with an FJR? I wanna see a pic! I can't believe they're getting the ass of this pig in the air! With or without bags?

I did 2 stoppies (not by choice) on the lowly Concours with stock brakes and a full load of luggage, bags installed. Compared to the Connie, the FJR brakes are nothing short of phenomenal (mine is non-ABS, never rode the ABS FJR and can't comment on that). There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the FJR could stand on its nose if the need came up (hope it never does!). I've never needed more than 2 fingers on my FJR brakes, and can't for the life of me understand how anyone would need more braking power. There's more than enough to lock the front wheel and crash if you slam them on - how much more can you use???
Regarding handling, I've never owned a Jap bike from any manufacturer that had decent suspension out of the box. The stock springs and shock sucked on the Concours and other bikes I had in the past, same with the FJR. Upgrading the springs and shock on the Connie transformed the handling of that bike (such as it was, with it's looooong wheelbase). The same is true of the FJR. Having said all this, I wish as much as the next guy that I didn't have to unload a grand for suspension upgrades. But keep in mind the number of guys who putt around on the FJR like it was a 'Wing and don't want to pay the extra dough out of the box for fancy suspension. Also, this bike was originally designed for Europe, where soft saggy suspension seems to be the desired norm for bumpy, slippery mountian roads - BMW makes it's suspension overly soft for this reason.

But I've gotta tell ya, the FJR could stand to be a little closer to the R1

I respect your opinion on this since you're a sportbike rider, and I think some would agree with you. But there's also riders out there who think the FJR is plenty edgy enough, thanks very much, and don't really want or need it to be more sporty than it is. As for me, if all the Japs sold were sportbikes, I'd never own another Jap bike, period. To me, those things are worthless for anything but track use, and I'm not a racer. But that's just my opinion.
All in all, for what I paid for the FJR, I was a little disappointed at first that it needed so much farkling to meet my needs, which were more tour oriented, bigger windscreen, highway pegs, heavier suspension, etc. But after awhile I learned how many different options were out there for this bike, and that you could farkle it into anything you want. Want more sport? Bolt it on. Want more tour? Bolt it on. Really cool forum with all the help you can stand to have? Free of charge!!! Had Yamaha decided to reinvent the bike every two or three years, there would be a lot less ability to have such a varied aftermarket for this bike. So keeping the design somewhat stable can be a good thing.

 

[Ramblin Man]

My turn.

I'm not sure where the criticism of the FJRs brakes are comming from unless its an ABS bleeding issue. My 03 brakes, pulled straight from the R1 of the time if I'm not mistaken, have always been stellar.

As for handling, I can't argue too much about wanting the bike to handle better other than to say that goes for any bike.

Of course, back in "the day" you had bikes like the CBR1000, ZX10/11, FJ1100/1200. And then you had bikes like the GSXR1100, FZR1000 which were a completely different focus all together. Obviously the FJR hales from the first group of bikes and merely benefits from the latter.

I think complaining about the FJR's sporting prowess in this particular instance is showing how spoiled we have all become (or at least some of us ) I mean, I would hope that my R1 handled, acelerated, and stopped a whole world better than my FJR, because its supposed to.

Even the best leatherman muti tool is not as good as having each individual tool at your disposal.

But, on the other hand, I'm all for fixing things that ain't broke. Who thinks moving the battery under the seat would have a positive effect on handeling?(sorry ABS dudes)

 

[C&C]

Oh no! you mean I bought a piece of junk bike. WOW, good thing somebody told me, cause up until now, I didn't know that. It just sounds like the reviewers had "sport" in their mind and didn't consider the tourer part.

 

[afterburn]

Also, this bike was originally designed for Europe, where soft saggy suspension seems to be the desired norm for bumpy, slippery mountian roads - BMW makes it's suspension overly soft for this reason.

I don't know where you got this myth from, but German roads are typically of the "smooth as a pool table" type, as are most roads we EU riders like to frequent. The reason the FJR suspension is too soft, is the same as why all Jap bikes have crap suspension: their idea of an average rider is one weighing 150 pounds and that typically does not fit EU or US descriptions.

 

[teerex51]

The German magazine "Motorrad" is Europe's most read and it featured a series of "shootouts" over the past 3-4 years in which the FJR always came in 1st or 2nd, most often beating the crap out of BMW iron B) -- which I though was commendable for a German rag.

The British bike press? I would not piss on them if they were on fire. :angry:

Stef