FJR vs Connie C10

[El Toro]

Carbs can indeed do some things better: like unreliable starting, being cold blooded, requiring the choke, needing to be drained over the winter, getting gummed up from sitting in the garage too long, and needing to be removed, disassembled and rebuilt from time to time. Yeah, they do SOME THINGS better.

I prefer EFI myself, but EFI systems will gum up if you leave things sitting too long too, and it is harder to sort them out once this has happened, although neither system is that hard if you haven't totally screwed it up.

Regarding unreliable starting, this is another user created problem, often associated with someone having "improved things" by turning this screw or that. You can get the same sort of messed up effect with EFI, but you have to be more adventurous since EFI is often sealed carefully against your improvements.

I still run one carbed bike, and it starts within a few seconds EVERY time. I know how to choke, how to release choke, and probably most importantly, I know enough to run the bike somewhere every month to keep the gas fresh ... and then there is the issue of E0 vs. E10, and I know which one is less likely to cause problems for anything that is more or less stored.

Up until last spring, I had a pair of EFI bikes that were both unreliable starters (both from that famous German brand with the roundel logo). If the battery wasn't at 100%, or if it was below 50 F in the garage, you were going to have to crank that sucker maybe 5 to 8 times before it would stay lit. According to the dealer, there were no issues with failed sensors etc. This bike's EFI system shared a lot with KTM and Aprilia, sporting high levels of Italian cleverness, delivered by Rotax. I've seen other samples of this same bike, and they are all similar.

And then there are the Aprilias. Anyone ever spent much time enjoying the fueling program on the Caponord? Maybe no one, although many have tried.

EFI is great if it has been set up by the right team. A carb can be great if it's not abused by a less talented user. If EFI has been screwed up when it was designed, even a clever user will have trouble sorting it out.

FWIW, most UJMs have pretty great EFI. And they also had pretty great carbs. EFI would not be so wide spread today if it weren't for the emissions regulations. Emissions regulations pushed carbs out, and once you've got EFI in place, you've got a whole lot more flexibililty to achieve specific target results if you're smart enough, and if you have access to the necessary facilities (brake based dyno and 5 gas analyzer).

 

[Fred W]

So, you like a touchy throttle and a soft throttle....I prefer to have a linear throttle response and decide for myself how much I want to use. Again...just my preference.

I get the sense that you have not actually ridden a 3rd Gen FJR or else you would not have said that. It isn't either of those things on the 3rd Gen FJR. It is a linear and smooth throttle, and you do choose how much of it to use, with your right hand.

Look... if you are happier without any of these features, then I am happy for you. You don't have anything to prove to me or anyone else. But I will tell you that your opinion is the minority one by a very, very large margin. I can't recall a single person who has ridden a 3rd Gen FJR with FbW that thought the throttle control was worse than prior Gens.

 

[Bounce]

Actually, except for power and whiz bang features, the 2010 NT, 2015 Gen III and 2003 C10 arent that all as far apart as you might think.

Can't that be said for any bike comparison? Apart from the differences they're exactly the same!

 

[wheatonFJR]

Shoot, they got two wheels...they're near identical!

 

[Bounce]

And, as most will admit, there are some things carbs do better... FI has been chasing carb-like throttle response since day one.

Chasing? My 05 has had perfect throttle response ever since the day I bought it. Absolutely no issues.

And how many years have passed between 2005 and when EFI was introduced? I stand by my observation. Fuel atomization, sprinkler head injectors, ECU tweaks to "lag" fuel cut off when the throttle is chopped, etc. Lots and lots of brain power went into getting EFI to act more like cabs wrt throttle response.

 

[garyahouse]

Bounce

You said, "And how many years had passed between 2005 and when EFI was introduced? I stand by my observation. Fuel atomization, sprinkler head injectors, ECU tweaks to "lag" fuel cut off when the throttle is chopped, etc. Lots and lots of brain power went into getting EFI to act more like cabs with throttle response."

Hmmm. With all that going on, it's amazing to me that my 05 has been so very spot on for me. Sure have gotten my money's worth out of that rascal.

Guess we can both agree that in both the Yammie world and in most of the automotive world, they have finally gotten it right. As the old Virginia Slims commercial on TV used to tout, "You've come a long way, baby..." How sad it was years ago when we went out and spent zillions on the latest and greatest, only to find that the engineers struck out: the carbs didn't carburate and we wondered if EFI meant...

Eventually

Figure

It out.

Gary

darksider #44

 

[Fred W]

And, as most will admit, there are some things carbs do better... FI has been chasing carb-like throttle response since day one.

Chasing? My 05 has had perfect throttle response ever since the day I bought it. Absolutely no issues.

And how many years have passed between 2005 and when EFI was introduced? I stand by my observation. Fuel atomization, sprinkler head injectors, ECU tweaks to "lag" fuel cut off when the throttle is chopped, etc. Lots and lots of brain power went into getting EFI to act more like cabs wrt throttle response.

Chicken or the egg.

The "issues" that you refer to with fuel injection were all purely intentional as a byproduct of satisfying the government(s) mandated emissions requirements. There are no other reasons to have the aggressively lean fueling and the fuel cut on over-run, which are what cause the classic Fuel Injection drive-ability problems. Those problems are not intrinsic to a fuel injection system, just a byproduct of minimizing emissions, which carburetors were unable to achieve.

 

[bergmen]

"Gee, I wish I had kept my (Gen I or Gen II) FJR instead of getting this Gen III FJR".

Said no one ever...

Dan

 

[Bounce]

I'm not saying new or old FJRs are bad. I'm simply making an observation that EFI has taken a while to shake out. To this day, product reviews in bike mags have bikes from different brands dealing well or poorly with EFI while having to meet those same EPA standards.

 

[Redfish Hunter]

Well, I think both sides are right on this one. But we sure are starting to drift from the original topic.

1. Anyone ridden the Yamaha FZ-09? Anyone remember the '06 and '07 FJR? Those are prime examples of poorly sorted fuel injection. So, Bounce is right on that side of the argument.

2. The emissions regulations have changed, and they are tighter now. It would be very, very difficult to get a carbureted engine to pass today's emissions testing. If there were a carbureted version of the FJR built today it would be jetted so lean that it would run like crap and would have more fueling issues in more situations than the fuel injected version. So, Fred W is right on that side of the argument.

I am going to say that the vast majority of us that ride our FJRs from sea level to 14,000+ feet of elevation and everything in between would prefer fuel injection. I would say that those of us who do at least some wrenching on our bikes would prefer fuel injection. I would say that those of us who sometimes have to pay someone to repair/maintain our bikes would prefer fuel injection.

I would say that for those of us who live in today's world and ride all over this country, the modern FJR is vastly superior in every way to yesterday's Concourse. And for me at least, I prefer the FJR to the modern Connie 14 also.

 

[El Toro]

I would say that for those of us who live in today's world and ride all over this country, the modern FJR is vastly superior in every way to yesterday's Concourse. And for me at least, I prefer the FJR to the modern Connie 14 also.

You can say that again! The FJR, in any generation, is the ultimate sport tourer for its day.

And I've got to admit, I think the Gen I and Gen II FJRs still hold up against newer offerings, including those newer offerings from BMW.

 

[HotRodZilla]

Well, I think both sides are right on this one. But we sure are starting to drift from the original topic.
1. Anyone remember the '06 and '07 FJR? Those are prime examples of poorly sorted fuel injection.

And for me at least, I prefer the FJR to the modern Connie 14 also.

1.Um, YES Why I do remember the lowly '07. Matter of fact, there's still one in my garage, and there is nothing wrong with my fuel injection.

I love how all you new ES turds want to pretend your bikes are suddenly so cool. They're not, they're a bike with more electrics. I can't wait to hear the bitching when one of them breaks. I guess I could have two modes to choose from, but since I know how to control my bike, I don't need modes to reduce my throttle response because I can't handle it. Cruise is honestly nice, but I can add one. Get rid of those things and what do we have? A bike that is nearly identical to the original 2002 model given to Europe. Haha...Yes...Sooooooooooo special.

The Concourse 14 is a POS. Let's call it like it is. Typical Kawasaki workmanship and poor implementation. A potentially cool bike screwed up by a bloated fairing, top much weight, too many gadgets and poor engine access. It has a bigger motor but is slower to accelerate and brake because of weight. Oh well...Maybe next time.

 

[Redfish Hunter]

1.Um, YES Why I do remember the lowly '07. Matter of fact, there's still one in my garage, and there is nothing wrong with my fuel injection.

I love how all you new ES turds want to pretend your bikes are suddenly so cool. They're not, they're a bike with more electrics. I can't wait to hear the bitching when one of them breaks. I guess I could have two modes to choose from, but since I know how to control my bike, I don't need modes to reduce my throttle response because I can't handle it. Cruise is honestly nice, but I can add one. Get rid of those things and what do we have? A bike that is nearly identical to the original 2002 model given to Europe. Haha...Yes...Sooooooooooo special.

The Concourse 14 is a POS. Let's call it like it is. Typical Kawasaki workmanship and poor implementation. A potentially cool bike screwed up by a bloated fairing, top much weight, too many gadgets and poor engine access. It has a bigger motor but is slower to accelerate and brake because of weight. Oh well...Maybe next time.

Well hello Mr. Grouchy.

As you already know there is an '07 in my Dad's garage also. While it is extremely cool, its fuel injection mapping sucked. Really sucked. The vast majority of the '06 and '07 owners reported the same issues. I used it as an example because the problems and the fixes are documented over and over in this forum.

I am happy that either YOUR bike is an exception or that YOUR skills are exceptional. It may be both. Or Not.

Yes, my ES is cool. It is Very Cool. I am like a modern Fonzie when I ride it. A fat, bald, ugly Fonzie, but still Cool.

The only reason your '07 is not cool is because it belongs to YOU.

I would argue that ANY year FJR would be a better bike for ME to own than the old, outdated Kawasaki C10. The C10 was a wonderful bike in its time but it is yesterday's technology. Compared to the Gen3, the older FJRs are also yesterday's technology. That is not an insult, that is just fact.

The C10 was never actually "Cool". I did want one because it was so useful, but by the time I could afford one the FJR was out and there was no way I was going to spend my money on that outdated war horse when the Cool FJR was available.

Now, cheer up my friend. I am pretty sure I can guess why you are grouchy right now. It will all get better with time.

 

[HotRodZilla]

^^^^Haha...I'm just messing with you man. Your '15 is still a woman's bike though. Did you know they used the lipstick red '14 paint to primer the 15's? Bummer...

 

[El Toro]

I had an '06, and I remember that a lot of owners were unhappy with the EFI, but I never was. I liked it just fine.

This may be like the mirrors issue. The stuff works for some people, but a sizable group are unhappy with the performance.

As for carbs, I think the ultimate carburetted sport touring bike was the ST1100. Those carbs were incredible. Love that V-4 too.

That bike was better than the C-10 too.

 

[RaYzerman19]

Yep, those ST11's are still great and unlike that lipstick pink of the '14 FJR's, the Honda reds are awesome. Fancy that, I didn't know that Yammy didn't want to re-release the unsold '14 FJR's and the '15's had the beautiful smokey charcoal paint to cover them up...... the things you learn here....

Meanwhile, my '07 got the PCV treatment and is running the best it's ever run, very few FI issues at all. The FJR is the best bike I have ever owned........ and to think I was craving a C10 once..... in 2006 (last year for them) I called a local dealer who was discounting them significantly. He said the good news was he had three of them, one the red I wanted. The bad news was they were all sold. I knew relatively little about all their quirks back then, but I'm glad they were all sold.

 

[NightShine]

In contrast the off-idle lurch on my 1979 Yamaha XS1100 (constant velocity carbs) was awful, hated it.

Another 1979 XS1100 owner here. Stolen from me

before I learned to hate the issue you bring up

I had that same year XS1000, 'sept sold mine to a guy who promptly crashed it at the drag races. I don't recall an off-idle lurch, but perhaps it's just been too long ago now.

 

[Fred W]

My 2001 (Smurf) Blue, ZG1000 Concours was the best touring bike that I had owned up to that point in time. That held true until I had my first ride on an FJR, which surpassed the C10 in every department. The idea that the Concours was a sport touring bike (at least in stock form) was some kind of an inside joke at Kawasaki. There was very little sportiness involved, IMO.

The buzzy, Inline four, one liter engine had been been morphed from the earlier Ninja 1000 of 1980's, but had been de-tuned to the point of boredom. The minimal power was exacerbated by the fact that the bike was serious overweight at just shy of 600 lbs dry, 671 lbs wet, that's more than a current version FJR with electronic suspension, ABS and all the other modern doo-dads.

The engineers had tuned the Ninja engine for increased low rpm torque by reducing the CV carb diameters from 36mm to 32mm, and going with a milder cam grind. The engine made only 97 Hp, giving it a power to weight ratio of 0.145 hp/lb. As a comparison, the modern (heavier) FJRs have 144.2HP and 637 lb wet weight, for a 0.226 hp/lb, or about 56% increase in power to weight over the old Connie. If you can't feel that kind of difference your butt-dyno is broken.

With its 7.5 gallons of fuel located up high in the fuel tank the old C10 was as top-heavy of a pig to paddle around a parking lot as ever was made. When (not if) you dropped the pig it almost always broke off the rider's foot peg mount on that side. Good ole' Murph (from MurphsKits.com), has funded his IRA from selling replacements.

The goofy 18" front and 16" rear wheel sizes meant that no decent sticky tires were available. Most of the COGnoscente would put the Metzler Marathon tires on them, which wore like steel and were as sticky as banana peels in the corners.

Talking about fueling, in stock trim (the 2001s at least) were delivered with undersized pilot jets to pass the current day emissions requirements. This resulted in a lean surge condition at cruise, much like many fuel injected bikes have today. Of course you had the carbs out to clean them often enough, so screwing in some proper sized pilots was an easy fix.

With the unreliable vacuum operated petcock, and perpetually gummed up float bowl needles, flooding a cylinder to the point of hydrolock and destroying the engine when you thumbed the starter button was always in the back of your mind. Many of us installed a secondary, electrical solenoid operated petcock as a belt and suspenders approach to avoid that looming disaster.

The weather protection was about the same as an FJR. But the windshield was fixed in place, (not even manually adjustable) so you had to choose which size shield you wanted for the entire trip.

The stock seat was squishy, but was actually more tolerable than the stock FJR seat for short periods. Then again, anyone riding any distance would be smart to put a Russell on either bike.

Like my photo analogy earlier, there really is no comparison between the two bikes.

 

[lnewlf]

Not to forget the screw type valve adjusters that would not hold adjustment,,easily scored cams and rotting tank corners...All that said, it was still a decent bike for it's time...

 

[hppants]

Upon further review..... I think the context of the OPs question is misunderstood. I don't think he wants an apples to oranges comparison of the two bikes. What he wants is opine regarding his specific concerns with sport touring bikes in general, and like everyone else, he relates his concerns to what he knows - in this case, the C10. He is concerned about the low speed weight of the bike, the pull of the clutch, and a few other very specific things. For those (like me) that have ridden and/or owned both bikes, it's easy for us to make those specific comparisons. Even if the FJR is God's gift to sport touring motorcycles, if something as simple as the clutch pull is overwhelmingly hard, and can't be fixed easily in the aftermarket, then I would assume, at least for the OP, that would be a deal breaker - and rightfully so.

The broader answer to the broader question (which S/T bike is the best) depends on who you ask, I think.

IMO, to qualify as a contestant, one has to have significant riding experience on many different S/T bikes. I'm talking at least hundreds of miles in varied weather, traffic, road conditions. Then and only then can one comment intelligently and impartially regarding the differences. Even so, those differences only shed light on what the particular contestant likes or dislikes about ALL S/T bikes. And more importantly, what that person is willing to compromise on for their S/T bike.

At some point, the overall comparison becomes moot. With the possible exception of better "barn door wind protection", the C10 doesn't do anything better than the FJR. It's a pointless comparison, really. Unless of course, you ONLY criteria in a sport touring motorcycle is weather protection. But of course, if that is the case, you would be better off buying a gold wing or a ultra glide.

The other day it was getting late, and I chose to blast down the slab to get home quicker. Running 85 mph against a 15-20 mph crosswind was kicking my *** big time. Eve in good weather, the FJR's manners on the interstate are not great, IMO. The windscreen was all the way up and even with my ear buds sealed in, things sounded like a hurricane in my helmet. I remember thinking that if I was riding an ST1300, it would be nearly as bad. I jumped off the slab about 15 miles from home and took one of my favorite curvy roads into the city. In a hundred yards, I found the first curve. A butter smooth right hander with great visibility. As I shifted into 4th, I pushed my right hand forward and my red head flopped right into the apex like she was on a rail. I tilted and turned my head toward the vanishing point of the curve and gently gave the beast just a smidge more fuel. The chassis was planted and rock stable. I forgot all about the slab....