How would Yamaha do it?

[RadioHowie]

Not a bad thread from a Florida ********.

Where's my ******* smiley, ******!

Without one, I might think you're painfully close to violating forum guideline #5. My feelings are hurt. :****:

[SIZE=8pt](and for an Admin, no less)[/SIZE]

Oh, forgot to ask...

HELL NO!

Why not?

 

[FJRay]

Just go find a good used 03. they are lighter than the rest and are quicker. The rest is up to the rider. My bike is much faster and handles better after I lost 100 lbs. :clapping:

 

[gr8eyes]

Isn't the Ducati ST3 about 550 lbs?

That would be the design bogey Yamaha would have to shoot for if the FJR was to lose 100lbs. V-Twin, Trellis frame, and Chain drive.

For me, the weight doesn't bother me.

Glenn

 

[UselessPickles]

think the most effective weight reduction on my machine would be 50lbs from the rider and 50lbs from the bike.

+1 Umm, for people like me who have added some weight with each "model year" it would be far easier to drop 50lbs from the rider. This would probably result in a performance increase for both me and my FJR. I wonder how many of us fall into this category? Further, I wonder how many of us are dedicated to riding enough to make a serious life style change in diet to improve the on road experience? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the engineering changes as well, it's just that it seems like the possibilities for change from the seat up (for me) are far greater than from the seat down. Of course, if you ride 2 up, you will have a hard time convincing the SO to drop some weight to improve your ride <_<

I think I would be dead if I lost 50 lbs. That would put me around 85lbs.

 

[Pjturbo]

If you want a faster,lighter bike, why don't you buy one. They're available.

Phil

 

[lnewlf]

If you want a faster,lighter bike, why don't you buy one. They're available.
Phil

Listen to Dr. Phil, he's right....Mamaha already did all the things you ladies want done..it was called the FJ1200. Of course that was to heavy at 570 so they made the R1. That was to narrowly focused and uncomfortable so they made the FJR. and the beat goes on.

 

[v65]

How about a one sided swingarm and single sided exhaust?

 

[Fred W]

I require shaft drive, but here's my contribution: Get rid of the adjustable windshield. The bracketry, and especially the motor would get you a few pounds towards that 50.

Good call. A manually adjustable windshield is really just as useful as the motor driven one. Though it is kind of nice to have the shield up on the cold mornings in the flat lands and be able to drop it down when entering the twisty bits.

If you want a faster,lighter bike, why don't you buy one. They're available.
Phil

Yes there are. I'd really like it if Yamaha made a bike to compare with the Triumph Sprint, Ducati ST, Honda VFR, CBR XX type bikes. The idea would appeal more to folks that don't 2-up as much.

As to the chain drive being a PITA, modern chains are really much better than they were years ago. The only lubrication required is in the interface between chain and sprocket, not the internal chain elements, so what you actually are saving from wear is the sprockets. An auto-chain-luber is overkill in my mind. Just get in the habit of spritzing the chain at every other gas stop with the Dupont Teflon spray stuff. No cleaning, no mess, no problemo. Works on my Viffer.

If I lost 50lbs now I'd be lighter than I was back when I was a 20-something, emaciated looking, road bicyclist (6'2 ~165 lbs). There's just no way I could maintain that kind of low body weight without riding a few hundred miles a week (with pedals, not motors) which would sure cut into the FJR riding time... But I know, like most 'Muricans, I could stand to lose 25...

 

[v65]

If you want a faster,lighter bike, why don't you buy one. They're available.
Phil

Listen to Dr. Phil, he's right....Mamaha already did all the things you ladies want done..it was called the FJ1200. Of course that was to heavy at 570 so they made the R1. That was to narrowly focused and uncomfortable so they made the FJR. and the beat goes on.

Say what? We're ladies because we want an improvement that increase performance and handling? Yamaha made the R1 because the FJ was too heavy? In case you haven't noticed genius the FJR is getting heavier, some of us would like to see it go the other way, what could possibly be wrong with that? You could at least have the courtesy to wait until Friday to make posts like this.

 

[wheatonFJR]

...according to Iggy's spreadsheet:

The 2008 ABS models are 40 lbs heavier than the 2004 ABS models. :huh:

That's called weight creep. :clapping:

 

[lnewlf]

If you want a faster,lighter bike, why don't you buy one. They're available.
Phil

Listen to Dr. Phil, he's right....Mamaha already did all the things you ladies want done..it was called the FJ1200. Of course that was to heavy at 570 so they made the R1. That was to narrowly focused and uncomfortable so they made the FJR. and the beat goes on.

Say what? We're ladies because we want an improvement that increase performance and handling? Yamaha made the R1 because the FJ was too heavy? In case you haven't noticed genius the FJR is getting heavier, some of us would like to see it go the other way, what could possibly be wrong with that? You could at least have the courtesy to wait until Friday to make posts like this.

Umm ,lets make it simpler-The FJ was to heavy so the FZ1000 was built which was to heavy so the YZF1000 was built which was to heavy so the R1 was built but we wanted a ST,which the FJ used to be so along came the FJR. If you had read my previous post you might have noticed that I agreed that lighter weight would be nice..It doesn't take a nuclear physicist to understand that if you change everything on the bike you won't have a FJR anymore but a more narrowly focused bike like a R1. And if "ladies "hurt your feelings then I certainly apologize in much the same way as when I hurt my wife's feelings.

 

[odot]

Tell us how you drop down on your knees to "apologize".....inewlf?

 

[wfooshee]

Nose structure pieces from aluminum instead of steel.

I'll bet you a dollar that those pieces ARE aluminum. They are waaaay to light to be steel. Seriously.

Steel, sorry. That black-painted piece that attaches to the top of the frame, carries the mirrors, nose cowl, headlights, windshield, instrument panel, upper fairing, and the battery tray. Not aluminum.

You're an admin, you can find my email, that's where you can paypal the dollar. :lol:

 

[lnewlf]

I believe I said "wife' as in woman--self explanitory or left up to one's imagination.. [panties must have FJR logo!]

 

[v65]

If you had read my previous post you might have noticed that I agreed that lighter weight would be nice..It doesn't take a nuclear physicist to understand

That's good, 'cause it must take a nuclear physicist to find the previous post where you agree with the lighter weight. Am I supposed to memorize your posts from other threads? Thanks for clearing up the history of the R1, much clearer now. So what does this have to do with making the FJR lighter? Nobody is proposing removing saddlebags, changing windscreens, or otherwise morphing the FJR into something else. Howie just wants to know what means are there to lighten the bike.

Looking forward to the next misogynistic post in this wonderful subthread. :glare:

 

[Potential]

The BMW R1200RT weighs 505 lbs dry, 571 lbs fully fueled/oiled, compared to the FJR1300's 640 lbs fully fueled. And the RT is also a fully-faired tourer with adjustable windshield, shaft drive, and a 7.1 gallon gas tank. The engine's a 1170cc two-cylinder, which is likely largely responsible for the lighter weight.

Buells use a 1203cc V-twin and they weigh 395 lbs dry. Of course they're naked bikes.

More food for thought: The Concours 14 has a wet weight of 670 lbs, but the ZX-14, which uses the same engine but has chain drive, a fixed windshield, no side bags, etc., weighs 567 lbs wet. That's about 100 lbs lighter. Of course the side bags alone probably weigh 30 lbs or so combined.

Anyway I think the biggest problem is the engine. Perhaps a two-cylinder would allow for a narrower (more comfortable) and lighter bike. Relocating at least some of the fuel under the seat would also be beneficial.

 

[lnewlf]

If you had read my previous post you might have noticed that I agreed that lighter weight would be nice..It doesn't take a nuclear physicist to understand

That's good, 'cause it must take a nuclear physicist to find the previous post where you agree with the lighter weight. Am I supposed to memorize your posts from other threads? Thanks for clearing up the history of the R1, much clearer now. So what does this have to do with making the FJR lighter? Nobody is proposing removing saddlebags, changing windscreens, or otherwise morphing the FJR into something else. Howie just wants to know what means are there to lighten the bike.

Looking forward to the next misogynistic post in this wonderful subthread. :glare:

Here you go Bud- try reading the posts that Howie referenced in the first post. And you might want to look up that big word before you use it..I have expressed nothing but admiration for Eva and all things feminine-the FJR is my second favorite ride. Back on subject-the best way to improve the FJR is to keep it around long term and refine it without turning it into something else. Improvements might actually be the reason that the FJR has gained weight, even if that sounds counterintuitive.[back to Websters again]

 

[Fred W]

The BMW R1200RT weighs 505 lbs dry, 571 lbs fully fueled/oiled, compared to the FJR1300's 640 lbs fully fueled. And the RT is also a fully-faired tourer with adjustable windshield, shaft drive, and a 7.1 gallon gas tank. The engine's a 1170cc two-cylinder, which is likely largely responsible for the lighter weight.
Buells use a 1203cc V-twin and they weigh 395 lbs dry. Of course they're naked bikes.

More food for thought: The Concours 14 has a wet weight of 670 lbs, but the ZX-14, which uses the same engine but has chain drive, a fixed windshield, no side bags, etc., weighs 567 lbs wet. That's about 100 lbs lighter. Of course the side bags alone probably weigh 30 lbs or so combined.

Anyway I think the biggest problem is the engine. Perhaps a two-cylinder would allow for a narrower (more comfortable) and lighter bike. Relocating at least some of the fuel under the seat would also be beneficial.

The BMW is an air cooled twin. That's apples and oranges in terms of total technology.

My VFR has a V4 liquid cooled engine and weighs 516 lbs wet. Granted it's only an 800cc but it makes ~110hp. It could be punched up to a liter or more with very little weight gain.

The Triumph Sprint with a (preferable) 3 cylinder liquid cooled 1050cc engine weighs in at 462 lbs dry (a little over 500lbs wet) and makes 125hp. Showing that it is possible to make a multi cyl engine that is narrower and lighter.

 

[v65]

Here you go Bud- try reading the posts that Howie referenced in the first post.

You might want to read them yourself, I already posted there. Kinda tough to keep track of other threads isn't it?

Mamaha already did all the things you ladies want done.And if "ladies "hurt your feelings then I certainly apologize in much the same way as when I hurt my wife's feelings.

I have expressed nothing but admiration for Eva and all things feminine

Oops, my mistake I guess. Don't know how I got confused.

refine it without turning it into something else

Who is suggesting changing it into something else? It's a hypothetical question on weight loss.

 

[Ignacio]

Nose structure pieces from aluminum instead of steel.

I'll bet you a dollar that those pieces ARE aluminum. They are waaaay to light to be steel. Seriously.

Steel, sorry. That black-painted piece that attaches to the top of the frame, carries the mirrors, nose cowl, headlights, windshield, instrument panel, upper fairing, and the battery tray. Not aluminum.

Yes....unless magnets started sticking to aluminum somehow. It surprised me the first time I had the nose off.

Gen 1 had less steel, Gen 2 has more. No way near 100 pounds, but might be able to shave a couple pounds if they reengineered the nose and used different materials.