New FJR Article

[ShinyPartsUp]

All i read is blah blah blah 6th gear!
Getting close to NEPRT material!

So, if I asked, say: 'Would a sixth gear require a different vicosity oil?' we might go over the edge? :lol: :dribble:

 

[Cdogman]

NERPT. LMAO I see not much has changed over here..

That friggin makes me happy too..

 

[palerider]

I could be wrong but my impression is that the bulk of riders pleading for a 6th gear come from a background of "high strung" bikes that have all their power in a narrow band (usually way up high). The 6 gears they got used to are needed to keep the bike "on power" in a wide bunch of situations.
The FJR's power band is so wide that it does fine without a 6th gear. With care, it can go from zero to 110+ mph in 3rd. Most have noted that an additional 6th would either be so high as to only be used above 80 or that the existing high/low boundaries would be kept and the different gears simply set more closely together (resulting in more stirring over any given section of road).

IOW: A 6th gear to assuage the conditioning of former sporters would bring little to the table.

And, yes, Fred, I wear my Curmudgeon badge proudly!

It's always straw-man arguments with you anti-6th-gear morons.

I don't want a 6th gear because of powerband issues--what would be the point of that on this bike? The bike pulls fine with 5, and adding a blatantly unnecessary 6th within the current gear spread would be steeply dupid. I want an OVERDRIVE 6th gear, a gear OUTSIDE the current gear spread, a very high gear that would lower RPMs and buzz during those boring, high-speed flat-straights, the occasionally necessary-but-always-mindless here-to-theres on the interstate. This might help MPG--I don't know, and I don't care--but dropping RPMs by 800 to 1000 would help a lot with comfort during those 200-mile, I-got-to-get-there-by-tonight stretches on I5. In the twisties or on country-road sweepers, I don't have to use 6th gear, do I? As a (sometimes) sentient human, I have the power and authority to not use a gear just because it's there.

That said, this ain't ever going to happen on an FJR1300 because, engineering-wise, it would result in a very small gain on a very big investment for Yamaha. Bikes with 6 gears, whether an overdrive 6th or not, existed long before the FJR was even conceived, so the 5-speed represents a deliberate, conscious choice by Yamaha, and the conditions and reasons existing when they made that choice haven't changed. Objections to the change are immediately obvious: It would make heavier an already heavy bike, and it would make it wider, affecting cornering clearance; it would require more parts and compexity and would increase the bike's cost; it would require a virtual re-engineering of the tranny and drive train necessitating expensive R&D and testing in a down market; and it's doubtful it would affect sales once revised in that direction. Would anyone buy an FJR that was essentially the same bike/engine that it is now except it would be heavier, slower, wider, and more expensive?

Nuh uh.

So I don't think this is the direction Yamaha would choose for the current bike. Now were there to be an FJR1400 in the works, then look at the C14 and any new Honda S/T that might be on the way. Those will be the targets. Any new Yamaha S/T will aim to better their features and performance. Frankly I doubt we'll see any major FJR redesign until the economy improves significantly, and by then we might be talking about an FJR 1500.

Would a company that was experiencing heavy financial losses in a down and not-soon-to-recover economy increase its costs when it is clear the result wouldn't increase its sales, revenues, and profits?

Answer: It wouldn't (and won't).

Before getting grouchy because a reviewer mentions a 6th gear, remember the mindset of reviewers. Their job is to find nits to pick and to make wise-and-knowledgeable-souding distinctions. IOW, their job is to sound like they know what they're talking about (even when, as is often the case--and I speak from experience as a decades-long magazine feature writer--they don't). Imagine how an editor would respond to a writer submitting an article that had no negatives at all (not to mention how the readers would respond). Asking Yamaha for a 6th gear is a safe way to sound knowing. After all, you want more assignments, and the editor, who will hand those out, wants to believe you actually rode the bike you're talking about. (I once wrote a tongue-in-cheek, tour-guide article for ISLANDS magazine about Atlantis.)

So take it easy, 6th-gear haters, take it easy. Breathe deeply. Relax. There's nothing at stake here. No 6th gear is ever going to be added to the FJR1300 no matter how many moto-mag whines there are, no matter how many forum wishlists there are, no matter how many FJR 1300 Gens there are. Be generous, and let the dreamers dream. There's not much else to think about while you're out there on I5 doing 90 on the slab from Bakersfield and the buzz is making your arm numb.

 

[charismaticmegafauna]

While your rambling soliloquy makes some salient points, some just 'don't hold water' -- to wit:

Objections to the change are immediately obvious: It would make heavier an already heavy bike, and it would make it wider, affecting cornering clearance; it would require more parts and compexity and would increase the bike's cost; it would require a virtual re-engineering of the tranny and drive train necessitating expensive R&D and testing in a down market; and it's doubtful it would affect sales once revised in that direction. Would anyone buy an FJR that was essentially the same bike/engine that it is now except it would be heavier, slower, wider, and more expensive?

Companies like Quaife have, for decades, sold custom transmission gearsets for stock, racing, and popular motorcycles. If there were sufficient demand, one could (probably?) be sourced for the FJR. It would replace, directly, the stock gear-set -- no wider. In fact, Quaife replacement gear-sets can be had in many differing iterations: 4-speed, 5-speed, 6-speed, etc; close ratio, wide ratio... IOW, 'made to order'.

Then there are the many motorcycles with 'cassette' style transmissions -- different gear-sets for different purposes -- 'at the ready'.

I maintain your 'dire predictions' about the inability/un-likelyhood of more/different gearboxes is largely histrionics.

 

[palerider]

While your rambling soliloquy makes some salient points, some just 'don't hold water' -- to wit:

Objections to the change are immediately obvious: It would make heavier an already heavy bike, and it would make it wider, affecting cornering clearance; it would require more parts and compexity and would increase the bike's cost; it would require a virtual re-engineering of the tranny and drive train necessitating expensive R&D and testing in a down market; and it's doubtful it would affect sales once revised in that direction. Would anyone buy an FJR that was essentially the same bike/engine that it is now except it would be heavier, slower, wider, and more expensive?

Companies like Quaife have, for decades, sold custom transmission gearsets for stock, racing, and popular motorcycles. If there were sufficient demand, one could (probably?) be sourced for the FJR. It would replace, directly, the stock gear-set -- no wider. In fact, Quaife replacement gear-sets can be had in many differing iterations: 4-speed, 5-speed, 6-speed, etc; close ratio, wide ratio... IOW, 'made to order'.

Then there are the many motorcycles with 'casette' style transmissions -- different gear-sets for different purposes -- 'at the ready'.

I maintain your 'dire predictions' about the inability/un-likelyhood of more/different gearboxes is largely histrionics.

With enough money, I can customize anything into anything else. I could turn an FJR into a Harley Ultraglide. I could even turn what you've just written into something that makes sense. But alas I don't have that kind of money. We're talking about a mass-produced bike for a mass audience, not a one-off. I said YAMAHA wouldn't spend the money to put out a 6-speed FJR 1300 because it wouldn't result in enough increased sales to offset the substantial costs. I did not say that it couldn't be done at all by anyone stupid enough to spend the very large amount of money it would cost in return for the very small benefit.

Tell you what. You call Quaife and see what it will cost, then post the result and see if any of the 6-speeders (of which I am one) are willing to pay that.

I'm quessing no.

:glare:

 

[SCWatts]

The sidebar about the FJR was right on

The sidebar wasn't completely right on . . . as when he described his black 2009 FJR, subject of a dozen or so photos spread throughout the article, as ". . . my big blue Yam . . . ."

 

[bramfrank]

The sidebar about the FJR was right on

The sidebar wasn't completely right on . . . as when he described his black 2009 FJR, subject of a dozen or so photos spread throughout the article, as ". . . my big blue Yam . . . ."

Because, as we all well know the '06 Blue was the best there ever was. It was a Freudian slip.

 

[charismaticmegafauna]

While your rambling soliloquy makes some salient points, some just 'don't hold water' -- to wit:

Objections to the change are immediately obvious: It would make heavier an already heavy bike, and it would make it wider, affecting cornering clearance; it would require more parts and compexity and would increase the bike's cost; it would require a virtual re-engineering of the tranny and drive train necessitating expensive R&D and testing in a down market; and it's doubtful it would affect sales once revised in that direction. Would anyone buy an FJR that was essentially the same bike/engine that it is now except it would be heavier, slower, wider, and more expensive?

Companies like Quaife have, for decades, sold custom transmission gearsets for stock, racing, and popular motorcycles. If there were sufficient demand, one could (probably?) be sourced for the FJR. It would replace, directly, the stock gear-set -- no wider. In fact, Quaife replacement gear-sets can be had in many differing iterations: 4-speed, 5-speed, 6-speed, etc; close ratio, wide ratio... IOW, 'made to order'.

Then there are the many motorcycles with 'cassette' style transmissions -- different gear-sets for different purposes -- 'at the ready'.

I maintain your 'dire predictions' about the inability/un-likelyhood of more/different gearboxes is largely histrionics.

With enough money, I can customize anything into anything else. I could turn an FJR into a Harley Ultraglide.

Some have tried to make the FJR into a slightly smaller/much cheaper Gold Wing -- but an H-D Ultraglide -- now, there's a stretch....

I could even turn what you've just written into something that makes sense. But alas I don't have that kind of money.

There may not be that much money...? I'm merely an amateur (un-like some...)

We're talking about a mass-produced bike for a mass audience, not a one-off. I said YAMAHA wouldn't spend the money to put out a 6-speed FJR 1300 because it wouldn't result in enough increased sales to offset the substantial costs. I did not say that it couldn't be done at all by anyone stupid enough to spend the very large amount of money it would cost in return for the very small benefit.

Your "cost" argument may 'hold water' (partly?) -- I'll allow you some traction there. But, your "heavier, wider, more complex' comments just don't fly.

Quaife gear-sets have been used by many private/individuals over the years -- they're not that "out-there".

And "cassette-style" transmissions (which some bikes come-with, stock) allow for changing gears and gear ratios through a trap-door all-at-once (same space, weight, etc).

The bottom line is: The mighty FJR just plain does not need 6 gears and having 6 gears would, in no way, make it better...(jmho)

 

[palerider]

Your "cost" argument may 'hold water' (partly?) -- I'll allow you some traction there. But, your "heavier, wider, more complex' comments just don't fly.

Yes, I see your point about heavier/wider. I wrote a long rebuttal defending my position, and when I got to the end of that I found my own argument to be illogical and stupid. Assuming Yamaha was willing to redo the tranny of the FJR1300, they could redesign it to fit within the existing case and weight. I take back heavier/wider, but not more complex: 6 gears is by definition more complex than 5. I don't need an engineering degree to figure that out. Know how I know? Because 6 is more than 5. More gears, more dogs, more parts, more complexity.

The only way anyone will see a 6-speed FJR FROM YAMAHA is in a new model with a new engine (maybe a 1400 crossplane?). There the economics might (MIGHT) warrant use of lighter, stronger, smaller gears to allow similar case dimensions and weight, but only if the marketing people thought it would generate enough more sales than otherwise (i.e. with a 5-speed). They'd probably be able to project selling a reasonable number of bikes because some of the existing base of Gen I and Gen II owners would buy them, and first-time buyers would be more likely to buy an FJR that compared more favorably to the C14. And some new FJR buyers would buy it DESPITE a 6-speed offering, not because of it. And some people would decide NOT to buy it because of a 6-speed offering. Of course some sales would be cannibalized by now-for-sale used FJRs put on the market by former Gen I and Gen II owners who were trading up. All that would be considered by Yamaha in the equation that would result in the final feature set.

Pie-in-the-sky? All else being equal? For me, coming off a 6-speed V65 with a true overdrive, a 6-speed overdrive on the current FJR would be a nice addition on long rides on the slab. Would I lose thousands of dollars by selling my current ride for the same bike with a 6-speed? No. Would I lose hundreds? Yes. Is it going to happen? No.

 

[Fred W]

I wrote a long rebuttal defending my position, and when I got to the end of that I found my own argument to be illogical and stupid.

Boy do I hate when that happens.

I've deleted some perfectly crafted, well worded posts just before clicking the "add reply",

'cause when I proof read it I realized I was full of it! :lol:

 

[Attila]

Mechanically speaking, you lose approximately 2.5% power/torque per gear set and consequently a 6 speed transmission eats more power than a 5 speed. The FJR employs a very small cam shaft duration wise and consequently is a torquer rather than a high RPM buzzer and the wide ratio 5 speed it has coupled with the numerically tall final drive (3.91) fits it's torque curve perfectly. If it had bigger cams, say something on the order of the V-Max cams which have 16 degrees more duration you would benefit from a lower gear ratio performance wise and in such a case you might want a taller top gear or a 6th. speed to bring the top gear ratio down to what it has now or maybe even higher like the 3.44 high gear ratio used in the C-14.

5,000 rpm on an 08 FJR is 95 mph and at that speed the engine is just loofing along in it's sweet spot and there are few places you can cruise aimlessly for very long at that speed without getting a users tax :assassin: and so, I'll take the 5 speed along with the 2.5% in change I can believe in. h34r:

From a mechanical standpoint, the FJR is a very good example where less is better, it's a sweet well balanced piece.

 

[palerider]

I wrote a long rebuttal defending my position, and when I got to the end of that I found my own argument to be illogical and stupid.

Boy do I hate when that happens.

I've deleted some perfectly crafted, well worded posts just before clicking the "add reply",

'cause when I proof read it I realized I was full of it! :lol:

It's a big club.

 

[SacramentoMike]

This thread has been an interesting one, and informative, as far as I could follow the engineer-specific parts. There have been plenty of times I've wound my bike up on some open road and tried for another gear, only to realize I was already in fifth. The bike has so much torque and power available wherever you are in the power band that it just feels like you should have another gear up there to go to. But realistically, when fifth carries you well up over double most any speed limit so easily and the tach is nowhere near red-lining, what else do you need? Talking to a friend recently who'd been riding with a buddy on a BMW reminded me of this. The buddy told him he had to shift down two gears to keep up when my FJR friend would accelerate after making a pass, staying in fifth the whole time.

I'd say more if I could type faster. I'm limited here, having only five fingers on each hand. Now if I just had six . . .

 

[bigjimbiker]

I'd say more if I could type faster. I'm limited here, having only five fingers on each hand. Now if I just had six . . .

Wow, you use all five!

I guess I'm stuck in second, only using two...and half the time, one of them's pickin' my nose! :dribble: