UK's bike magazine ranks FJR 2nd to last

[Flyguy]

Could you at least post the individual ratings if that sort of info was given?

 

[ionbeam]

R 1200 RT MSRP: $16,650

K 1200 GT MSRP: $18,600

[SIZE=12pt]https://www.bikemagazine.co.uk/[/SIZE]

 

[Barabus]

They don't have a website you could link?
You could email it to Don and HE could post it! :dribble:

Okay MM2, didn't have breakfast this morning? If Bike posted all the articles online then they would not be Britain's largest selling motorcycle magazine. Here is the link anyways- Bike UK mag. As to your second idea, if that circumnavigated copyright laws, then any pirate could just email Don. He could be the clearing house for pirated materials. Too funny, MM2. You are busting me up this morning. There is always the educational fair use defense to copyright infringement. Y'all need edgyoumacaten dontcha?

 

[Flyguy]

DCaver is right. I don't think an FJR forum would even come close to their radar screen but even if it did I believe that there is no violations of copyright infringements in posting here, anymore that there is no problem with you showing your friends the article as long as there is no profit motive involved. Pubs are time sensitive business's. A week after it's out, it's done, old news. Their circulation dept would probably applaud you for the additional circ, especially since it goes to non members that are potential customers.

 

[Barabus]

Could you at least post the individual ratings if that sort of info was given?

Well, it was not given in any sort of meaningful way without the article. Each of the five reviewers picked his favorite and then ranked the others. It seems that the RT was only picked first by one reviewer. Note, the FJR was picked 1st by two riders. However, no reviewer hated the RT so the average was good enough to place it first overall. Which I think is problematic. This extensive test was marred by a chessy ranking system at the end. A couple guys just got buffeted by the OEM windscreen and hated the long, fast ride. I do not fault them on that point, but come on and do what any novice would do and change the screen out so you can really evaluate the bike. Three reviews had high speed weave on the st1300 and it finished higher? Windscreens are easily fixable but high speed weave is not. In sum, the final results are shite (proper Queen's English here). However, the performance tests and article are gold.

 

[Flyguy]

You're such a tease! <_< What were the other 2 first place votes!

 

[Barabus]

R 1200 RT MSRP: $16,650K 1200 GT MSRP: $18,600

[SIZE=12pt]https://www.bikemagazine.co.uk/[/SIZE]

Yeah, but that is base. Try to find a BMW bike at that price. Each one has this package and that package. Every guy I have met on a k1200gt has spent 23K-25K out the door for the ride. I spent 12.5K on the new 06 FJR plus another 3K to Garmin, Russell, Skyway, Rifle and Smitty. So in my book it is roughly $16K vs. $25K. However, I do not have factory options, so no yamaha warranty. I also do not have electronic suspension or heated grips (yet). Great article but flawed results. And good point Ionbeam, that this does not take into account the purchase price or ownership costs which are disparate.

In any event, I would give this article to a friend that is thinking about a new ST bike. Cross off the conclusion and caveat it with "everyone changes their windscreen" and it is a great article. Make me feel good that I did not drink the GTR Koolaid!

 

[Barabus]

Your such a tease! <_< What were the other 2 first place votes!

Well, I have been called worst things. OKAY! Note, you get to know the reviewers personality and riding style over a period of reading. I cannot instill that into this post, but the two that picked the FJR were the tallest two reviewers, both sightly over 6 feet. The individual results, which are meaningless according to my analysis are listed in order of first choice to last below.

Paul Allen FJR,RT,GTR,ST1300,GT

Chippy Wood GT,GTR,RT,ST1300,FJR

MArtin Gibbons RT,ST1300,GT,FJR,GTR

Pete Boast FJR,GT,ST1300,RT,GTR

Simon Hargraves ST1300,GT,RT,GTR,FGR

Overall RT,GT,ST1300,FJR,GTR

Last bit of goodness- uncorrected standing 1/4 mile times

RT 13.1s

St1300 12.5s

FJR 12.3s

GT 11.8s

GTR 10.85s

The GTR moves out but handle poorly. It is still a muscle bike, might as well buy a ZX-14 if you are seriously think about a GTR.

 

[mikeyb]

In sum, many of the reviewers hated the heavy sprung throttle and small OEM windscreen. I wonder what they would pick if they had actual customers bikes after one year of farkling?

So for $200 you can fix the biggest concerns of the reviewers and still have $6k to spend on all other kinds of things.

I am a researcher and have to submit grant requests to organizations like the NIH and am used to dealing with critiques of knowledgeable people in the area. When I get comments like this identifying items of little or no consequence, or can easily be fixed I take that as a worthless review as it does not address the science. In this case, neither of these big concerns really address the fitness of the motorcycle as the throttle can be "fixed" by releasing the spring one turn and for less than $200 dollar you can add many different kinds of windscreen. With an MSRP of nearly 20K for the BMW's vs. 14K on the FJR there is something to be said for the value of the motorcycle.

I have ridden an 1150 RT and looked at the 1200 RT before I bought my 07 FJR. If I were to review the 2 (and others) I think I would point out some of the difference between the bikes and then discuss those difference and how they might impact the use of each for their stated purpose. The biggest difference between those 2 bikes is in power and as I already have a 650 Vstrom (which tours just fine IMHO) I wanted something more peppy and that just ruled out the

RT. So, that should be mentioned as a limitation and if it were important then one should consider bikes like the FJR, GT Kawasaki etc. Since this is a sport touring category, I don't see how the RT can even be compared to either the GT or the FJR frankly. The new RT, although lighter in weight has a considerably larger footprint than the earlier versions and is more like the LT now.

So, for me a review that addresses real concerns is more useful. As I have MCN I found its format to be useful but I have a real problem with the MCN article not taking Yamaha to task for the poor stopping performance of the Gen II FJR. In the current issue of MCN it gives a list of testing data for alot of different bikes and at 60 to 0 a stopping distance of 144 feet is just about the worst for all the bikes listed. If I were to take the FJR to task for anything this is the item I would dwell on and not the throttle (which I really don't notice as a problem). If I were to complain about the throttle I would complain more about the throttle cam but once again this can be easily fixed with the G2 throttle tube, which I have done.

 

[Checkswrecks]

I own a Feejer.

Rode it to work (it was a balmy 21F leaving the garage).

Will ride it tomorrow if possible.

And like it.

Screw 'em if they don't.

That is all.

 

[charismaticmegafauna]

<snip>The individual results, which are meaningless according to my analysis ....

I read England's BIKE from time-to-time -- and judge their editorial staff to be quite experienced and able to sift the wheat from the chaff. All moto-mags like to think they're the be-all and end-all in moto-knowledge and it takes some time to 'get to know' who's saying what in order to make a valid assessment. I certainly have my 'favorites' -- who's opinion I weigh more than others. With the exception of a notable few: Peter Egan and John Burns (to name two) -- the U.S. moto-journos are littered with diletantes, factory shills, and know-nothings. IMO, BIKE's credentials rate pretty high.

Interesting that they, generally, found that old, out-dated, boxer-twin to still have some merit in general sport-touring? Is all the modern technology applied to the four others "all-for-naught"....?? :blink: :huh:

 

[Barabus]

<snip>The individual results, which are meaningless according to my analysis ....

I read England's BIKE from time-to-time -- and judge their editorial staff to be quite experienced and able to sift the wheat from the chaff. All moto-mags like to think they're the be-all and end-all in moto-knowledge and it takes some time to 'get to know' who's saying what in order to make a valid assessment. I certainly have my 'favorites' -- who's opinion I weigh more than others. With the exception of a notable few: Peter Egan and John Burns (to name two) -- the U.S. moto-journos are littered with diletantes, factory shills, and know-nothings. IMO, BIKE's credentials rate pretty high.

Interesting that they, generally, found that old, out-dated, boxer-twin to still have some merit in general sport-touring? Is all the modern technology applied to the four others "all-for-naught"....?? :blink: :huh:

Yeah, I agree wholeheartedly with everything you say. Too bad more US readers are not exposed to this excellent publication or alternatively; too bad there are not US mags that rise to this quality, IMHO.

 

[garywayne]

My take on the bikes (which is worth about 2 cents)....I've owned a R1100RT, 2 ST1100's, 2 ST1300's and 2 FJR's. plus 22 other bikes. The BMW was a great bike. It was very comfortable, handled better than I can ride and I found it sexy as hell to look at..but dealer network sucks, requires a lot of upkeep and in my case was a 300 mile round trip to the dealer. that is the sole reason I got ride of it. The ST100 is one of the best bikes ever made. It did nothing great but everything good. The ST1300, well if it wasn't for the heat problem I would still be on it. It does everything the ST1100 did but better. I really hated to get ride of it but it was burning me up. I had a 04 FJR and got ride of it because of the heat but after reading that it was pretty much fixed in the 06 models I decided to try one again. Not had a chance to have my 07 out in real hot weather but so far (4,000 mikes) I'm very happy. I'm as comfortable on it as I was the ST, it feels like a much smaller bike which I like, it's easier to change oil and take panels off then the ST. I will never knock the ST but for now the FJR is working out better for me. I looked at the new Concours but there were just things I didn't like about it. Thing is there are so many good bikes out there anymore. Its hard to say one is better than the other. the one that fits you and makes you smile is the one to have. I don't think you could go wrong with any of the bikes mentioned. I live in the mountains of East Tennessee so a bike than can do 140 means nothing to me (can't ride like that here), I am more interested in a bike that feels good, that fits me and that makes me feel like Joe racer.....even though I'm not. I want a bike that I can get on and ride coast to coast (which I have done on the ST), and all of these bikes can do that so just ride the one you like.

Gary

 

[Flyguy]

Your such a tease! <_< What were the other 2 first place votes!

Well, I have been called worst things. OKAY! Note, you get to know the reviewers personality and riding style over a period of reading. I cannot instill that into this post, but the two that picked the FJR were the tallest two reviewers, both sightly over 6 feet. The individual results, which are meaningless according to my analysis are listed in order of first choice to last below.

Paul Allen FJR,RT,GTR,ST1300,GT

Chippy Wood GT,GTR,RT,ST1300,FJR

MArtin Gibbons RT,ST1300,GT,FJR,GTR

Pete Boast FJR,GT,ST1300,RT,GTR

Simon Hargraves ST1300,GT,RT,GTR,FGR

Overall RT,GT,ST1300,FJR,GTR

Last bit of goodness- uncorrected standing 1/4 mile times

RT 13.1s

St1300 12.5s

FJR 12.3s

GT 11.8s

GTR 10.85s

The GTR moves out but handle poorly. It is still a muscle bike, might as well buy a ZX-14 if you are seriously think about a GTR.

Something is very wrong with the quarter times.

The FJR has been list most recently by MCN at 11.1. Others have listed it from 10.8 to 11.3 My AE, which will not launch properly has been recorded at 11.6 with a poor rider (me). 12.3 so different it is obviously an error. Likewise the GT has been clocked at 10.7 - 11.1 and they list it at 11.7!? The GTR is just a hair slower than other reports.

Also ranking the bikes by attributing 5pts to 1st, 4 to second, 3 to 3rd etc.

RT 17

GT 17

ST 16

FJR 15

GTR 11

First place votes

FJR 2

GT 1

RT 1

ST 1

GTR 0

interesting . . .

 

[Rondo777]

Havn't seen the mag or the article, but did it specify if they tested a "A" model or an "AE" model?

The A model was tested.

Oh, trust me, had they tested an AE model, we would had ended up in the cellar, no question.

This is the 2nd big mainstream review that that has knocked the big Kawk GT's dick in the dirt with a last place finish.... haarrm....

AMEN to that!

 

[bramfrank]

Let's remember that this is a BRITISH review. The Beemers are not as expensive there as they are here - and the Japanese machines are VERY expensive there. So the pricing is likely not as different between the models as we see here.

Also, I'd be willing to wager that BMW dealers are not quite as few and far between as they are here.

Then, there is the matter of their rating system - how a bike that only one of five rated as their favorite managed to come in first place when another that two rated as their preferred ride came in 4th . . . that just defies logic.

 

[charismaticmegafauna]

In sum, many of the reviewers hated the heavy sprung throttle and small OEM windscreen. I wonder what they would pick if they had actual customers bikes after one year of farkling?

....items of little or no consequence, or can easily be fixed .... In this case, neither of these big concerns really address the fitness of the motorcycle as the throttle can be "fixed" by releasing the spring one turn and for less than $200 dollar you can add many different kinds of windscreen.

MamaYama could fix these things -- if they wanted to. Makes one think that they're there purposely -as a 'red herring' to divert testers from actually evaluating the whole bike? The "clunky" shifting too -- Kawi C-10 had a brake on 1st gear so that when it was being selected the shift lever slowed the gear's rotation for a quiet shift -- Yammie could do that.

Back in the day -- it was said that H**** purposely put their fuel pet-cocks in a difficult to reach, out-of-the-way, place under the fuel tanks so that testers would focus on that perceived "problem" and miss criticizing the rest of the bike.

 

[painman]

You can read all the shoot-outs all you want. It still comes down to personal preference really. Weather you had 5 testers or 5 thousand. And if you want to compare bang for the buck, BMW will loose everytime. I do like to read them though but for me of course the FJR always comes out on top, either model. PM. <><

 

[wheatonFJR]

That's it...I'm sellin my FJR.

I can't ride it if other people don't like it.

 

[MAJ Todd]

96 The Big Test

It’s the heavyweight battle to decide

the European crown: BMW R1200RT

v BMW K1200GT v Honda Pan

European v Kawasaki 1400GTR v Yamaha FJR1300 to the Czech Republic and back

The magazine, which is the only bike mag I feel worth reading has the following test results-

1st BWM 1200RT

2nd BMW 1200GT

3rd Honda ST1300

4th Yamaha FJR1300

Last Kawi GTR 1400

The article is extensive with very good and interesting performance data. I encourage you to pick up a copy and read it (usually available at Cycle Gear)Even though the rankings are disappointing to me personally, the reviewers were split and fragmented on their rankings. Of 5 reviewers, 2 picked the FJR as their personal favorites. Of note, only one picked the RT as his favorite. They put 2500 miles on each bike during the test. In sum, many of the reviewers hated the heavy sprung throttle and small OEM windscreen. I wonder what they would pick if they had actual customers bikes after one year of farkling?

There are no bad bikes. I read the reviews but none of them will make me buy a $20K bike or an ugly one (ST1300) :lol: