why are touring bikes so damn heavy??

[oldryder]

a 1000cc. sport bike can have mucho trick parts, make close to 200 hp, cost $12,000, and weigh in at around 400 pounds.

I can't understand why sport tourers (or even touring bikes) need to weigh 200 - 300 pounds more. every pound saved could be another pound of carrying capacity.

perhaps someone here can enlighten me.

 

[Patriot]

a 1000cc. sport bike can have mucho trick parts, make close to 200 hp, cost $12,000, and weigh in at around 400 pounds.
I can't understand why sport tourers (or even touring bikes) need to weigh 200 - 300 pounds more. every pound saved could be another pound of carrying capacity.

perhaps someone here can enlighten me.

they are to be strong enuf to carry around portly cargo...

 

[Ignacio]

You like that extended swing arm on the Gen 2 that smooths out bumps....a longer bike that's more comfortable to spread out on? How about that final drive that has lower maintenance and longer service intervals? A glove box, extra structure to hang side bags to, an adjustable seat, a larger windshield, ABS and the linked brakes are probably 25 pounds alone.

The list is lengthy.

It's all about trade-offs and one reason you don't see VFRs, R1s, and Ninjas crossing the country as much.

Or, you can put it on a diet and start taking parts off, replacing parts with lightened replacements, and shave off as much weight as you want....or afford.

Or start your own motorcycle company and build whatever you like and think the market will bare.

 

[SkooterG]

Why are SUVs heavy?

Sorry, but this is a silly question. You are trying to compare a Corvette against a Tahoe and wondering why the Tahoe is so heavy.

Sport-Touring bikes are designed for certain capabilities, and to get those requires more stuff (and weight).

And as an aside, some us don't want a featherweight sport-tourer. Weight = stability, and a cushier ride.

 

[charismaticmegafauna]

Weight = stability, and a cushier ride.

Not necessarily.

Any handling and ride features desired can be engineered lighter -- it's a matter of engineering.

Weight has damn few benefits (almost none, IMO) -- maybe to hold down loose papers on your desk...?

It is true, that heavy vehicles tend to appear to ride better because the ratio of sprung weight to un-sprung weight is greater -- giving the (false) appearance of lighter, more responsive, suspension (only true in relation to the bulk of the vehicle). A lighter vehicle can ride as well and be as stable as you want (with multifarious benefits everywhere else) -- the downside is that engineering and materials costs more.

Weight = cheap...!

 

[happyPuppy]

I agree with the others. it all adds up. The easiest way to save some weight is the Headers and cans , about 25 lbs. I ride most of the time without the bags and that saves a lot ( As well as scratches on them)

 

[wfooshee]

It's just bigger. Touring bikes are bigger, taller, wider, blah blah blah.

What's the wheelbase of an R1? 55.7 inches. And an FJR? 60.8 inches. 5.1 inches of something holding it together. More tail structure, for luggage. More nose structure, for battery, windshield, and bodywork. (How tough do you think that nose has to be to push a windshield through the air at 100+ miles per hour? Quite a torque moment on them pieces.) Bigger tank. Tanks are steel, by the way, heavy.

As for weight with what the FJR has, compare it to Ammurican steel: Say, a new Fat Boy. The HD is 4 inches longer, but some of that is higher rake, not structure. The Harley has no luggage, you have to "customize" it with a rack, packs, bags, whatever, but it's 50 pounds heavier than the FJR before you do all that, more expensive, and carries less gas. So start with an Electra-Glide, then. It's got all the space you'd need for carrying stuff already built on. But wait, it's only 50 pounds short of a half-ton, and still carries less gas and gets lower mileage!!!! And you get 2 FJRs and some farkles and gear for the money.

The FJR is a big bike. Of course it's heavier. ScooterG's comparison is appropriate. But compared to "other" big bikes, it's not that heavy after all.

 

[tmc]

Weight = stability, and a cushier ride.

Not necessarily.

Any handling and ride features desired can be engineered lighter -- it's a matter of engineering.

Weight has damn few benefits (almost none, IMO) -- maybe to hold down loose papers on your desk...?

It is true, that heavy vehicles tend to appear to ride better because the ratio of sprung weight to un-sprung weight is greater -- giving the (false) appearance of lighter, more responsive, suspension (only true in relation to the bulk of the vehicle). A lighter vehicle can ride as well and be as stable as you want (with multifarious benefits everywhere else) -- the downside is that engineering and materials costs more.

Weight = cheap...!

I agree, but the one thing you didn't mention is that the extra weight/mass does make the bike more stable in crosswinds.

Ride a small bike around a semi, then ride an FJR around the semi.

I don't know about you, but I feel a helluvalot better on the Feej than I did on my old GS500, the Ninjette, or even the ol Fizzer or CBR. This is one of the few areas where weight does in fact make a noticeable difference. It just so happens to be a pretty important area to a lot of us who need to ride slab to get to some of the good stuff.

 

[johnny80s]

You could always get one of the new Honda Dullsviles oh I mean NT700 or something.

 

[charismaticmegafauna]

I agree, but the one thing you didn't mention is that the extra weight/mass does make the bike more stable in crosswinds.

Even loaded semis (since you brought-it-up) get blown-over in strong cross winds -- where do you draw the line...?

How heavy is heavy enough?

I contend good design/engineering can give you all the stability you want -- you may not like other aspects of the bike? -- but stability can be designed-in.

You could always get one of the new Honda Dullsviles oh I mean NT700 or something.

Yep, there's a good and heavy bike for its size (not too cheap tho..., yet).

Americans tend to like to buy motor vehicles by the pound -- like potatoes...

 

[tmc]

Even loaded semis (since you brought-it-up) get blown-over in strong cross winds -- where do you draw the line...? How heavy is heavy enough?

I contend good design/engineering can give you all the stability you want -- you may not like other aspects of the bike? -- but stability can be designed-in.

I draw the line right about 650lbs, or about what my Feej weighs with a full tank and a few items in the bags.

You can do your best to design with stability in mind but between the laws of physics and the demands of the rider there has to be middle ground. Not to mention cost control to the manufacturer.

I'd say we have struck a pretty good medium in bikes like the Feej.

 

[user 213]

Any handling and ride features desired can be engineered lighter -- it's a matter of engineering.Weight has damn few benefits (almost none, IMO) -- maybe to hold down loose papers on your desk...?

It is true, that heavy vehicles tend to appear to ride better because the ratio of sprung weight to un-sprung weight is greater -- giving the (false) appearance of lighter, more responsive, suspension (only true in relation to the bulk of the vehicle). A lighter vehicle can ride as well and be as stable as you want (with multifarious benefits everywhere else) -- the downside is that engineering and materials costs more.

Weight = cheap...!

Go drive two cars back to back that both have power to weight ratios of sub 10:1 (10 lbs per 1 Hp). Pick one that's sub 2000 lbs or close to it, the other 3000 lbs or more. THEN tell us you can design stability as much as you want. The lighter car will be much more of a handful to drive and more difficult to control at speed in anything but perfect conditions.

 

[garysciascia]

As some have already said with weight comes stability from wind blasts but also smoothness of ride as more weight means more inertia too or greater stability. When you compare a R1 you see a smaller lighter frame, smaller gas tank and less gas weight, no center stand, linked or ABS components add weight, single mufflers not 2, heavy chrome ones as well, luggage, even the seats are smaller and skimpier which is great when you're jumping your but in and out of the saddle around curves but not when you're riding 300+ miles a day. I'm sure there's more weight from other places that i don't know of too. Smaller mirrors, brake and clutch reservoirs are plastic, etc. Like someone said like comparing a corvette to a Suburban !! I've ridden 2 vfrs,a zx9 , a cbr1000. The fjr is the hit that it is because it's the best of both worlds. That's what all us 50+ year old geezers say !!!

 

[Aasland]

I've often wondered why these bikes are so much heavier. Yeah, they are bigger, but not TWICE as big, and there's a lot of air in that fairing. I'm guessing the FJR could easily lose 100 lbs with some creative engineering.

I believe the primary reason Yammy didn't spend $3k per bike to drop it 100lbs is competition. If Yammy spent $3k making the FJR 100 lbs lighter, it will still be compared to the now-much-cheaper Connie.

I also think there's a tendency for engineers to see a big motor with lots of torque and think the weight won't matter. "eh what's another 20 lbs, we got 138 hp to play with".

 

[gearman]

I suspect the FJR and other sport tourers are generally more robust than the supersports.

-heavier chassis and suspension components due to increased load carrying capacity

-shaft drive

-larger fuel tank

-larger radiator

-larger fairing/windscreen

-increased engine weight due to additional/heavier balancing mechanism

-centerstand

 

[charismaticmegafauna]

Go drive two cars ... Pick one that's sub 2000 lbs

Mmmm..., sub 2000 lbs. -- I doubt we'll ever see that again?

But, I'd love one.

I did have 2 of these sub-2K (one each, LHD & RHD):

 

[user 213]

Go drive two cars ... Pick one that's sub 2000 lbs

Mmmm..., sub 2000 lbs. -- I doubt we'll ever see that again?

But, I'd love one.

I did have 2 of these sub-2K (one each, LHD & RHD):

Very nice, but not quite the power to weight ratio I had in mind. Think TVR Vs 350Z. The former is scary in the rain, the latter much more controlable at high speeds.

 

[FJRBluesman]

Why ask why?

Buy many bikes, the style you like, etc, then you can pull out of the livery, which ever bike suits you at that moment.

Then the only question will be, why did you choose that bike to ride? Just sayin'....

 

[charismaticmegafauna]

Very nice, but not quite the power to weight ratio I had in mind.

No, not nearly -- but, light weight has its advantages: a very delightful and responsive (handling-wise) car. No barn-burner, tho.

Think TVR Vs 350Z. The former is scary in the rain, the latter much more controlable at high speeds.

TVR...? Where do you get those? Are they even sold in America?

How about (sticking with the same company) an S2000 -- lots of lighter-weight (hard to get a really light vehicle, anymore) modest-power goodness...