Kawasaki Concours Forum

Riding => It's not a Concours - other Bikes => Topic started by: eng943 on June 04, 2013, 06:53:09 AM

Title: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: eng943 on June 04, 2013, 06:53:09 AM
Short but relatively decent article describing the pros and cons of these three bikes. Predictably, the FJR was a distant third due to it's inferior suspension, braking, handling and wind protection, but still got praise for being the low budget leader of the three.

Having owned the K16, and ridden both the 2013 FJR, and the Trophy, I tend to agree with the article in terms of the way these bikes rank in a comparison. The article proclaimed these are good days to be into the sport touring category, and I could not agree more. Lot's of choices, price ranges, options, and bikes of varying emphasis on comfort, sport, and touring. 
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: George R. Young on June 04, 2013, 07:28:21 AM
It's a shame the C14 wasn't included.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: ljcorby on June 04, 2013, 07:31:12 AM
It's a shame the C14 wasn't included.

I agree.  I was quite surprised it wasn't. 
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: stevewfl on June 04, 2013, 07:44:42 AM
Kawi didn't bribe as hard
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: BruceR on June 04, 2013, 07:49:26 AM
I think the press is all gaga over the Trophy and K16000- they picked the FJR because they knew it would be a distant 3rd place- that way they can say how great these 2 machines are.  You couldn't have a budget bike (C14) giving them a hard run for the money and have the same outcome...
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: stevewfl on June 04, 2013, 08:49:01 AM
The Trophy is a steal for the price
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: BruceR on June 04, 2013, 09:08:39 AM
I don't think any of the current ST bikes available are a bad choice.  I think that 1600cc is way overkill though.  i'm betting the trend will be smaller, lighter s/t bikes in a couple years.  I know that 1400cc is the biggest I want to go right now.  If I had enough legroom on the VFR800 I'd be on one of those instead of the C14.

Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: jayke on June 04, 2013, 10:15:30 AM
Hey.........

I just bought a '13 FJR, great bike if bang for the buck is important.  Cash is tight, I couldn't afford either the Trophy or the K1600GT but wanted a new bike with factory cruise.  There was no other option. 
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: eng943 on June 04, 2013, 12:06:53 PM
Kawi didn't bribe as hard

If you read the article, the criteria was to test the newest sport touring bikes against the benchmark K16GT. Hence the reason the C14 was not included.

Not everything is a vast conspiracy against C14 admirers.   
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: eng943 on June 04, 2013, 12:07:49 PM
I think the press is all gaga over the Trophy and K16000- they picked the FJR because they knew it would be a distant 3rd place- that way they can say how great these 2 machines are.  You couldn't have a budget bike (C14) giving them a hard run for the money and have the same outcome...

....And I think that's utter nonsense. There have been tests with the C14 in the past.

It's as simple as this. The Trophy is new, and the FJR received some noteworthy changes. Therefore, that was their criteria to test them against the benchmarked ST bike.
 
Of course the FJR is going to come up short in some areas, but that does not mean it's a bad bike, or is needed to justify praise for a Trophy or K16GT.

Where is all this conspiracy theory BS when the C14 has been chosen ahead of an FJR, ST1300, etc????


 
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: roger dodger on June 04, 2013, 02:04:25 PM
The good news (for all frugal Japanese bikes) is the FJR was credited w/ ...  Lightest
                                                                                                                        Lowest
                                                                                                                        Torque-est
                                                                                                                        and Cheapest! ;D

Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: BruceR on June 04, 2013, 02:22:21 PM

Of course the FJR is going to come up short in some areas, but that does not mean it's a bad bike, or is needed to justify praise for a Trophy or K16GT.

Where is all this conspiracy theory BS when the C14 has been chosen ahead of an FJR, ST1300, etc????

 
No conspiracy theory at all.  The FJR is older technology than the other 2 bikes.  I expect it to come in third in the above comparison.  Same as when the C14 was compared to the FJR & St1300- I expected the newer C14 to do better.   You must have ignored the post where I said they were all good choices...
The press almost always gushes over the newer bikes.  That is not utter nonsense, that is fact. 
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: eng943 on June 04, 2013, 02:54:26 PM
No conspiracy theory at all.  The FJR is older technology than the other 2 bikes.  I expect it to come in third in the above comparison.  Same as when the C14 was compared to the FJR & St1300- I expected the newer C14 to do better.   You must have ignored the post where I said they were all good choices...
The press almost always gushes over the newer bikes.  That is not utter nonsense, that is fact.

The nonsense is that they would add the FJR to justify heaping their praise onto the Trophy and K16.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: BruceR on June 04, 2013, 03:09:45 PM
The nonsense is that they would add the FJR to justify heaping their praise onto the Trophy and K16.
Yeah because a tweak in bodywork and cruise control make it so much better.  It still is down in power, handling, and almost every other category compared to the other bikes.  Having it along for the ride lets them point out how vastly improved the new models are.  Really, if you don't think bike mag comparos are biased....seriously?
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: Pokey on June 04, 2013, 04:05:49 PM
The BMW is the benchmark?  :o :rotflmao:
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: stevewfl on June 04, 2013, 05:08:05 PM
If you read the article, the criteria was to test the newest sport touring bikes against the benchmark K16GT. Hence the reason the C14 was not included.

Not everything is a vast conspiracy against C14 admirers.   

I didn't read the article i read his post.  And asides I didn't mean ill will, don't take me too seriously on the Internetz =)
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: stevewfl on June 04, 2013, 05:11:16 PM
The BMW is the benchmark?  :o :rotflmao:

It should be, its the top of the top for both performance and price.  Nothing else compares to it (other than maybe on a drag strip).  As a sport-tourer, nothing can touch it. I didn;t realize thats not a known fact. 

What bike you know of surpasses it as far as sport-touring type performance, and standard OEM sport-touring features?  The suspension alone is outrageous and trumps everything in the sport-touring class.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: gPink on June 04, 2013, 05:22:10 PM
Gadets are cool but there is a point of diminishing returns.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: stevewfl on June 04, 2013, 05:52:35 PM
Gadets are cool but there is a point of diminishing returns.

Agreed, but some will pay 40% more to have a suspension that performs second to none (not including Zg'sbike, I mean off the show room floor :)  )

Well, some will pay 40% more for a 5-10% better bike, but on the flip side one would be dillusional to say a C14 or the Yamaha the better bike for anything other than a value budget play.

I agree with the article

1) BMW...the benchmark
2) trophy...2nd....
3) Jap bike....distance third on performance, features, but much better on price =)

Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: Pokey on June 05, 2013, 07:06:39 AM
It should be, its the top of the top for both performance and price.  Nothing else compares to it (other than maybe on a drag strip).  As a sport-tourer, nothing can touch it. I didn;t realize thats not a known fact. 

What bike you know of surpasses it as far as sport-touring type performance, and standard OEM sport-touring features?  The suspension alone is outrageous and trumps everything in the sport-touring class.


It has the most crap on it for sure, and since it is a "BMW" that makes it the benchmark. Considering a friend of mine that owns a 2008 C14 rented  a K1600 for a few days out West, he said it was a pretty nice bike, but still liked his old C14 much better. He also said he would rather have a Goldwing over that bike anyday, and that tends to be where my head is at as well. Until BMW can compete with the Japanese offerings in terms of reliability and cost of ownership, folks can have their damn BMW's.  ::)
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: eng943 on June 05, 2013, 07:24:10 AM
The BMW is the benchmark?  :o :rotflmao:

Don't shoot the messenger.

Just curious. Ever ridden one?
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: eng943 on June 05, 2013, 07:52:22 AM
Yeah because a tweak in bodywork and cruise control make it so much better.  It still is down in power, handling, and almost every other category compared to the other bikes.  Having it along for the ride lets them point out how vastly improved the new models are.  Really, if you don't think bike mag comparos are biased....seriously?

I would say "having it along for the ride" highlights the improvements for 2013 on the FJR, and gives readers another perspective to consider. The FJR is a great bike, cost's thousands less, and now has cruise control, etc.

In other words, if the editors were out to outright leg hump the Triumph and BMW, they sure didn't need to add a revised FJR to the article to justify it.

To each their own.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: Pokey on June 05, 2013, 12:39:46 PM
Don't shoot the messenger.

Just curious. Ever ridden one?


Nope, and have zero desire to either. My next rig will be smaller and lighter than the C14, pretty convinced less is more for me. The only BMW that I would love to ride and especially own would be the S1000RR.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: eng943 on June 05, 2013, 03:58:13 PM

Nope, and have zero desire to either. My next rig will be smaller and lighter than the C14, pretty convinced less is more for me. The only BMW that I would love to ride and especially own would be the S1000RR.

I rode the S1000RR. Nice toy I suppose, but incredibly uncomfortable.

Lighter is nice too, which is why I am anxious to ride the new RT with the water cooled boxer. The new GS is a hoot with the added power   
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: Pokey on June 05, 2013, 07:11:59 PM
I rode the S1000RR. Nice toy I suppose, but incredibly uncomfortable.

Lighter is nice too, which is why I am anxious to ride the new RT with the water cooled boxer. The new GS is a hoot with the added power   


Oh that toy would be a toy for sure, not an everyday rider. Rode my friends 2011 Multistrada today..........WOW, just WOW!!!!! I will always like those darn GS models though, call it a weakness of mine.  ::)
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: Wrinkled Wrider on June 06, 2013, 05:23:25 AM
 Eery sport touring comparison i recall over the last 2-3 years has ranked the 1600 GT first, hence the "benchmark" characterization.
1200 RT: I thought this might be the bike I was looking for, but disparities in listed weight got me curious. The BMW website finally provided the answer. Near 500# weight is what BMW refers to as unladen; sans bags and liquids. The upcoming liquid cooled version will probably be close to FJR weight.
As for the article, and other recent comparisons, there are no bad bikes in this category, and enough choices to satisfy nearly everyone. The BMW and Triumph have pretty much every feature one could want (some optional on the Trophy), but for me that takes away the fun of farkling. I want my bike to be MY bike.
Personally, I'd love a ~500# sport touring bike, but the riding position of the Sprint was too aggressive for my old bones,  and the NT700V was comfortable and  pleasant but uninspiring.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: wroman on August 07, 2013, 08:10:32 PM
I have not ridden the GT, FJR or trophy.  But just sitting on the bikes stationary the Trophy feels just about right.  The only stock seat I feel I could live with.  Neither the RT or GT fit me like the Trophy.  One of the testers said something interesting about the Trophy, he said it is the bike to own if you just cannot bring yourself to buy a Goldwing.  I predict now these will do real well by IBR riders.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: eng943 on August 11, 2013, 04:03:01 AM
I have not ridden the GT, FJR or trophy.  But just sitting on the bikes stationary the Trophy feels just about right.  The only stock seat I feel I could live with.  Neither the RT or GT fit me like the Trophy.  One of the testers said something interesting about the Trophy, he said it is the bike to own if you just cannot bring yourself to buy a Goldwing.  I predict now these will do real well by IBR riders.

I would encourage you to go ride one. I really thought the Trophy was going to be my next bike. I'm not too sure about the Trophy being the Goldwing of the ST segment though. As a two up bike, the K16's are better. As a matter of fact, the K16's feel much more refined, have superior ESA, much more power and smoothness, and all the conrols are more intuitive. I also have come to absolutely hate brake dive, particularly with a passenger on board. This the duolever front ends on the K16 are a big preference for me.

I was a little underwhelmed by the Trophy, and even the triple that I loved in the 1050 Tiger did not have the same seductiveness in the Trophy. In fact, it seemed somewhat bland and agricultural compared to the 1050.

Overall a great bike, but for my money the K16's offered more of what I wanted. Both however, put a lot more TOURING into sport touring than the FJR/ST/C!4. 
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: martin_14 on August 12, 2013, 07:50:47 AM
It should be, its the top of the top for both performance and price.  Nothing else compares to it (other than maybe on a drag strip).  As a sport-tourer, nothing can touch it. I didn;t realize thats not a known fact. 

What bike you know of surpasses it as far as sport-touring type performance, and standard OEM sport-touring features?  The suspension alone is outrageous and trumps everything in the sport-touring class.

errr... no, it isn't. I recently did a 1000 miles tour to the alps with a... ahem... experienced group, 45 motorcycles in total, with a few K1600GTs and GTLs. Very experienced drivers on them, on full attack mode, and I was easily following them, sometimes with ONE HAND on the handlebar and tons of leaning angle to spare. Engine-wise, as long as you don't use the 6th on the C14 (much, much longer than the equivalent on the Beemer or any other bike, for that matter), there's nothing to worry about. I'd love ESA, though.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: eng943 on August 12, 2013, 08:47:34 AM
errr... no, it isn't. I recently did a 1000 miles tour to the alps with a... ahem... experienced group, 45 motorcycles in total, with a few K1600GTs and GTLs. Very experienced drivers on them, on full attack mode, and I was easily following them, sometimes with ONE HAND on the handlebar and tons of leaning angle to spare. Engine-wise, as long as you don't use the 6th on the C14 (much, much longer than the equivalent on the Beemer or any other bike, for that matter), there's nothing to worry about. I'd love ESA, though.

I think he was speaking to the overall capabilities of the bike, not specifically handling and acceleration. To a vast segment of the sport-touring market, while those attibutes are generally desired, they are not the be all end all of deciding which ST bike is the right choice.

Now, having owned both my exprience is has been that as delivered, the K16 handles better than a C14 or FJR. It steers much lighter than the C14, exhibits no funky brake dive or squirrly linked brake behavior. However, when I added PR3's and went to a 190/55 in the rear, my C14 handled just as well I thought, minus the lamented linked brakes and associated brake dive. Upgrading the Z8's on the K16 might advance the handling capability as it did on my C14. Both offer handling capabilities far beyond the scope of an average rider, let's be honest.

To me, the measure of a sport touring bike goes beyond how fast or how well it may handle. Admittedly, even handling is subjective, as some prefer different handling traits. I can tell you going from duolever to conventional forks and back a few times always gets noticed, and takes me quite some time to adjust. Some guys like conventional forks only, personally, I have come to really dislike them for sport touring. It gets very annoying having my passenger slide into me every time I brake on the C14.

I think the C14 and FJR represent the ST purists in a sense. They most certainly are the best value around with minimal gadjets and conveniences, leaving it to owners to farkle accordingly. Less emphasis on wind protection, more sporting rider ergonomics, etc.

On the other hand Triumph and BMW try to let you have your cake and eat it too. They provide machines that provide better weather protection, comfort/conveniences/refinement, better two up platforms, and give it to you with a very sporting balance of performance and more refinement, and arguably do so beyond the FJR and C14.

I can tell you this much. As good as the C14 engine is, if Kawi plopped in a butter smooth torque monster I6, that would really be something. Nothing beats an engine that is naturally banced, and the more holes the better! 

There is no wrong choice, but it is almost impossible to argue that the Trophy and K16 in particular are at the head of the class in terms of their broader capability.

 
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: martin_14 on August 13, 2013, 01:06:43 AM
eng943, that's a well documented post, thanks.

I have to disagree on the handling part, which I found particularly noticeable while on a trip with a friend with his K16 and me on the Kawa, and we were swapping back and forth. Every time I got back on the C14 I felt like I was driving such a nimble, light bike, and the K16 felt like a whale. But as you well put it: each person appreciates different traits on a bike. One thing that puzzles me is how easy it is to take a hairpin on the BMW and how scary it can get on the Kawasaki. But that's about it. Everywhere else I take the Kawasaki without thinking, unless it's a two up trip, then the misses is happier on in the BMW.

Another thing that usually goes unnoticed until someone points it out at you is the throttle lag, that half a second that the BMW takes to respond to throttle inputs due to one-butterfly design and such a long intake. The I6 lack of vibes is neat, but the I4 from the C14 is amazingly smooth. So, to summarize: those 2 factors, together with the paralever, make for a very detached feeling which I don't care for, like driving a 7-series. Some actually like that very feeling; I (as you remarked) prefer conventional forks.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: eng943 on August 13, 2013, 04:07:54 AM
eng943, that's a well documented post, thanks.

I have to disagree on the handling part, which I found particularly noticeable while on a trip with a friend with his K16 and me on the Kawa, and we were swapping back and forth. Every time I got back on the C14 I felt like I was driving such a nimble, light bike, and the K16 felt like a whale. But as you well put it: each person appreciates different traits on a bike. One thing that puzzles me is how easy it is to take a hairpin on the BMW and how scary it can get on the Kawasaki. But that's about it. Everywhere else I take the Kawasaki without thinking, unless it's a two up trip, then the misses is happier on in the BMW.

Another thing that usually goes unnoticed until someone points it out at you is the throttle lag, that half a second that the BMW takes to respond to throttle inputs due to one-butterfly design and such a long intake. The I6 lack of vibes is neat, but the I4 from the C14 is amazingly smooth. So, to summarize: those 2 factors, together with the paralever, make for a very detached feeling which I don't care for, like driving a 7-series. Some actually like that very feeling; I (as you remarked) prefer conventional forks.

Cheers Martin! You're right about the the slight throttle lag. I felt that even in dynamic mode on my pre-order K16. My '13 seems to be mostly cured of that, though I still am no fan of throttle by wire, be it a car, or motorcycle.

The shorter wheelbase and reduced weight, although not dramatic, really did make the C14 feel more nimble at lower speeds in particular. Having relocated back to the midwest, where the roads are bad, the longer wheelbase and ESA set to soft really help my operated/fused lower back cope with bumps better. This is one of the main reasons I went back to a BMW, no pun intended.

Anyway, the C14 is really a great bike, and if Kawasaki ever took a leap and added cruise and ESA I might be back. Honda is well past due to update their ST, and have a gem of an engine in the VFR.         
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: shreveportSS on August 13, 2013, 09:38:09 PM
I think he was speaking to the overall capabilities of the bike, not specifically handling and acceleration. To a vast segment of the sport-touring market, while those attibutes are generally desired, they are not the be all end all of deciding which ST bike is the right choice.

Now, having owned both my exprience is has been that as delivered, the K16 handles better than a C14 or FJR. It steers much lighter than the C14, exhibits no funky brake dive or squirrly linked brake behavior. However, when I added PR3's and went to a 190/55 in the rear, my C14 handled just as well I thought, minus the lamented linked brakes and associated brake dive. Upgrading the Z8's on the K16 might advance the handling capability as it did on my C14. Both offer handling capabilities far beyond the scope of an average rider, let's be honest.

To me, the measure of a sport touring bike goes beyond how fast or how well it may handle. Admittedly, even handling is subjective, as some prefer different handling traits. I can tell you going from duolever to conventional forks and back a few times always gets noticed, and takes me quite some time to adjust. Some guys like conventional forks only, personally, I have come to really dislike them for sport touring. It gets very annoying having my passenger slide into me every time I brake on the C14.

I think the C14 and FJR represent the ST purists in a sense. They most certainly are the best value around with minimal gadjets and conveniences, leaving it to owners to farkle accordingly. Less emphasis on wind protection, more sporting rider ergonomics, etc.

On the other hand Triumph and BMW try to let you have your cake and eat it too. They provide machines that provide better weather protection, comfort/conveniences/refinement, better two up platforms, and give it to you with a very sporting balance of performance and more refinement, and arguably do so beyond the FJR and C14.

I can tell you this much. As good as the C14 engine is, if Kawi plopped in a butter smooth torque monster I6, that would really be something. Nothing beats an engine that is naturally banced, and the more holes the better! 

There is no wrong choice, but it is almost impossible to argue that the Trophy and K16 in particular are at the head of the class in terms of their broader capability.

Just curious, Did you spend much time setting up your C14 suspension or tinker with it? It took me awhile to get mine set up for optimal handling but I can corner better on my Connie than I can on my Ninja 1000 as the N1k's suspension was not manufactured with a 245lbs rider in mind. (Olins in it's future?) By setting mine up correctly, i don't have any noticeable brake dive. Just have to worry about flying over the handlebars.
 I have ridden a new Trophy and  K1600GT  and for me, the C14 was definitely the better canyon carver, but, It's no cushy ride when set up this way when the road gets rough. That to me is where the Trophy and K16 show the superior suspension's ability to perform well while giving that cushy ride.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: eng943 on August 14, 2013, 12:18:24 PM
Just curious, Did you spend much time setting up your C14 suspension or tinker with it? It took me awhile to get mine set up for optimal handling but I can corner better on my Connie than I can on my Ninja 1000 as the N1k's suspension was not manufactured with a 245lbs rider in mind. (Olins in it's future?) By setting mine up correctly, i don't have any noticeable brake dive. Just have to worry about flying over the handlebars.
 I have ridden a new Trophy and  K1600GT  and for me, the C14 was definitely the better canyon carver, but, It's no cushy ride when set up this way when the road gets rough. That to me is where the Trophy and K16 show the superior suspension's ability to perform well while giving that cushy ride.

No, I really did not tinker much with the suspension on the C14, and when I lived in SoCal, it was less of an issue really, since most of the roads were really good.

Now in the midwest, where I crank out more slab, and the roads are really complete junk, the suspension on the C14 became more of a focal point. It's nice to be able to hit a button and get what you want, and it's an option I would love to see more bikes in this segment have along with cruise.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: VirginiaJim on August 15, 2013, 12:25:44 PM
The BMW is the benchmark?  :o :rotflmao:

And I raise you with a  :_shudder_Emoticon .
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: VirginiaJim on August 15, 2013, 12:35:48 PM
eng943, that's a well documented post, thanks.

I have to disagree on the handling part, which I found particularly noticeable while on a trip with a friend with his K16 and me on the Kawa, and we were swapping back and forth. Every time I got back on the C14 I felt like I was driving such a nimble, light bike, and the K16 felt like a whale. But as you well put it: each person appreciates different traits on a bike. One thing that puzzles me is how easy it is to take a hairpin on the BMW and how scary it can get on the Kawasaki. But that's about it. Everywhere else I take the Kawasaki without thinking, unless it's a two up trip, then the misses is happier on in the BMW.

Another thing that usually goes unnoticed until someone points it out at you is the throttle lag, that half a second that the BMW takes to respond to throttle inputs due to one-butterfly design and such a long intake. The I6 lack of vibes is neat, but the I4 from the C14 is amazingly smooth. So, to summarize: those 2 factors, together with the paralever, make for a very detached feeling which I don't care for, like driving a 7-series. Some actually like that very feeling; I (as you remarked) prefer conventional forks.

I think that the throttle lag is endemic of anything accelerated by wire.  The computer is calling the shots, not the rider.  I quick twist doesn't necessarily translate to the same thing at the TB butterfly.  On Motorhead Garage they had a device that removed that lag (now this was for a truck, I think) and could change it for road or track or some other condition.  I don't see why that couldn't be done somehow for these fly by wire bikes.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: Rhino on August 15, 2013, 12:52:55 PM
eng943, that's a well documented post, thanks.

I have to disagree on the handling part, which I found particularly noticeable while on a trip with a friend with his K16 and me on the Kawa, and we were swapping back and forth. Every time I got back on the C14 I felt like I was driving such a nimble, light bike, and the K16 felt like a whale. But as you well put it: each person appreciates different traits on a bike. One thing that puzzles me is how easy it is to take a hairpin on the BMW and how scary it can get on the Kawasaki. But that's about it. Everywhere else I take the Kawasaki without thinking, unless it's a two up trip, then the misses is happier on in the BMW.

Another thing that usually goes unnoticed until someone points it out at you is the throttle lag, that half a second that the BMW takes to respond to throttle inputs due to one-butterfly design and such a long intake. The I6 lack of vibes is neat, but the I4 from the C14 is amazingly smooth. So, to summarize: those 2 factors, together with the paralever, make for a very detached feeling which I don't care for, like driving a 7-series. Some actually like that very feeling; I (as you remarked) prefer conventional forks.

I thought it was just me and my lack of skill. I don't like hairpins on the C14.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: gPink on August 15, 2013, 01:38:15 PM
I think that the throttle lag is endemic of anything accelerated by wire.  The computer is calling the shots, not the rider.  I quick twist doesn't necessarily translate to the same thing at the TB butterfly.  On Motorhead Garage they had a device that removed that lag (now this was for a truck, I think) and could change it for road or track or some other condition.  I don't see why that couldn't be done somehow for these fly by wire bikes.
That's why I pulled the secondaries.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: VirginiaJim on August 15, 2013, 02:15:04 PM
We're not throttle by wire.  Whole different can of worms with those bikes.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: jayke on August 15, 2013, 02:25:02 PM
I'm now riding a '13 FJR with throttle by wire. 

It has two modes:

Sport which has instant response, I don't notice any lag.

Touring- which has simular throttle response to my stock '08 C14

I don't think you can just blame throttle by wire buy it's self for the lag. I'd say it's in the software.

The BMW K bikes with a single throttle body might be the exception though.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: VirginiaJim on August 15, 2013, 02:43:50 PM
As I said, the computer controls it, albeit by software.  Software runs in the computer.  At least the FJR has some user override, which makes a lot of sense on a bike rather than having to buy some aftermarket device or reflash.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: gPink on August 15, 2013, 03:02:11 PM
computer controls the flys
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: VirginiaJim on August 15, 2013, 03:31:37 PM
Last time I looked, there were two cables going to the throttle bodies.  I think that they control something down there, don't they?  We're not a throttle by wire bike.  We're a throttle by cable bike.  It ain't the same as a throttle by wire.  :doublepuke:
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: gPink on August 15, 2013, 04:06:32 PM
Last time I looked, there were two cables going to the throttle bodies.  I think that they control something down there, don't they?  We're not a throttle by wire bike. We're a throttle by cable bike.  It ain't the same as a throttle by wire.  :doublepuke:
agreed
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: shreveportSS on August 15, 2013, 05:18:01 PM
I thought it was just me and my lack of skill. I don't like hairpins on the C14.
I find the BMW with it's longer wheelbase can be turned through a hairpin where the Connie need to be lain over and counter steered through it with a little throttle roll on like a sport bike.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: eng943 on August 17, 2013, 08:50:39 AM
I think that the throttle lag is endemic of anything accelerated by wire.  The computer is calling the shots, not the rider.  I quick twist doesn't necessarily translate to the same thing at the TB butterfly.  On Motorhead Garage they had a device that removed that lag (now this was for a truck, I think) and could change it for road or track or some other condition.  I don't see why that couldn't be done somehow for these fly by wire bikes.

It's a two part critisim on my part when it comes to ride by wire. Be it a car or a motorcycle, I just don't feel as connected to the engine as I do when there is a good old fashioned cable opening up the throttle. I don't like ride by wire period, and have not liked it any more or less when I have ridden other ride by wire bikes.

That being said, the software is the other point of contention, and from my experience the throttle lag is typically associated with lame throttle input perameters in the software. BMW seems to have greatly improved the throttle input/response on my 2013 K16GT. Much more responsive than my pre order K16 was.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: martin_14 on August 17, 2013, 04:19:24 PM
I think that the throttle lag is endemic of anything accelerated by wire.  The computer is calling the shots, not the rider.  I quick twist doesn't necessarily translate to the same thing at the TB butterfly.  On Motorhead Garage they had a device that removed that lag (now this was for a truck, I think) and could change it for road or track or some other condition.  I don't see why that couldn't be done somehow for these fly by wire bikes.

Jim, I drive other ride-by-wire bikes and there's no lag. The problem of the K16 is very specific, and rather simple: the admission system has only one butterfly for all 6 cylinders, and from the butterfly to the intake there's a long way, so there's inertia in the system. The air column has to be accelerated and it takes time. You give an input to the butterfly, but air doesn't start flowing in immediately.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: martin_14 on August 17, 2013, 04:22:23 PM
I thought it was just me and my lack of skill. I don't like hairpins on the C14.

I have an '08 (no linked brakes) so applying a bit of rear brake to pre-load the transmission helps a lot, but it's still a balance act... Funny thing is, when you nail it, you get (yet another) grin  ;D
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: sherob on August 17, 2013, 04:45:53 PM
Can you describe the issue you have with the C14 in twisties?  I'm just curious... and I'm not here to criticize either.  ;)
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: martin_14 on August 19, 2013, 12:31:19 AM
Can you describe the issue you have with the C14 in twisties?  I'm just curious... and I'm not here to criticize either.  ;)

you mean me? if yes, my issue is with the really slow curves, like hairpins, where you go below the threshold value where you have to steer the bike, not counter-steer. The chassis has some sensitivity to load transfer fore-aft, and the steering gets heavy. We all experienced the top heaviness of this bike at low speed, and how it disappears when moving. Well, I guess in those hairpins the weight just pops up (?). It's unsettling, at least for me. When applying the rear brake very slightly, the rear suspension is already a bit compressed so you can apply power and will make less of a difference in pitch. When leaning, that's important because you have a more stable center of gravity.

Of course this is difficult when leaning right.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: pistole on August 19, 2013, 02:07:40 AM
- imho , if your speed drops to where you need to steer where you want to go (as opposed to countersteering) , thats parking lot speed .... not hairpin speed.

- at parking lot speeds , hell yeah. The C14 is one heck of a handful !

.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: sherob on August 19, 2013, 08:35:55 AM
you mean me? if yes, my issue is with the really slow curves, like hairpins, where you go below the threshold value where you have to steer the bike, not counter-steer. The chassis has some sensitivity to load transfer fore-aft, and the steering gets heavy. We all experienced the top heaviness of this bike at low speed, and how it disappears when moving. Well, I guess in those hairpins the weight just pops up (?). It's unsettling, at least for me. When applying the rear brake very slightly, the rear suspension is already a bit compressed so you can apply power and will make less of a difference in pitch. When leaning, that's important because you have a more stable center of gravity.

Of course this is difficult when leaning right.

Thanks... was trying to understand the issue. 
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: martin_14 on August 19, 2013, 01:59:21 PM
- imho , if your speed drops to where you need to steer where you want to go (as opposed to countersteering) , thats parking lot speed .... not hairpin speed.

- at parking lot speeds , hell yeah. The C14 is one heck of a handful !

.

with all due respect, I don't think you've driven in Italian Alpine passes. And I don't mean Passo dello Stelvio, that one's easy. I mean passes with hairpins so tight that if it is wet and because of risk of ice you can't lean, sport bikes have to back up and then forward again to negotiate the curve. The steering radius is just to big  :-\
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: gPink on August 19, 2013, 03:05:32 PM
aw com'on, can't be that bad. Hannibal tooks his elephants over those passes.  :)
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: pistole on August 19, 2013, 05:16:10 PM
with all due respect, I don't think you've driven in Italian Alpine passes. And I don't mean Passo dello Stelvio, that one's easy. I mean passes with hairpins so tight that if it is wet and because of risk of ice you can't lean, sport bikes have to back up and then forward again to negotiate the curve. The steering radius is just to big  :-\

- like these ?

(http://img.eatsleepride.com/content/list/10050.JPG)

.
Title: Re: Cycle World - FJR vs. Trophy vs K1600GT
Post by: martin_14 on August 20, 2013, 01:37:02 AM
- like these ?

(http://img.eatsleepride.com/content/list/10050.JPG)

.

that's exactly the king of hairpins that the C14 can do no problem. That's a proper, well kept and heavily driven pass like San Bernardino or dello Stelvio. Notice how the street is closer where the car is, but it opens up to increase the curve radius on the hairpin.
But the much smaller and tighter passes within the Italian north (known as Süd Tirol for the locals) or next to the Slovenian border, are much, much tighter. Imagine the guy on the Yamaha stretching out his right arm and touching the street going up and already 3 feet above his wheels. That tight.