2014 Heavyweight Sport-Tourer Shootout

FJR gets some nice props...

An OK video of some 2014 ST's.... Nothing you guys don't already know but didn't see it posted here so I thought I'd throw it up.

BMW 1200 couldn't make it to the party due to recall..... but the 1600 is there....

Article link.

I was surprised by the lack of comparative evaluations of the electronic suspensions.....they just commented that three bikes had ES and one did not. I was also surprised how close the final scores were for the top three, certainly not enough difference to justify the price differences. Its too bad that reliability and maintenance costs are not part of the evaluations because they certainly are a major factor in most purchase decisions.

MCRIDER007 said:

I was surprised by the lack of comparative evaluations of the electronic suspensions.....they just commented that three bikes had ES and one did not. I was also surprised how close the final scores were for the top three, certainly not enough difference to justify the price differences. Its too bad that reliability and maintenance costs are not part of the evaluations because they certainly are a major factor in most purchase decisions.

Click to expand...

I'm surprised too, along with no mention of the fuel cost difference of having to run premium vs regular, especially in California.

Much appreciated posting, kind of in the doldrums at present, next round of magazines has yet to get to the mailbox and always interested in bike stuff . The r1200rt has not got much press about the suspension recall, it would be interesting to see how that is being handled. As far as power and performance I am totally happy with my FJR. I do not challenge twisties or pop wheelies nor am I an Ironbutt rider but I do like my long way in a hurry sort of riding while enjoying the secondary roads and awesome scenery. The roll-on power of my 2013 in 2nd, 3rd, or 4th is spectacular to me, let alone if it is in sport mode. Frequently I find myself inadverently staying in 4th cause of the good feelings.

All good comments on this report. I suspect the authors of the publication are hesitant to report the soft negatives of and positives for fear the manufacturers may pull some advertising $$'s. Just my hunch. I tend to rely more on Motorcycle Consumer News for the less bias reviews.

MCRIDER007 said:

I was surprised by the lack of comparative evaluations of the electronic suspensions.....they just commented that three bikes had ES and one did not. I was also surprised how close the final scores were for the top three, certainly not enough difference to justify the price differences. Its too bad that reliability and maintenance costs are not part of the evaluations because they certainly are a major factor in most purchase decisions.

Click to expand...

art miller said:

All good comments on this report. I suspect the authors of the publication are hesitant to report the soft negatives of and positives for fear the manufacturers may pull some advertising $$'s. Just my hunch. I tend to rely more on Motorcycle Consumer News for the less bias reviews.

Click to expand...

Bingo... !! These guys that are writers for magazine articles for reviews will never step on the wrong side of a manufacturer - how would they continue to ride across the country on someone elses dime year in and year out......

Don't byte the hand that feeds you....

MCRIDER007 said:

I was surprised by the lack of comparative evaluations of the electronic suspensions.....they just commented that three bikes had ES and one did not. I was also surprised how close the final scores were for the top three, certainly not enough difference to justify the price differences. Its too bad that reliability and maintenance costs are not part of the evaluations because they certainly are a major factor in most purchase decisions.

Click to expand...

Purdie much ^THIS^ They dun left out the key issues.

art miller said:

All good comments on this report. I suspect the authors of the publication are hesitant to report the soft negatives of and positives for fear the manufacturers may pull some advertising $$'s. Just my hunch. I tend to rely more on Motorcycle Consumer News for the less bias reviews.

Click to expand...

Dunno 'bout that? I used to subscribe to their rag, but then a few years back they did a similar ST "shootout" and picked the Buy Mor Warranty GS that wuz haul'in the camera gear as the winner. WTF? Now if they picked the pos GS cuz it's mor versatile, I could maybe see, butt when they ranked the motor 'n tranny as being superior to they FJR 'n Concourse, then I knew they'z full of shit and canceled my subscription. (Since they shift like tractors, 'n the engine is a fragile, high maintenance, weak sauce paint shaker!)

Y'all can have that bs!

MC rags are in the business of sell'in rags, they aren't gonna give you the truth, or real deal; none of them.

Warpdrv said:

Click to expand...

Well Allen, since my K16 gets better mileage than my FJR, any 89 Octane fuel vs. 87 Octane is negated, and then some. Ask Mike the Wine Guy who rides the exact same ride-in's and routes w me. We always compare our gas fill-ups cuz he's amazes at how good that 6 cyl does. On an average fill, Mike will take 4.2g, mine will be 3.4g or 3.5g. So about a 1/2 gal on short fills, almost a whole gal if we went the whole 7g.

So forget the measly $0.10/gal difference from 87 to 89. And I can/have run 87 with no reported difference. There isn't a knock sensor on the K16, and others have reported pure use of the 87. I don't, I try to get 89 when I can (sum isolated fill stations don't have it, especially up in Canada).

Cheers

I have to say that when the price difference between Premium Unleaded and Regular Unleaded becomes a factor, I would probably be better off staying at home.

One second's difference in the time I hold the rocker switch for the windshield will have more effect on the $s going into the tank than the price difference in the gas.

Price difference between regular (87) and mid-grade (89) is $.20/gal. If the bike needs premium (91), which is what I thought was needed, but I could be wrong, that is another $.20. $.40 more per gallon is the norm here...at 20k miles per year and 44 mpg (my avg after 10k miles) = $181 addt'l fuel costs on top of service/maintenance costs. These are the reasons I sold my BMW 330i after having it for one year and bought a different car.

As inconsequential as it seems, small things add up to bigger issues. Just my opinion.

Allen_C said:

Price difference between regular (87) and mid-grade (89) is $.20/gal. If the bike needs premium (91), which is what I thought was needed, but I could be wrong, that is another $.20. $.40 more per gallon is the norm here...at 20k miles per year and 44 mpg (my avg after 10k miles) = $181 addt'l fuel costs on top of service/maintenance costs. These are the reasons I sold my BMW 330i after having it for one year and bought a different car.
As inconsequential as it seems, small things add up to bigger issues. Just my opinion.

Click to expand...

Respectfully, if your driving a $50,000 car + insurance + maintenance etc etc etc, and $300 in fuel costs over the course of a year ($25.00 per month) makes a difference, you are driving the wrong car ...

There are a lot of reasons to get rid of a BMW (dealers ripping you off, insurance, reliability, depreciation). $300 difference in fuel cost is insignificant when they charge you $250 for a tire that you can buy elsewhere for $100 add in a few $500 service events and you feel the pain. Speaking from experience ...

Really - gas prices ? ? --- seriously the least of the input of cost for these machines guys......

I don't care if you put in Premium or unleaded / equating into a 20 cent difference / gallon x 6 or 7 gallons here ?!?! $27 vs $28
How about you look at the real cost - K1600 $26K plus ( required and not required Maintenance / break downs ) insurance costs ?

They don't throw out real world info for people / just talk about the bling that gets the oooohhs and aaaaahhhhhs until you own the real thing and experience the good, bad and the SERIOUSLY UGLY facts of some products on the market.... Too many times I have read on forums about - people only post on forums when something goes wrong and want to bitch, thats a bunch of crap, and its funny how some forums seems to have countless threads about failures and shitty company policy in passing the buck..... and other forums its a rarity........ cough cough FJR

Sorry I just honestly don't care for all the BS that mag rags use to sell advertising...... I'd bet if you sat in a bar with those guys after they'd had some truth serum - and bring some of the big issues they spill the beans about what products were honestly fair to compare and reasons why....... but I'm sure there will be plenty of "don't quote me on this" thrown around to save their bacon....

Allen_C said:

MCRIDER007 said:

I was surprised by the lack of comparative evaluations of the electronic suspensions.....they just commented that three bikes had ES and one did not. I was also surprised how close the final scores were for the top three, certainly not enough difference to justify the price differences. Its too bad that reliability and maintenance costs are not part of the evaluations because they certainly are a major factor in most purchase decisions.

Click to expand...

I'm surprised too, along with no mention of the fuel cost difference of having to run premium vs regular, especially in California.

Click to expand...

This was my original comment. I'm not saying gas costs alone would be a reason for comparison. However, it along with the higher cost of service and maintenance create a noticeable difference in "Cost of Ownership".

And no, owning a $35k car and having to pay the insurance and maintenance costs dwarf the gas costs. However, when you pay $700 here and $1,000 there for service on the car, the more costly gas, especially when regular is approaching $4/gal, will act as the straw that broke the camel's back...at least for me.

Upstate SC- $3.18 for regular.

wheatonFJR said:

Upstate SC- $3.18 for regular.

Click to expand...

a bit cheaper than Chicago burbs?

Yep, so cheap that I'm telling wifey that with the money I am saving I can upgrade to a 2014FJR that is the winner of Sport Tourers.

As soon as KJ hands me the monetary difference between the lifetime costs of an FJR and his bike, I'll give it a test ride.

So EVERYBODY is happy.

I do all my own maintenance. Costs are identical. I buy nothing at the stealer.

I haven't been paying much attention to the biking world of late so seeing that a new Feej is at $17K really raised my eyebrows. (And forget the Beemer! "Wonder Wheel" indeed!) I'm as happy with my Gen 1 Feej as I was the day I bought it 2nd hand from a guy in SoCal who put 3300 miles on it for 9200 bucks.

I mean, how many more farkles that these manufacturers put on new bikes. Is A/C next?

Just sayin'