Broken bone in my neck, broken ankle and a little nick on my left thigh. My riding gear held up well on the 225 foot slide, but unfortunately I was only wearing jeans that day.Whoa! My FZ1 ended up totaled, also, but it didn't look that bad. Did you come out of that OK?
I still have my '13 and ride it back to back with the ES.....is the ES worth an extra thousand dollars.....NO.....but the inverted fork is. When Yamaha puts the inverted fork on the A model it will out perform the ES, which currently is like having very good, but non-adjustable suspension.Well? You are pretty much obligated to give us a back to back suspension comparison. You are one of the few who should be able to completely evaluate the difference.
No pressure here but... What you tell us may be the deciding factor in whether or not we should spend that extra thousand dollars.
Ouch! Stuffed mine under the back bumper of a pickup. I stepped off with a broken arm. Almost had it stopped, but not quite. Buckled the frame.Broken bone in my neck, broken ankle and a little nick on my left thigh. My riding gear held up well on the 225 foot slide, but unfortunately I was only wearing jeans that day.Whoa! My FZ1 ended up totaled, also, but it didn't look that bad. Did you come out of that OK?
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I understood that the "hard/soft" on the Gen II is a preload adjustment, the "hard/standard/soft" on a Gen III is damping, the preload being done with the "Rider-only/rider-with-luggage/two-up/two-up-with-luggage"....The A model has a much higher rear spring rate, but it is the hard/soft lever adjustment only. Most of the time I'd say you're OK with soft on a Gen III, and would use hard for two up. ....
I can't offer a education, just my impressions after 1300 miles of ES ownership. I also had a GEN1, GEN2, and still have a '13A. The GEN1 had the GP Suspension fork rebuild and a Wilbers shock, both of which were eventually moved to the GEN2 and I thought worked better in the GEN2 than the GEN1. I just traded that bike, a 2008, for the ES, so my impressions are pretty current and I can certainly understand why you were blown away by the ES.Okay, I am willing to be educated.
I have quite a few miles on Dad's Gen2 with factory suspension. I have a 14 mile demo ride on the '14 ES. I am NOT a suspension expert.
I have no issues with OEM Gen2 suspension. I was blown away by the ES. The changes in damping brought about immediate results that were real world useful and I could easily see myself making those changes while on a ride. The preload changes were obvious as well and I would certainly use them based on bike load but not so much during a ride as before the ride.
I found the ES to be much more controlled than the Gen2. Everything seemed more solid, smoother, less harsh, more controlled.
Why do you say the inverted fork is worth more than that immediate and wide range of adjustability?
The hard/soft on the GEN1, GEN2, and the GEN3 A models is not a preload adjustment all though everyone, including Yamaha calls it a preload. Those shocks have two springs that work in series in the soft position but only one working spring in the hard position. The result is two very different spring rates, neither of which has a preload adjustment. Its a true dual rate system that works very well if the individual spring rates fit the needs of the rider when riding solo or 2-up. The GEN1 and GEN2 shocks were badly under sprung for all but the lightest riders, the GEN3 shock is made for the big boys.Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I understood that the "hard/soft" on the Gen II is a preload adjustment, the "hard/standard/soft" on a Gen III is damping, the preload being done with the "Rider-only/rider-with-luggage/two-up/two-up-with-luggage"....The A model has a much higher rear spring rate, but it is the hard/soft lever adjustment only. Most of the time I'd say you're OK with soft on a Gen III, and would use hard for two up. ....
With my not-very-portly 145 pounds, I find "rider-only", then soft on highways, and hard on twisties or bad surfaces. I rarely use "standard". (I've not yet started playing with the "+/-3" damping modifiers.)
Thank you for the detailed and clear response. I know from prior threads and posts that you know a great deal more about suspension than I do, that is why I wanted your evaluation. I appreciate it.I can't offer a education, just my impressions after 1300 miles of ownership.
The ES is more solid, smoother, less harsh, more controlled and that is due to heavier spring rates, greatly improved damping, and the increased rigidity of the inverted forks. The '13A has the heavier spring rates and improved damping but does not have the inverted fork. The ES also has the smoothest engine of any FJR I have ever ridden and that contributes to the overall ride quality and refinement.
The 4 preload adjustments are great if they fit your needs. The solo plus luggage fits my weight and riding style when I am solo, I need more preload when I actually have luggage but going to 2-up doesn't work very well because the damping settings offered with that preload have too much damping. On the '13 I can switch to the hard spring setting, make a minor adjustment to the damping, and I am ready to go. The ES requires me to choose between slow steering or a less plush ride.
However, the range of damping from SOFT -3 to Hard +3 is actually very narrow and several of the magazine testers have made similar comments. I can notice a small improvement in ride quality by switching to the SOFT setting on very smooth road surfaces but any advantage in that setting disappears quickly when you encounter a bump. I haven't found a use for the HARD setting, I can't detect any improvement in handling. Again, the range of adjustment is very narrow, and if someone else was controlling the damping I wouldn't be able to detect when the damping was changed and would not have any idea of what setting was being used, any road surface I ride on will have greater changes in any given mile than the damping variance offered for that preload.
I think the ES is a significant improvement over the '13 due to its smoother motor and inverted fork and also appears to be a "tighter" package and more refined. I have not ridden a '14A and it also may be an improvement over the '13. I know there are a lot of doubters concerning the valve added of the inverted fork, but I also have a C14 with an inverted fork that is more stable than the '13 at speed, cornering, and in winds; but not any better than the ES under the same conditions.
I really like the ES but at this point cannot see any additional value from the ES itself. I would much prefer to have fully adjustable suspension that I can fine tune rather than a lot of preset damping combinations where I am searching for the one that seems to work the best.
Enter your email address to join: