ndivita
Well-known member
Anyone else read and digested the May 2013 issue?
Therein you will find a review of the most recent iteration of five sport touring machines: K1600 GT, R1200 RT, Triumph Trophy SE, Concours 1400 ABS and our beloved FJR 1300. You can guess which bike was rated tops.
The FJR tied for fourth with the Concours in a review containing a good bit of adolescent fawning, a few questionable assertions and a notable absence of any discussion of what is to me perhaps the number one desired trait in a motorcycle: reliability. I know, I know, the reviews don't matter, ride what you like, etc., but it is strange to read that the FJR engine is "uninspired" and "lacks character" or that the FJR "generally feels bland compared to the others." Remarkable. This about a bike legendary in long riding circles?
Last time I checked, "bland" means "lacking strong features or characteristics and therefore uninteresting." Who knew?
Lots of giddiness is expressed over the K16 powerplant along with praise for the bike's array of expensive geegaws. The FJR is knocked, I guess, for being the bike with the least wind protection and for feeling the most like a large sport bike.
There seems to be precious little real-world performance data while there is a good bit of "tale of the tape" dimensional and specification information.
The ST1300 was ruled ineligible in that there is no 2013 edition for that bike (which I did not know).
The K1600GT as tested would set you back 25 large while the FJR lists for $15.9. The others are in between those two endpoints of the price spectrum.
In addition to saying nothing about long term reliability (or short term for that matter) there is nothing in the article about other factors that matter quite a bit to me: cost of ownership, ease of maintenance and dealer network. I could get a K16 if I wanted one, but the fact is, the 05 FJR I had for the past seven and half years taught me that dependability in a package that I found enormously inspiring counts for almost everything if you're a long rider. I am sure the BMW crowd has their explanations especially if money is no object or if you don't mind a long-term intimate relationship with your local BMW dealer. I considered a K16 when I bought recently, but ended up being unable to justify anything but the 2013 FJR that sits in my garage waiting for winter to ease up.
The article contains nothing about the real word aspects of owning a motorcycle you actually ride to and from distant locales: If you're going to have a mechanical issue on the road while riding the FJR, that road can be almost anywhere and you can get needed help. More likely, you won't ever have a mechanical issue. If you're going to have a mechanical issue on the road while on a BMW or Triumph, not very unlikely, you'd better be near an interstate in proximity to a population center and then you should pray the parts needed are in stock. I had no qualms owning and operating my former FJR in or out of warranty. Owning a BMW of any sort out of warranty is a tight rope walk with no net.
Two of the five testers stated that if they were going to pick one of these bikes "and spend their own money," the FJR would get the call. Two stated the RT1200 would be their pick using that criterion. One said he'd pick the Triumph.
I have never operated the K16, the Triumph or the Concours but I have operated a 2012 R1200RT. It was very nicely finished but the engine felt sluggish and agricultural compared to the FJR, yet the FJR's engine is described as "uninspired" and lacking "character." This is one of many dubious assertions in the article.
Generally speaking the article leaves you with the impression that the FJR platform as it now exists, even in 2013, has simply seen its day.
In keeping with the high school journalism class vibe of the article, the author sums up the bikes thusly:
K16 = "Mr. Big Stuff"
R1200RT="Mr. Traditional"
Triumph Trophy SE="Mr. Personality"
Kawasaki Concours 14="Mr. Universe"
Yamaha FJR 1300="Mr. Sport"
The fact is, each of these bikes is just fine. The issue is what floats your boat and how much mechanical risk and expense are you willing to accept in exchange for that which floats your boat.
My $.02.
Therein you will find a review of the most recent iteration of five sport touring machines: K1600 GT, R1200 RT, Triumph Trophy SE, Concours 1400 ABS and our beloved FJR 1300. You can guess which bike was rated tops.
The FJR tied for fourth with the Concours in a review containing a good bit of adolescent fawning, a few questionable assertions and a notable absence of any discussion of what is to me perhaps the number one desired trait in a motorcycle: reliability. I know, I know, the reviews don't matter, ride what you like, etc., but it is strange to read that the FJR engine is "uninspired" and "lacks character" or that the FJR "generally feels bland compared to the others." Remarkable. This about a bike legendary in long riding circles?
Last time I checked, "bland" means "lacking strong features or characteristics and therefore uninteresting." Who knew?
Lots of giddiness is expressed over the K16 powerplant along with praise for the bike's array of expensive geegaws. The FJR is knocked, I guess, for being the bike with the least wind protection and for feeling the most like a large sport bike.
There seems to be precious little real-world performance data while there is a good bit of "tale of the tape" dimensional and specification information.
The ST1300 was ruled ineligible in that there is no 2013 edition for that bike (which I did not know).
The K1600GT as tested would set you back 25 large while the FJR lists for $15.9. The others are in between those two endpoints of the price spectrum.
In addition to saying nothing about long term reliability (or short term for that matter) there is nothing in the article about other factors that matter quite a bit to me: cost of ownership, ease of maintenance and dealer network. I could get a K16 if I wanted one, but the fact is, the 05 FJR I had for the past seven and half years taught me that dependability in a package that I found enormously inspiring counts for almost everything if you're a long rider. I am sure the BMW crowd has their explanations especially if money is no object or if you don't mind a long-term intimate relationship with your local BMW dealer. I considered a K16 when I bought recently, but ended up being unable to justify anything but the 2013 FJR that sits in my garage waiting for winter to ease up.
The article contains nothing about the real word aspects of owning a motorcycle you actually ride to and from distant locales: If you're going to have a mechanical issue on the road while riding the FJR, that road can be almost anywhere and you can get needed help. More likely, you won't ever have a mechanical issue. If you're going to have a mechanical issue on the road while on a BMW or Triumph, not very unlikely, you'd better be near an interstate in proximity to a population center and then you should pray the parts needed are in stock. I had no qualms owning and operating my former FJR in or out of warranty. Owning a BMW of any sort out of warranty is a tight rope walk with no net.
Two of the five testers stated that if they were going to pick one of these bikes "and spend their own money," the FJR would get the call. Two stated the RT1200 would be their pick using that criterion. One said he'd pick the Triumph.
I have never operated the K16, the Triumph or the Concours but I have operated a 2012 R1200RT. It was very nicely finished but the engine felt sluggish and agricultural compared to the FJR, yet the FJR's engine is described as "uninspired" and lacking "character." This is one of many dubious assertions in the article.
Generally speaking the article leaves you with the impression that the FJR platform as it now exists, even in 2013, has simply seen its day.
In keeping with the high school journalism class vibe of the article, the author sums up the bikes thusly:
K16 = "Mr. Big Stuff"
R1200RT="Mr. Traditional"
Triumph Trophy SE="Mr. Personality"
Kawasaki Concours 14="Mr. Universe"
Yamaha FJR 1300="Mr. Sport"
The fact is, each of these bikes is just fine. The issue is what floats your boat and how much mechanical risk and expense are you willing to accept in exchange for that which floats your boat.
My $.02.
