Rider Magazine 2012 Review

[carlson_mn]

So in the same magazine they introduce the 2013, in the days just before going to print they acknowledge, but then they have a nice review of the 2012 FJR. Some things I noticed.

- Bike makes over 10ftlbs more tq on their same dyno than the Triumph Trophy in the same magazine. 7 more hp.

- The color of the bike is some shade of purplish blue that I have never seen on an FJR. Maybe it is their camera filters.

- The author loves the 5 speed tranny and engine and states a 6 speed would be a waste with all the tq the FJR has. I agree.

- He mistakenly says it more or less requires premium fuel due to its 10.8 compression. Not true on the premium. I think they get their RON understanding wrong.

- Bike came in at 668 wet 'fueled up' as they say, I assume with the bags on as tested, which would translate to 644lbs without the bags.

Overall the review was the same as the many positive ones in the past, nothing too new. They like the FJR how it is, I imagine they'll love the new 2013.

 

[Redfish Hunter]

I read the article a few minutes ago and found it to be just plain vanilla. It did not say anything that had not already been said, nothing outstandingly positive, nothing outstandingly negative. I wonder why Yamaha gave them a Gen2 test bike when the Gen3 was almost out? Some goofy marketing ploy?

BTW, the pics in my magazine show the color very close to what the 2012 blue looks like, depending on the light.

 

[FJR Flyer]

Yeah, fairly lame. And when did premium gas become required? No mention of heated grips or alternator output.

 

[bgross]

I read the article a few minutes ago and found it to be just plain vanilla. It did not say anything that had not already been said, nothing outstandingly positive, nothing outstandingly negative. I wonder why Yamaha gave them a Gen2 test bike when the Gen3 was almost out? Some goofy marketing ploy?

BTW, the pics in my magazine show the color very close to what the 2012 blue looks like, depending on the light.

I suspect the marketing ploy in play might have something to do with helping dealers move their inventories of 2012s. The word about the 2013 will get out and dealers will appreciate having inventory $$ freed up.

My local Yamaha dealer hasn't received any 2013s (yet) and they have three (3) 2012s on the floor at $13.8k.

 

[Full House]

I'm glad to heat that I'm not the only fellow wondering why now. Just a coincident? Anyways, still nice to read and critique.

 

[lnewlf]

they got the linked brake system wrong-just one piston on the right caliper. Wrong octane. Wrong alternator output. Wrong year brought to US. A "brace" of fuel injectors?- a brace is a pair. Guess I'm just grouchy tonight-meebee a brace of Makers Mark will help.

 

[Redfish Hunter]

they got the linked brake system wrong-just one piston on the right caliper. Wrong octane. Wrong alternator output. Wrong year brought to US. A "brace" of fuel injectors?- a brace is a pair. Guess I'm just grouchy tonight-meebee a brace of Makers Mark will help.

And unless the gear ratios have changed they got the RPM @ 60 mph wrong as well. At least compared to the '07 I ride. Overall I find this magazine to be nearly useless.

 

[carlson_mn]

yeah, it is pretty bland magazine but one of the only ones out there that will review anything more than the latest liter class sport bikes!

For a dollar a month it's worth it I guess. I like pictures and getting mail makes me feel important.

 

[Redfish Hunter]

yeah, it is pretty bland magazine but one of the only ones out there that will review anything more than the latest liter class sport bikes!

For a dollar a month it's worth it I guess. I like pictures and getting mail makes me feel important.

+1

In addition, I like to leave the motorcycle mags lying on the coffee table to make it look like I am a "real biker".

 

[lnewlf]

they got the linked brake system wrong-just one piston on the right caliper. Wrong octane. Wrong alternator output. Wrong year brought to US. A "brace" of fuel injectors?- a brace is a pair. Guess I'm just grouchy tonight-meebee a brace of Makers Mark will help.

Maker's Mark doesn't help accuracy- make that a pair [brace?] of pistons on the right caliper...

 

[fjrbird]

I agree. I got the mag in the mail couple days ago and read that article. Just bland taste, and got some facts wrong like others mentioned. I I were new to FJR and read that article, not sure I want to purchase it based on that review.

 

[palerider]

I read the article a few minutes ago and found it to be just plain vanilla. It did not say anything that had not already been said, nothing outstandingly positive, nothing outstandingly negative. I wonder why Yamaha gave them a Gen2 test bike when the Gen3 was almost out? Some goofy marketing ploy?

BTW, the pics in my magazine show the color very close to what the 2012 blue looks like, depending on the light.

Magazine articles are written as much as 6 months in advance of publication.

 

[Redfish Hunter]

I read the article a few minutes ago and found it to be just plain vanilla. It did not say anything that had not already been said, nothing outstandingly positive, nothing outstandingly negative. I wonder why Yamaha gave them a Gen2 test bike when the Gen3 was almost out? Some goofy marketing ploy?

BTW, the pics in my magazine show the color very close to what the 2012 blue looks like, depending on the light.

Magazine articles are written as much as 6 months in advance of publication.

OK, and you think Yamaha did not know this after years of dealing with the motorcycle press? Or Yamaha did not know that they were about to drop a Gen 3 within the next year? I will revise my question to include: I wonder why Yamaha gave them a Gen 2 test bike when they had to know the Gen 3 was almost out? I wonder why Rider even bothered to test a motorcycle that had already been on the market for 7 years?

Another thing that bothers me about this is that if they had 6 months to proofread it, somebody ought to get an ass-whipping, get fired, or both. That many mistakes in a review of a 7 year old motorcycle is ridiculous.

 

[palerider]

I read the article a few minutes ago and found it to be just plain vanilla. It did not say anything that had not already been said, nothing outstandingly positive, nothing outstandingly negative. I wonder why Yamaha gave them a Gen2 test bike when the Gen3 was almost out? Some goofy marketing ploy?

BTW, the pics in my magazine show the color very close to what the 2012 blue looks like, depending on the light.

Magazine articles are written as much as 6 months in advance of publication.

OK, and you think Yamaha did not know this after years of dealing with the motorcycle press? Or Yamaha did not know that they were about to drop a Gen 3 within the next year? I will revise my question to include: I wonder why Yamaha gave them a Gen 2 test bike when they had to know the Gen 3 was almost out? I wonder why Rider even bothered to test a motorcycle that had already been on the market for 7 years?

Another thing that bothers me about this is that if they had 6 months to proofread it, somebody ought to get an ass-whipping, get fired, or both. That many mistakes in a review of a 7 year old motorcycle is ridiculous.

I worked in the magazine industry for years. That article could have been submitted a year ago and held back for any number of reasons. A letter to the editor raising the various good points you've raised here might get you an explanation.

 

[lnewlf]

yeah, it is pretty bland magazine but one of the only ones out there that will review anything more than the latest liter class sport bikes!

For a dollar a month it's worth it I guess. I like pictures and getting mail makes me feel important.

+1

In addition, I like to leave the motorcycle mags lying on the coffee table to make it look like I am a "real biker".

Actually, in that case you have to have Easy Rider

 

[RadioHowie]

Folks gettin' so worked up over a "so-so" review. Meh...

The bike hasn't changed dramatically since 2002...what the hell CAN they say about it???

 

[mferriter]

OK, and you think Yamaha did not know this after years of dealing with the motorcycle press? Or Yamaha did not know that they were about to drop a Gen 3 within the next year? I will revise my question to include: I wonder why Yamaha gave them a Gen 2 test bike when they had to know the Gen 3 was almost out? I wonder why Rider even bothered to test a motorcycle that had already been on the market for 7 years?

Another thing that bothers me about this is that if they had 6 months to proofread it, somebody ought to get an ass-whipping, get fired, or both. That many mistakes in a review of a 7 year old motorcycle is ridiculous.

I think you're missing an important detail here. No one who publishes a motorcycle magazine assumes any of us can read. We just look at the pretty pictures.