Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Concours Comparison test

Found this 4 bike comparison with the FJR, BW K1200GT, ST1300 & the Connie. Don't agree with the outcome although I'm biased & haven't ridden the winner...


Agree about heat off motor. Disagree about low speed handling and I get better economy (not a ham-fisted bike journo - I pay for my bike & fuel).


2 comments:

  1. Anonymous9:00 AM

    Had a read last night. What a waste of time, there were no real or meaningful comparisons to say why a person would want to buy whichever bike, or no real criticism of any of the bikes……. and that says it all……..They are all superb machines and selection comes down to minor cosmetics or idiosyncrasies of the riders (and the price comparisons didn’t seem relevant or equitable to NZ)

    Comparing the hp and torque are sort of irrelevant to the average touring rider because they’re not race bikes and my poor old ST, at the bottom of the heap, has way more power than I need, or can handle. It’s a bit grim that a bike can be so ‘Smooth’ and ‘reliable’ to end up rated as last because it’s old and boring..??

    Personally, I love the look and styling of the FJR because it looks equally natural with the bags on or off. I guess I was put off buying one when the earlier reports/comparisons I read rated them as the most nimble etc, etc but at the end would be a sentence saying “but for long touring rides I’d take the Honda".

    I like the grunty look of the Concours except when riding behind and it looks like they ran out of time when putting it together and threw on a couple of indicators from a trail bike…and then there’s that can!! I haven’t ridden one but the smaller tank and screen would probably put me off a purchase…..mind you, being able to monitor the tyre pressures on the go must be a positive…I wonder why they never mentioned that. (Sorry Andrew…I couldn’t help myself there)

    I’ve never really considered buying a Beemer due to the price.

    The selection of an ST for me came down to the big tank because I wanted it for long rides. Initially, coming from a cruiser, I found the mirrors too low but the fact they shielded my hands from the elements was nice and I’ve never felt the need for heated grips. The crash bar ‘wings’ look a bit ugly but the design is incredible and the bike will just balance on them if it goes over. It’s a bit tall and heavy to park etc, but on the move it’s fine. I normally ride at around 110kph but it would sit all day at 140 and I’ve ‘blipped’ it up to 230 so it’s got heaps. I have no trouble ‘filtering’ through traffic and overtaking is a breeze. 27Kg of luggage is plenty and it’s always dry.

    I’d have all 4 (5) bikes and I’ll be really interested to see what Mr Suzuki puts on offer for this niche in the future….but I’ll probably replace my ST with another one.

    JohnM

    ReplyDelete
  2. You're quite right John - I seriously doubt whether there is much wrong with any of them. Power is irrelevant - I've supposedly got 156hp on tap, but how much do I ever use? (Ok every now and again it's nice to check and see if it's still really there).

    RE: the Connie. I'm not fussed by the tank size - as long as I can do 300km in one hit (no problem have done 368), it's ok. You need a break every now and again (unless you're like some mad ST rider doing 2,100km in under 24hours). In saying that, I still wouldn't mind having more gas up my sleeve. The exhaust is ugly but Brian's fixed his one. Apparently the lights are there so that they could keep the rear end skinyish with the panniers on - not sure they quite got away with that...

    The ST's were cheaper when I boght the Connie but I just don't like the looks - exhausts again + they look huge. And I know they're great mile munchers.

    Don't like my old man's BM but it's a twin and the fours are probably a lot nicer but too dear. And when you put the Connie next to the FJR it's better value for money in my book.

    Horses for courses...

    ReplyDelete