Cycle World full test

Just picked up the new issue of Cycle World and they have a full test. Described as "Stunning". All Testers were very impressed. Faster than a ZX-14 in the quarter, all day (15hr) comfortable seat, excellent ergonomics, great wind protection with no buffeting. Read it and now am even more convinced that I made the right move in taking the plunge back in January and ordering one. Can't wait.

I saw that today as well. I'm glad to hear all the positives, but I still wouldn't call it an in-depth article (less than two pages of text).

**Spoiler Alert** :goofy:

For the record, they got high/low/avg mileage of 41/28/34, and an average range of 167 miles. That's including reserve. Ouch.

Faster than a ZX-14 in the quarter?

I've gotta see this to believe it!

[image: View Post]carlitos92, on 25 February 2010 - 09:48 PM, said:

an average range of 167 miles. That's including reserve. Ouch.

Just hard to believe Honda would put such a peanut sized gas tank on a sports-"tourer".

[image: View Post]Veefer800Canuck, on 25 February 2010 - 09:54 PM, said:

Faster than a ZX-14 in the quarter?

I've gotta see this to believe it!

Same here.

[image: View Post]mick, on 25 February 2010 - 10:03 PM, said:

[image: View Post]carlitos92, on 25 February 2010 - 09:48 PM, said:

an average range of 167 miles. That's including reserve. Ouch.

Just hard to believe Honda would put such a peanut sized gas tank on a sports-"tourer".

Same here. What befuddles me even more is that the 7th generation is more sport touring-like than the previous generations.

[image: View Post]mick, on 25 February 2010 - 10:03 PM, said:

[image: View Post]carlitos92, on 25 February 2010 - 09:48 PM, said:

an average range of 167 miles. That's including reserve. Ouch.

Just hard to believe Honda would put such a peanut sized gas tank on a sports-"tourer".


Yes, what part of tourer do they not understand?

[image: View Post]landlover, on 25 February 2010 - 10:49 PM, said:

[image: View Post]mick, on 25 February 2010 - 10:03 PM, said:

[image: View Post]carlitos92, on 25 February 2010 - 09:48 PM, said:

an average range of 167 miles. That's including reserve. Ouch.

Just hard to believe Honda would put such a peanut sized gas tank on a sports-"tourer".


Yes, what part of tourer do they not understand?

The Connie's average range is about 220. That's more like it.

10.3 at 135 mph in the 1/4 mile.

They loved the clutch (it was the manual 6 speed).

[image: View Post]ki-speed, on 25 February 2010 - 10:53 PM, said:

10.3 at 135 mph in the 1/4 mile.

They loved the clutch (it was the manual 6 speed).

I believe you; however: ZX-14 = 9.73 @ 147.

I didn't "see" the bikes but the article stated....VFR 10.33 seconds at 134.85mph.......not ZX-14 (sorry Concours 14) 10.78 seconds at 125.44 mph.

If it is a "tourer" you're looking for Honda understands that quite well and call it a Gold Wing or ST1300. 150 - 160 miles on a tank is good enough for me as I like to stop evry couple of hours anyway. The bottom line here is we buy what we like and negatives for one person don't matter much for another and vica versa. I mean one of the editors in their comments referred to the sixth generation in this way "..... the weirdly annoying VTEC...." while another said of the new bike. "While it is not the lightest handling, fastest or quickest machine on the road it is far more enjoyable over a long, fast riding day than any of the bikes that top those respective performance categories."

It is all a matter of taste.

[image: View Post]PaulW, on 25 February 2010 - 09:43 PM, said:

Faster than a ZX-14 in the quarter


:goofy: :goofy:

167 miles including reserve is...wow, just wow. :comp13:

Yeah read it tonight when I got home, very positive. But it is from the least respected rag in the states CW. :rolleyes:

[image: View Post]PaulW, on 25 February 2010 - 11:02 PM, said:

It is all a matter of taste.


You're right. ;)

But what really irks me is that Cycle World has huge 3/4" text on the cover of the magazine that reads "RIDE FAR." Tons of people on this forum have been agonizing over what the VFR1200's range will be... and that cover caption led me to believe CW had the final results to soothe everybody's souls. Uh-uh. On my VTEC, I don't even start looking at the gas gauge until I'm at 160 miles or more.

Don't get me wrong, 167 miles is probably more than enough for me, too - but what's the point of making a comfortable-for-15-hour bike if yer gonna have to stop and stretch your legs at a gas station every two hours anyway?

I don't want to overlap all the other threads of VFR1200 conjecture we've already started around here, but it just seems like when you make a middle-of-the-road bike you really risk either pleasing everybody or pleasing nobody. I hope it's the former in this case. Sounds like CW is voting that way, anyway.

[image: View Post]carlitos92, on 25 February 2010 - 11:20 PM, said:

what's the point of making a comfortable-for-15-hour bike if yer gonna have to stop and stretch your legs at a gas station every two hours anyway?


A typical big day ride for me:

Leave at 8am. Stop at 10 for gas and coffee. Stop around noon for gas and lunch. Stop at 3pm for gas, check map and call home with ETA. Stop at 5pm for gas and ice tea or coffee. Stop at 7pm for gas and dinner or arrive home. Bio breaks at each stop (obviously). 11 hours and 750 miles (150/tank).

I'm not seeing a huge problem here. The exception would be very remote areas in the southwestern US where pre-planning might be necessary but even major roads/interstates there wouldn't be a problem with range between stations.

[image: View Post]BaileyRock, on 25 February 2010 - 11:07 PM, said:

Yeah read it tonight when I got home, very positive. But it is from the least respected rag in the states CW. :rolleyes:


CW has a history of being giddy and oozing superlatives on just about every 1st test of a new major model of any manufacturer. Give it a few months when they really do an "in depth" test and compare it with competitor bikes. Then the real stuff will come out......

MD

Download this last week... April edition, in the middle of Feb? :blink:

[image: View Post]UFO, on 25 February 2010 - 11:03 PM, said:

167 miles including reserve is...wow, just wow. :comp13:

1200cc and shaft drive, check.
Japanese reliability, check.
Still butt ugly enough to look good, check.

Plus - traction control, adjustable engine mapping, 6 gallon fuel tank, adjustable windscreen, etc. etc. check, check check...

:biggrin:

http://www.motorcycl...t/?R=EPI-122382

[image: Posted Image]

[image: View Post]UFO, on 25 February 2010 - 11:03 PM, said:

[image: View Post]PaulW, on 25 February 2010 - 09:43 PM, said:

Faster than a ZX-14 in the quarter


:goofy: :goofy:

167 miles including reserve is...wow, just wow. :comp13:

i don't get that either. after seeing bike in person i cant understand why that big bulge where the gas tank should be is so huge.

[image: View Post]vfrcapn, on 26 February 2010 - 01:23 AM, said:

[image: View Post]UFO, on 25 February 2010 - 11:03 PM, said:

167 miles including reserve is...wow, just wow. :comp13:

1200cc and shaft drive, check.
Japanese reliability, check.
Still butt ugly enough to look good, check.

Plus - traction control, adjustable engine mapping, 6 gallon fuel tank, adjustable windscreen, etc. etc. check, check check...

:biggrin:

http://www.motorcycl...t/?R=EPI-122382


Personally I don't care if that had a 16 gallon fuel tank, the best farkles in the world, and emitted gold dust instead of fumes, that thing is just beyond ugly! That's not even in the same league as the VFR, try the BMW GS1200. Are you riding in the mountains, or delivering a letter to a soldier in Afghanistan?

I don't have a problem with anything that has been mentioned. My issue is the V8 M3-like jump in price. Oh, and the fact that it lacks a few key touring pieces.

[image: View Post]FotoMoto, on 25 February 2010 - 11:57 PM, said:

[image: View Post]carlitos92, on 25 February 2010 - 11:20 PM, said:

what's the point of making a comfortable-for-15-hour bike if yer gonna have to stop and stretch your legs at a gas station every two hours anyway?


A typical big day ride for me:

Leave at 8am. Stop at 10 for gas and coffee. Stop around noon for gas and lunch. Stop at 3pm for gas, check map and call home with ETA. Stop at 5pm for gas and ice tea or coffee. Stop at 7pm for gas and dinner or arrive home. Bio breaks at each stop (obviously). 11 hours and 750 miles (150/tank).

I'm not seeing a huge problem here. The exception would be very remote areas in the southwestern US where pre-planning might be necessary but even major roads/interstates there wouldn't be a problem with range between stations.

+1. While the range might be a little annoying when eating up huge chunks of miles, it probably wouldn't be an issue for me, as I rarely go more than 100 miles at a time anyway. It would mean modifying where I stop, not how often I stop. But like FM said, if touring in the US southwest it could be a real problem. I'm hoping Honda will offer a larger tank in the future tho - standard on a future model year, as an option or as an aftermarket item.

[image: View Post]vfrcapn, on 26 February 2010 - 01:23 AM, said:

http://www.motorcycl...t/?R=EPI-122382



I think we've found the bike to replace Elizilla's TDM if she ever sells it! ;)

[image: View Post]FotoMoto, on 25 February 2010 - 11:57 PM, said:

[image: View Post]carlitos92, on 25 February 2010 - 11:20 PM, said:

what's the point of making a comfortable-for-15-hour bike if yer gonna have to stop and stretch your legs at a gas station every two hours anyway?


A typical big day ride for me:

Leave at 8am. Stop at 10 for gas and coffee. Stop around noon for gas and lunch. Stop at 3pm for gas, check map and call home with ETA. Stop at 5pm for gas and ice tea or coffee. Stop at 7pm for gas and dinner or arrive home. Bio breaks at each stop (obviously). 11 hours and 750 miles (150/tank).

I'm not seeing a huge problem here. The exception would be very remote areas in the southwestern US where pre-planning might be necessary but even major roads/interstates there wouldn't be a problem with range between stations.

I agree, the 167 mile range shouldn't be a deal breaker. That's two to three hours between gas stops. But in remote areas where gas stops are few and far between, or open late or close early, you could get yourself into some trouble. I nearly got into this trouble last year when on my trip out west.

[image: View Post]rufrydrsc2, on 26 February 2010 - 06:31 AM, said:

[image: View Post]vfrcapn, on 26 February 2010 - 01:23 AM, said:

[image: View Post]UFO, on 25 February 2010 - 11:03 PM, said:

167 miles including reserve is...wow, just wow. :comp13:

1200cc and shaft drive, check.
Japanese reliability, check.
Still butt ugly enough to look good, check.

Plus - traction control, adjustable engine mapping, 6 gallon fuel tank, adjustable windscreen, etc. etc. check, check check...

:biggrin:

http://www.motorcycl...t/?R=EPI-122382



Personally I don't care if that had a 16 gallon fuel tank, the best farkles in the world, and emitted gold dust instead of fumes, that thing is just beyond ugly! That's not even in the same league as the VFR, try the BMW GS1200. Are you riding in the mountains, or delivering a letter to a soldier in Afghanistan?



Ah the Hummer H2 of motorcycles. The ultimate poseur piece for the weekend motorcyclist.

[image: View Post]TimC, on 26 February 2010 - 09:00 AM, said:

[image: View Post]FotoMoto, on 25 February 2010 - 11:57 PM, said:

[image: View Post]carlitos92, on 25 February 2010 - 11:20 PM, said:

what's the point of making a comfortable-for-15-hour bike if yer gonna have to stop and stretch your legs at a gas station every two hours anyway?


A typical big day ride for me:

Leave at 8am. Stop at 10 for gas and coffee. Stop around noon for gas and lunch. Stop at 3pm for gas, check map and call home with ETA. Stop at 5pm for gas and ice tea or coffee. Stop at 7pm for gas and dinner or arrive home. Bio breaks at each stop (obviously). 11 hours and 750 miles (150/tank).

I'm not seeing a huge problem here. The exception would be very remote areas in the southwestern US where pre-planning might be necessary but even major roads/interstates there wouldn't be a problem with range between stations.

+1. While the range might be a little annoying when eating up huge chunks of miles, it probably wouldn't be an issue for me, as I rarely go more than 100 miles at a time anyway. It would mean modifying where I stop, not how often I stop. But like FM said, if touring in the US southwest it could be a real problem. I'm hoping Honda will offer a larger tank in the future tho - standard on a future model year, as an option or as an aftermarket item.

[image: View Post]vfrcapn, on 26 February 2010 - 01:23 AM, said:

http://www.motorcycl...t/?R=EPI-122382



I think we've found the bike to replace Elizilla's TDM if she ever sells it! Posted Image

I can't find the kitchen sink on that thing. I know it must be somewhere.

I understand that some of you dislike it just cause. Too many things stated as fact when they are opinion. So I will state my "facts". The new bike looks great! The 6th generation looks like a refugee ray gun from a Buck Rogers movie. VTEC is for cars. The underseat exhaust just raises the centre of gravity and takes up valuable space. The fact that the new VFR is positioned as an all around motorcycle just carries on the tradition. Except for the old interceptor days the VFR has never been anything but one of the best "all-around" motorcycles you can buy.

Thinking about the fuel range the other night and something struck me. Ergonomically it is almost identical to the 6th generation. Given that since the engine is taller (78 degree V vs. 90, 1200cc vs. 800) it is inevitable that there is less fuel space on the "underside" of the tank and the only way to correct that would be to either raise the height of the tank or lengthen it.

Me I am just happy to be getting one.

I've come to not mind the looks of the new VFR, and the reviews have generally been fairly positive. However, the big thing that puts me off (especially given the price tag) is the last set of reviews I read on here (the ones from the UK where theyhad a bunch of different riders each doing 150 miles or more each). There were a couple that were underwhelmed, and one guy that said it just didn't live up to the hype. Overall, it seemed to be, "What are we actually getting for the money?"

We have a pretty small team of reviewers here in Noo Zilund, but I was really surprised and impressed by one of them, who owns a Ulysses and really digs Harleys, Victorys, etc., but rides anything and everything. He was REALLY impressed by the VFR1200. Perhaps not enough to buy one (given the price tag of NZ$29k), but he thought it was a lovely bike. Test rides are very easy to get here, but I dunno that I'll bother. I've been itching to test the Street Triple (I have a good friend who sold his Blackbird to buy one), a Ducati or four, KTMs, etc etc. but I *know* I'll never buy another bike, so it seems pointless.
Shmae, really, as I used to love riding as many bikes as possible. Maybe I'll book a VFR1200 ride anyway, just so I can say I have ridden it.

[image: View Post]FotoMoto, on 25 February 2010 - 11:57 PM, said:

[image: View Post]carlitos92, on 25 February 2010 - 11:20 PM, said:

what's the point of making a comfortable-for-15-hour bike if yer gonna have to stop and stretch your legs at a gas station every two hours anyway?


A typical big day ride for me:

Leave at 8am. Stop at 10 for gas and coffee. Stop around noon for gas and lunch. Stop at 3pm for gas, check map and call home with ETA. Stop at 5pm for gas and ice tea or coffee. Stop at 7pm for gas and dinner or arrive home. Bio breaks at each stop (obviously). 11 hours and 750 miles (150/tank).

I'm not seeing a huge problem here. The exception would be very remote areas in the southwestern US where pre-planning might be necessary but even major roads/interstates there wouldn't be a problem with range between stations.

Posted Image Exactly.
Range is totally not a problem for me.
Price is. But then again, I'm not the one to shell out the full price for a new bike any way.
Waiting for a gently used one. Tipped over once or twice even better ;) :beer:

[image: View Post]PaulW, on 25 February 2010 - 09:43 PM, said:

Just picked up the new issue of Cycle World and they have a full test. Described as "Stunning". All Testers were very impressed. Faster than a ZX-14 in the quarter, all day (15hr) comfortable seat, excellent ergonomics, great wind protection with no buffeting. Read it and now am even more convinced that I made the right move in taking the plunge back in January and ordering one. Can't wait.


I got my issue in the mail yesterday and I double checked but there was no comparison to a ZX-14. There was one to the Kawasaki Concours with bags. It did out perform that bike but they did note the VFR was lighter and did not have luggage. The ZX-14 is a sub 10 second 1/4 mile bike (9.96 @ 143 mph) so I hope new VFR owners don't get to fired up. I replied to CW via e-mail and voiced my 2 pennies worth. Nice bike? Hell yeah! $16K worth of nice bike??? No way! The bike they compared it to, the Kawi C-14 is heavier, has luggage, heated grips, vari-height wind screen and traction control. All that and it cost less than a new VFR.
I'm not hating on the VFR but to me, Honda is not focused on us current or past VFR owners. Since the VFR was introduced, it has gained weight, width and length. Sure, it has more power but if the engine is truly smaller (physically) than our 800cc lump of coal; can you imagine that motor in "our" current model that was slightly restyled? Can you say rocket ship? I own 4 Hondas and love the brand but look at what Kawasaki did to the latest model on the Concours. The owners complained and a restyle with a ton of improvements came out in less than three years. Even the price stayed reasonable. Honda could have used the new VFR chassis and drive train to make a "new" CBR1000F with a 1200cc motor (in-line 4) to compete with Kawi and BMW sport touring bikes. They could have taken the new bike's motor, updated our current bike's styling and took a step toward returning the VFR to being a true Interceptor. Later, JD

I luv the 6th gen high pipe set up, you hurt my feelings Posted Image

[image: View Post]leanit, on 27 February 2010 - 04:55 PM, said:

I'm not hating on the VFR but to me, Honda is not focused on us current or past VFR owners. Since the VFR was introduced, it has gained weight, width and length. Sure, it has more power but if the engine is truly smaller (physically) than our 800cc lump of coal; can you imagine that motor in "our" current model that was slightly restyled? Can you say rocket ship? I own 4 Hondas and love the brand but look at what Kawasaki did to the latest model on the Concours. The owners complained and a restyle with a ton of improvements came out in less than three years. Even the price stayed reasonable. Honda could have used the new VFR chassis and drive train to make a "new" CBR1000F with a 1200cc motor (in-line 4) to compete with Kawi and BMW sport touring bikes. They could have taken the new bike's motor, updated our current bike's styling and took a step toward returning the VFR to being a true Interceptor. Later, JD

You are probably correct that Honda is not focused on past or present VFR owners to guide their future directions. I for one am glad they are not. Honda surely has done focus groups to provide an extra feedback point or two, but ultimately they take the risk of moving forward with new designs. Think about what you are asking for: you want Honda to look behind them for guidance and direction. Fixing minor bugs like Kawasaki did with the C14 is one thing, but making strategic decisions by looking back is quite another. Look at the trap Harley Davidson is in, everything they do is backward looking. HD is shackled to their history, traditions, and most of all their customer base. They can't even introduce something like the V-Rod without getting lambasted by their target market. Ultimately, they end up marketing old, tired technology because this is what appeals to their base, indeed this is only what HD is allowed to do. This is exactly what would happen to Honda or anyone else if all they did was "listen" to the existing customers. Honda is the leading innovator of motorcycles and related technology, they are NOT going to be led by the tail (wag the dog...). You do not and can not maintain a leadership position by looking backwards. They have made and will make mistakes now and then as they/we all do, but on the whole we are far better off with a visionary company like Honda that is willing to take big risks to show the way forward. The VFR1200 is exactly the product of that thinking.

You are probably correct that Honda is not focused on past or present VFR owners to guide their future directions. I for one am glad they are not. Honda surely has done focus groups to provide an extra feedback point or two, but ultimately they take the risk of moving forward with new designs. Think about what you are asking for: you want Honda to look behind them for guidance and direction. Fixing minor bugs like Kawasaki did with the C14 is one thing, but making strategic decisions by looking back is quite another. Look at the trap Harley Davidson is in, everything they do is backward looking. HD is shackled to their history, traditions, and most of all their customer base. They can't even introduce something like the V-Rod without getting lambasted by their target market. Ultimately, they end up marketing old, tired technology because this is what appeals to their base, indeed this is only what HD is allowed to do. This is exactly what would happen to Honda or anyone else if all they did was "listen" to the existing customers. Honda is the leading innovator of motorcycles and related technology, they are NOT going to be led by the tail (wag the dog...). You do not and can not maintain a leadership position by looking backwards. They have made and will make mistakes now and then as they/we all do, but on the whole we are far better off with a visionary company like Honda that is willing to take big risks to show the way forward. The VFR1200 is exactly the product of that thinking.
[/quote]

Well said Solo. I understand but with your reasoning, Ford or Chevy should not be selling "improved" pony cars. The F150 should have died long ago and the Corvette should not be here either. Those brand names/companies have realized they have a firm customer base in each market and have improved established designs. I don't like Harleys but this holds true for them as well. I love Honda bikes and show it with my spent money (own 4). But not all of their ideas are golden. Does the DN-01 or Fury increase sales? Did the old CBR1000F sell better than both...combined? I want Honda motorcycles to be around for a long time and to do this, selling bikes that alot of people want will be key. Hi-tech slow/low selling models hurt a company and rarely help. Thanks, JD

http://www.vfrdiscus...reenshot&id=110
File Name: Cycleworld Article April 2010
File Submitter: HispanicSlammer
File Submitted: 28 Feb 2010
File Category: Article Scans

Cycleworld Article April 2010 First full test vfr1200f

Click here to download this file

Thanks HS :fing02: