My impression is as follows, keep in mind I have not ridden the VFR12 enough to get a long term sense of it.
VFR12 (600 miles so far)
Great build quality, great motor, suspension is very firm for touring unless the road is dead flat (expansion joints suck). The bike handles well for its advertised weight, especially at low speed. The brakes are a little noisy, but work really well. Not sure about the whole linked rear brake thing since the bike does not slow down well with the rear brake even though it is supposed to be linked with one pad in one of the front calipers. The riding position and seat comfort suit me very well, though I would agree with anyone who says this depends on a riders individual taste. I would like a little more fuel capacity, but I think I can stretch it to over 200/tank after its broken in. It pulls out of corners on the power very nicely (reminds me of a Duc). With the power/torque of the motor and the chassis, it's easy and fun to ride. Note: if you are riding around town, it’s not so much fun (see note). You need to pay attention to your downshifts as it does not like to crawl in any gear and will make bad sounds if you try it.
*I'm having some throttle issues with my bike that Honda is looking into. It kind of stumbles/surges in low gears with small throttle openings. I don't recommend buying the bike until Honda sorts this out. I was really surprised to have this kind of issue with a Honda (maybe a smaller company with less FI experience would be understandable).
Looks B
Handling B
Motor A
Trans B+
FI D-
Brakes A-
Build quality A-
Fun to ride B
Kawasaki Concours C14 2008 (26k miles)
Build quality is good. Motor is strong and geared for touring. Suspension is firm. The bike is heavy per spec., it's heavy to push around, it's heavy feeling when you ride it and the weight feels like it's up higher than my other bikes, it's just heavy all around. The brakes were excellent when it was new, then the rotors warped, Kaw dlr said they were in spec and I put on Galfers to fix it. In fairness I probably could have hounded uncle Kaw to replace them in warranty, but then what? Have them warp again and end up with aftermarket anyway? Life’s too short. With the Galfer rotors it stops great, it just feels like it mutilates the front tire if you use the brakes aggressively because of the way the weight shifts to the front of the bike. Maybe this is just my perception, but I have never had a bike go through front tires like this one (Roadsmarts on this, the VFR and K12, the C14 factory tires were crap). This bike has never inspired confidence when riding aggressively. It has not spit me off, but it feels like it understeers (better with the Roadsmarts). For commuting, this bike is good, not great, but good. The factory seat was painful after 45 minutes, the aftermarket Sargent is good for 60. I don’t know why, maybe it’s just a more upright riding position. I already said it’s heavy, it’s also big. Have you been watching the tour de France? These things look huge on the road. I think I can take up more real estate than a smart car when I park it. By now it sounds like I don’t like it, but that’s not so, I just feel like I am riding the motorcycle equivalent of a well appointed Suburban when I’m on it. The gauges are great, mileage to empty, fuel consumption, air pressure�. And I like the fact I can talk on my headset when I need to after I push the little button that raises my aftermarket Cee Bailey windscreen, but in the end, it’s a tool, not a joy on the road.
Looks B
Handling C
Motor B+
Trans C+
FI A-
Brakes A-
Build quality B+
Fun to ride C-
BMW K1200RS 98’ (91k miles) (just sold)
I and this bike have history.
It’s probably my favorite bike of all time and at the same time, the most expensive. There is a lot of grousing about the price of a new VFR12, but does everyone realize this bike had a $15,999 MSRP in 1998? I paid $13,500 or so after someone put it on consignment at the dealer with 1k miles on it. I still think it is the best looking sport touring bike ever made. Build quality was great, motor was great (although BMW replaced it for eating its cylinder walls at 25k miles) and it stopped and handled very well of a bike of its size and weight. Had a blast tormenting the sport bikes at Bakersfield track with it. The thing had torque and would follow a line in turns so long as you remembered that lean angle was limited and you needed to hang off it a bit. If you have never ridden a BMW with the telelever front end, make an appointment to do so (hats off to BMW for encouraging test rides). They do not dive when you apply the front brakes, what a concept. The problem with this bike was that it cost a fortune to maintain it. Those of you that have owned a BMW motorcycle can attest to the fact that it is shocking that a parts counter salesmen can keep a straight face when they charge you what they do for a part. This is the fundamental reason I went looking at Honda for my latest new bike, because I hate being raped for parts, even when the parts are for my favorite motorcycle. I owned a BMW 540i sedan and it was cheaper by mile to keep that thing in tires and service than this bike, how sick is that?
So lots of good miles, lots of complements on what a pretty bike it was, it was fast, felt safe at any speed and should go down as one of the greatest bikes of its day.
Looks A
Handling B
Motor A-
Trans B
FI A-
Brakes B
Build quality A-
Fun to ride B
BMW K1200S 2005 (borrowed)
My buddy was hosting a bike rally and let me use this bike out of his collection. The ride was about 175miles on some great mountain roads in the Sierras.
I think the bike looks great at a given distance, but you start to notice that it does not look quite as well finished as some of its older BMW cousins. When this bike came out I was surprised to see that the castings were not as well finished as on the earlier bikes. It just didn’t look like it was made by BMW, or at least by the old farts that had been designing and building great BMW bikes for decades. I don’t know the truth of it, but judge for yourselves. I was also annoyed with the clutch sticking out the side and into my tibia. Not sure what happened there, but it’s weird and not welcome in stop and go traffic. The bike handled pretty well in the mountains. The motor was good, but the throttle was not as predictable as my early generation bike. I can’t remember if I like the brakes, but I would have remembered if I really didn’t like them. The thing is, I didn’t come away wanting to buy one of these, even ignoring the parts issues mentioned above. I liked my 98’ better – maybe because of familiarity, but I don’t think so. I think this bike is just not as well sorted as the RS models that came before. This ride is what really got me to try the VFR12.
Looks B+
Handling B-
Motor B
Trans B
FI B-
Brakes B
Build quality B-
Fun to ride B-
Sorry if this is too long winded for some of you, but for those who own/have owned some of these bikes I hope it helps. I really wish Honda did test rides the way BMW does. If they did, I would have waited a year for them to finish tuning what is potentially a great bike.
[image: View Post]SteveSvfr750, on 13 July 2010 - 05:48 AM, said:
I would love to get some feedback from riders experienced with the VFR1200 competition. I have an old 97VFR but not sure it's representative of the touring comfort on the new model. I've been looking at the bmw's and yamaha fjr also. Is the new vfr that much more comfortable touring than my 97 to put it in the league of the others?
Thanks.