I imagine subject may have been discussed previously so forgive me I'm a newbie.
Comparing a $15,600 bike to a $24,000 bike is ludicrous so given that POV  do the members of this forum agree with
the reviewers comments on how the Connie handles? "It turns a twisty road into a high effort chore" "Indeed a long set of
switchbacks isn't something you look forward to on the Concours" ??
They actually suggest mounting a smaller rear tire to improve handling? I just put plates on yesterday and weather hasn't been
conducive to riding so I'm wondering what to expect. Please someone talk me down off this cliff...
Wayne

I do not find my C-14 to be a 'chore' to ride under any circumstances but creeping traffic on the highway (not stopped but moving too slowly to keep my feet up). In fact, the C-14 handles remarkably well for such a heavy bike. It is not nimble but once beyond the parking lot, it really does not need to be so.

The stock tires on a C-14 really do leave a lot to be desired. They are not horrible in my opinion but they do mask the abilities of this bike as well as add a lot of work to both tip in the bike as well as hold it down in a turn. Premium tires will absolutely do away with that and the two brands that are extremely popular are Michelin Pilot Road 2's, 3's, and 4's, with the 3's and 4's being the better handling tires, and Pirelli Angel ST or GTs. Any of those tires will transform the C-14 from a sluggish bike that takes some effort to ride into a much more aggressive (but in a great way, nothing bad), more nimble and much easier to ride motorcycle.

I would normally not recommend taking perfectly good tires off a bike and replacing them but in this particular case, there is quite a bit to be gained and if you can spare the money, and you can appreciate the difference, it may well be worth swapping the tires. Some people cut deals when buying brand new C-14's to have the tires changed as part of the sale; they take new tires off the bike and put other, new tires back on.

Brian

I imagine subject may have been discussed previously so forgive me I'm a newbie.
Comparing a $15,600 bike to a $24,000 bike is ludicrous so given that POV  do the members of this forum agree with
the reviewers comments on how the Connie handles? "It turns a twisty road into a high effort chore" "Indeed a long set of
switchbacks isn't something you look forward to on the Concours" ??
They actually suggest mounting a smaller rear tire to improve handling? I just put plates on yesterday and weather hasn't been
conducive to riding so I'm wondering what to expect. Please someone talk me down off this cliff...
Wayne

One "journalist"  has a negative opinion when comparing vehicles. Wow. I believe that he had his mind made up before he even threw a leg over either bike. Go enjoy your motorcycle and think about what you can spend that other $8000 on...

"It turns a twisty road into a high effort chore"

I guess if all you have ever ridden are 400 lbs sport bikes but as 700 lbs touring bikes go, it handles amazing IMO. Granted, I'm a total amateur but I go out of my way to find twisty roads.

Thanks gentlemen. Brian, the current tires needed replacement so next Wednesday we'll be rolling on Michelin Pilot Road GT 4's. Your advice was music to my ears.

Outstanding- this way, you will get to know the bike without having to go through a 'clunky' cycle before getting decent tires.

I just noticed you have a 1200GT; I think you will find the bikes more similar than different. The C-14 was the alternate for me as the fist idea was to buy a very attractive two- toned 07 GT. I really like the GT and found it to be, along with the 1300GT, an excellent performer and a great bike. I think the first big difference you will notice is the much higher gearing on the C-14; the engine will not 'sing' nearly as much on the highway, running much slower at the same speeds as a GT will. The vibration is different between the bikes too, although there is very little vibration at all on either one, I found it was mostly in the pegs of the GT and mostly in the bars, especially the right one, on the C-14.

It will be different from what you are used to but try to give it a fair evaluation on its own level and I believe you will find the C-14 every bit as good as the GT.

Brian

Thanks gentlemen. Brian, the current tires needed replacement so next Wednesday we'll be rolling on Michelin Pilot Road GT 4's. Your advice was music to my ears.

I'm a long-time BMW owner, and I can tell you that review was biased. First of all, the 1600GT is significantly heavier than the C14, plus it has a truck-like wheelbase of 66+". Neither bike can be considered 'nimble' by simple physics, but I prefer the Connie by far. I was about to buy a 2015 1600GT, and glad I gave the Connie a chance. Not only I ended up with a better bike for my needs (I didn't need stereo, a mammoth fairing), plus BMW didn't fit the 2015 GT with any of the RT improvements I was expecting: quick-shifter, radial brakes (std on the Connie), better suspension, etc. I also happen to like the Connie's ergos better, and probably why I favored it. And as expected, the Connie trumps the BMW in every performance category except top-gear roll-ons, but I MUCH rather have the taller gearing on the Connie all day long. Not much trouble to downshift to 5th (or 4th) if needed. The tranny on the Connie is probably the best I've sampled; certainly much more refined than the clunkier BMW, although it was significantly improved for 2015. It's a matter of personal preference. But one thing is absolutely clear: the BMW WILL NEVER BE $8K better than a Connie. I was considering it because I could afford it. But it'd had never been the better buy. Ride a Connie and 1600 and decide for yourself. They're similar machines since both are considered 'sport-tourers', but quite different. The GT is a whale of a sport-TOURER, basically a touring GTL without the trunk and some ergo changes. The Connie is a SPORT-tourer, basically a sport ZX14 with bags and other touring amenities. Finally, the stereo and its interface on the BMWs is absolutel crap, so you're paying for nothing. Most people bypass it with other sources of nav and music/phone interfaces. The only thing I wish the Kawi had from the BMW is the adjustable suspension and cruise, in that order. But neither is a big deal, since I like firm, sporty suspensions anyway, and I hardly ever touched the settings on my previous BMW bikes anyway. Good luck with your choice.

elp_jc

Excellent summary  of the two bikes. 

the current tires needed replacement so next Wednesday we'll be rolling on Michelin Pilot Road GT 4's.

 

You will love the change those make.  Biggest impacts on my C14 so far (and by far) have been the Guhl flash and the PR4GTs.

As far as the review- the guy was likely clueless and/or biased and/or had some other issue going on.   The 1600GT is a nice bike, indeed.  But from what I gather by reviews I trust, it doesn't perform better than the C14 (and top gear roll-on is meaningless).  Most suspect that it will cost a LOT more to maintain.  It does have a lot of nice additional conveniences and bells and whistles (electronic suspension, auto headlights, comms, etc).  But for $8K+ more, I would certainly hope it has some extras

Wayne,
In case it wasn't previously mentioned, the big change in handling improvement I saw on mine was not just getting rid of the stock 'Stones and going to the Michelin PR2, but also ditching the 50 series and going with the 55 series.

Opinions on doing this vary some per individual, but for me, I will ONLY run a 55 rear from now on.
I realize this post may reach you after you've installed the new tires, but wanted you to be aware of this.
Bob

From what I saw, the GTL weighs 65 lbs. more than a C14, but that 6 has a lot more torque...and it's useable at 2000 rpm. Really the biggest difference I saw, with the exception of the jog wheel and cool electronics.

My buddy bought a new GTL the same day I bought my C14.
He paid twice what I paid for mine.
Since, I have spent $4k upgrading mine, but that's still around $17 k.
He paid $26k for his.
Mine will do everything his will do.

I say, "Gimmee 2 Connie's!"

Oh, and Wayne...
I gave $13,300 for mine new.
Today, you can get even cheaper deals on one than that!
So...that's like 2 Connie's, throw in cruise control, a seat, and a set of Michelin's difference! Lol

Kawasaki really hurts themselves when after 8 years of riders and journalists telling them what a P.O.S. the Bridgestone 021's are, they still use them. DUH!!

Kawasaki really hurts themselves when after 8 years of riders and journalists telling them what a P.O.S. the Bridgestone 021's are, they still use them. DUH!!

I agree. At a $16,000 price tag on this bike I would deliver it with PR4's. I would want anyone test riding this bike to get the best experience possible. Nothing like a first impression.

Great feedback boys. I did notice in subject comparison mention of going with a 55 versus 50. Unfortunately the tires are in so I'll consider that option after experiencing what the 50 provides. I rode the KGT home yesterday so it could be seen by potential buyers. After 4 months of total inactivity it started and ran flawlessly as if it was used the day before. There is something special about these bikes,  that said they can be frustrating devices to deal with as well. Comfort  even after  risers, lowered pegs, Sargent seat , grip puppies still isn't where it should be. Removing the Tupperware (on this particular model) to hard-wire farkles is something you want to allocate lots of time for.  Service, well that's a given they have owners pre-conditioned for financial pain and agony. I'm done with the Beemers and looking forward to experiencing the 14.
It's been frustrating, I've had it a week and only test drove it for 20 minutes. It's suppose to snow all day thus I'll probably have to wait till Sunday.
If that's the biggest problem I have this weekend I'm fine...
W

Wayne,
What I immediately noticed when changing from a 50 to a 55 were these differences;

Much improved steering effort, turn in effort much easier and enjoyable.

Speedometer factory error of +3 mph fast as compared to gps corrected by 2 mph. Now only +1 fast.

No big difference in kickstand height. May be a bit different, but works hunky dorey for me.

I have also observed in the most recent competitor's models they are now going with the 55 series.
Seems THEY listen and read what their customers have complained about.

Kawasaki's got their heads buried deep. I can't believe they're even allowed to release a bike who's speedometer has been that much fast for 8 model years now.
(Not to mention how they still continue to use those awful 'Stones, despite all the bad handling press they've gotten.)

Oh well... As has been my personal experience, the paying customers are merely beta-testers, and it's left up to us to figure out the fix.

But, like I said earlier, Wayne... there's been lots of discussion about this topic. And, like certain specific bodily orifices, when it comes to opinions, everyone's got one.

YMMV!

I have to wonder how many people in this world (and in this forum) have done what that journalist did, driving these two bikes on the same day. As much as I like my 1400GTR, taking a hairpin with the beemer is much, much easier. The counter steering effort on the Kawasaki is too much and it really wants to tip in the curve. The only way I've found to make it viable has been applying rear brake when in the curve in order to keep the weight transfer in check.
That said, in every other situation the Kawasaki is superior. It just handles better and weighs less. And yes, the beemer has torque; it has to, since it displaces 300 cc and 70 lb more. Taking hairpins with the beemer might be technically easier, but it's just taking a yacht around, and jumping back on the Kawasaki really makes it feel almost like a bicycle.
So, more thrills for less money, and 90% of the comfort of the beemer? I'll be keeping this bike for a long time, at least until Kawasaki puts the new 1441 engine, CC and shaves 30 or 40 lb.

Thanks gentlemen. Brian, the current tires needed replacement so next Wednesday we'll be rolling on Michelin Pilot Road GT 4's. Your advice was music to my ears.

Got the same tires sitting in the basement waiting to be mounted as the snow melts.

  A friend of mine bought a BMW 1600 and he didn't pay $24,000 for it. By the time he was out the door it was in the neighbor hood of $32,000.
 I can't figure out why the motorcycle magazine writers are always under estimating the out the door cost of these bikes.
 They are great bikes but I'll take my Kawasaki 1400 any day.
  Brent

I can't figure out why the motorcycle magazine writers are always under estimating the out the door cost of these bikes.

Remember there're about 6 grand in options. It's the typical stupid game of mentioning the 'base' price, when basically no dealer ever orders a base model. In fact, most dealers order fully-optioned bikes to maximize their profits. And same with stupid magazines. They get fully decked bikes, and still mention (to keep manufacturers happy) the base price. That's why I never believe anything I see on TV, magazines, etc. All manufacturers picture a fully-loaded model, and still post the base price, only to find out in small print 'shown with optional equipment'. A 'base' BMW is absolute crap. The caps over the speakers and stereo switchgear on base bikes look cheaper than a Hyosung bike.  And there's no TPMS, no cruise, no TC, almost no nothing on those bikes. That's why nobody orders them. The Connie and most others only come one way, and that's the way it should be IMO.

Hey OP, compared to a KGT brick, a Connie runs CIRCLES around that bike in every regard. I had the RS model with bags (basically a GT, except the more relaxed ergos), and the Connie handles immensely better. Mine came with the wider 5.5" wheel, and it always had a shimmy on high-speed sweepers. Plus it was as heavy as the Connie. Nice bike back then, when you couldn't find ABS and cruise on anything. But now it's a dinosaur . You'll be very happy with the Connie. But try one before buying, if you can. Good luck.

  A friend of mine bought a BMW 1600 and he didn't pay $24,000 for it. By the time he was out the door it was in the neighbor hood of $32,000.
 I can't figure out why the motorcycle magazine writers are always under estimating the out the door cost of these bikes.
 They are great bikes but I'll take my Kawasaki 1400 any day.

Many dealers even sell OVER LIST price.  This is especially true of BWM dealers (and there are usually very few of them, so there isn't any competition either).  So while you are looking at sticker price of a C14 KNOWING you can get it knocked down hundreds or more, when you are looking at a BWM, you might not even see sticker price as an option.  And yes, often they will order and sell only vehicles with tons of "options" not reflected in the base price.  The car equivalent of undercoating, trunk mats, and uber-special wax.

This is why I have seen numbers in the past that comparing the 1600GT to the C14 is not like an $8k difference but more like DOUBLE the price, in reality.  Then you want to extend the factory warranty on the 1600 by three years?  Good luck!  You can do that to the C14 and have enough money left over from just that transaction alone to add a new seat, cruise control, auxiliary lighting, and coms compared to what it will cost on the BWM.