september issue of Motorrad compares the C14 with 3 others, and loses

[martin_14]

the comparo runs the Kawasaki C14, Yamaha FJR1300, Honda ST1300 and BMW K1600 GT. According to these clowns, the result of their "report" is:
1. BMW
2. Honda
3. Yamaha
4. Kawasaki

Besides all the text, these are the comments from the 4 guys riding them. Each one commented on the bike he drove. I'll just sum up what was said from each bike:

K1600 GT: "The beemer challenges me. For me the german is a stunner, not only because of its size. It's also its huge practicality that strikes me. From gliding at low RPMs in the ESA-Comfort mode and tame road-mapping, until the hot sport mode and dynamic mapping, there's only a click away. The engine is smooth but sharp, likes spinning and sound fantastic."

ST1300: "The Honda is relaxing. In my opinion the beemer could make me breakfast; I don't care, it's not for me. The 6-cyl engine is just not right for touring, too agressive and the throttle transition is nervous. Instead, Honda's V4 is perfect. It pulls and does what it should. Just like the rest of the bike. This way I can focus on the landscape and the people, which is what touring is about."

C14: "The Kawa look undecided. Actually, the C14 as a lot of what I like in a tourer. Creature comfort, suspension with margin to play, pull. But it somehow misses the point. The engine dissapoints at low revs, wind protection is neither good nor bad, seat is too soft after a while, and on secondary road one has to forget overdrive and stay in 5th. The BMW can do everything better."

FJR: "The FJR deserved better. I can still remember well when Yamaha presented this bike. A new, dynamic category, a great departure. These assets are still there with the fantastic engine and sound chassis. But the world around it didn't stand still, and the BMW shows the state of the art. That's why Yamaha should do something. More wind protection, more ability to travel, more features. And finally a 6th gear. Engine and chassis can stay as they are."

Now, a few comments from my side. First, these guys are in BMWs pockets. Or BMW is in theirs. Whatever. But I do agree that as a tourer, the BMW exceeds the others. It's simply a comfortable whale bike.
Second, this was exclusively a comparo as tourers, not Sport Tourers, where the sporty side of the BMW would have... ahem... sucked. The ST I don't know, never drove one. The Yamaha has little ground clearance (not that I would have personally used it up), and the Kawasaki would have won, no doubt. Not because it's a thorough bred sports bike, but it's simply ahead of the others for such function.
So, basically, I'm irritated by such morons who simply dismiss or dislike a bike and try to justify it. "Geez! my Mack truck sucks! I can't overtake that Ferrari!" Flashnews, you idiot: it's not supposed to. Try to carry 50 tons of logs with that Ferrari and tell me what happens.

[sherob]

I owned a ST1300.  It is a nice ride, that V4 is sweet too... but it has no suspension to speak of, needs a 6th gear, it's seat is a true torture device, and just plain cost to much for what they are giving you.  It should have a refresh coming out this year. 

[graham downunder]

They have to write something . Now what they should do is compare bikes of the same price  ,if you are going to pay 30% more I actually want 30% more of everything .

All of the above bikes are good I would not kick anyone of them out from my garage .

The Honda  ST is an old design bike and the FJR1300 is more modern design and is a much better sport /tourer
The Kawasaki has a few advantages over the FJR1300 and a few things that are not as good but IMO I prefer the look of the Yamaha .
The BMW is a VERY exspensive Touring /sports bike to replace the failed K1300GT which replaced the K1200GT and to also fill the place left by the K1200 LT It also wants to attract Honda Goldwing fans .

The cost of ownership is not mentioned in tests but service and depreciation are BIG costs that
we should always consider in owning a bike ,unless money is no problem.

Personaly they should have included a Ducati Multistrada 1200 and a Triumph 1050 Sprint in the test . I know the Ducati would realy show how a light weight bike can do compared to the BMW .

[redbarber]

I think that it's interesting that excluding the new BMW, all three of those Japanese bikes have been compared over and over in article after article.  Every one I've seen over the past 3 years has put the C14 at the top of the stack.  Now along comes a new (and interesting) BMW, and Viola! the same-old FJR and the same-old ST1300 somehow leap-frog over the improved C14 to put it last.  That can only mean one of two things:  either these guys are all different from every other test rider that has done the previous comparisons, OR the C14 gen2 (traction control, economy mode, KTRS, linked-brakes, etc) is a move in the wrong direction. 
I think that 1) Factory Cruise Control, 2) better mapping (if Guhl can do it, why not mama Kaw?), 3) a seat, and 4) Adjustable handlebars, would turn this disturbing trend around.  I'd bet that if they had borrowed one of the "farkled" bikes from this forum, it would have given first place a shot, and definitely would have locked up second place after the obligatory BMW.  Just MHO.

[Beamer]

You have to remember, most people in media struggle to justify their existence in the world to their corporate owners and advertisers. It's a world where information and opinions can travel at the speed of light (thanks to the internet and email), so the struggling world of media relies more on the money of their advertisers than their subscribers. The people writing the articles are doing all they can to justify to their companies that they are of some value and worthy of keeping on the payroll vs. the other writers that are getting laid-off due to a ever shrinking industry.

As far as the conclusions in the article (just my opinion based on the info listed in this thread). Obviously "value" was not a deciding factor in their decisions, with the BMW (which is probably the "best" bike in the evaluation) coming in at first place. It does have all the goodies, the power, etc.... but at $21k-$24k, it's "value" is severely depleted. I'd rather have the top of the line GS IMO.

The ST1300, well has allot of stuff going for it, but allot of stuff that hurts it. I really wanted to buy this bike, but it was a $5000 difference between a leftover 10' ABS ST1300 and a New 09 C14ABS, and the ST lacked severely when you compare the suspensions on both bikes. Not only does the C14 have allot "better" components, they are much more adjustable. Stack on lower hp, lower torque, 1yr vs. 3yr warranty, it's value is greatly depreciated.

Oh, the poor FJR. Great engine, good handling, just not refined. But, it's value is pretty good IMO when you compare current year models to one another. $10k less than the BMW, almost $5k less than the Honda. It has a certain amount of "Bang for the buck"

[rcannon409]

I sat on the bmw yesterday.  It was the upscale version as they did not have a gt on the floor.  In physical size, it felt closer to the Goldwing than my Concourse parked outside.  So, if they've found a way to make this giant bike handle as well as a c14, props to them.   

[So Cal Joe]

Depending on who is doing the testing you will get different answers. If we all liked the same thing about our bikes there would only need be 1 bike. I read a comparison in Motorcycle consumer news (the have no advertising so they are in no ones pocket like other mags).
They compared the BMW1600GTL to the Gold Wing, The gold wing won in all but 2 of the categories, then in Friction zone they raved about the BMW 1600GTL, on the same page as the article was an ad for a BMW dealership and the entire back cover was a BMW ad. If you don't like the way your bike comes out in a mag comparison, look for another magazine, I'm sure you will find one that rates it best. There is a video on youtube comparing the BMW1600GT and the C14. They rate the BMW higher but ask if the extra $9,000 is worth it. I don't think they are in the same class. Oh yea, and on that $24,000 + BMW there are no helmet holders.

[martin_14]

I sat on the bmw yesterday.  It was the upscale version as they did not have a gt on the floor.  In physical size, it felt closer to the Goldwing than my Concourse parked outside.  So, if they've found a way to make this giant bike handle as well as a c14, props to them.

They didn't. I have driven the beemer about 2000 miles this year, half of it on a single weekend trip, the rest in bits. Not bad for its size and weight, quite the contrary, but still not a C14 by any means.

[jsa]

Now, a few comments from my side.

First, these guys are in BMWs pockets. Or BMW is in theirs. Whatever. But I do agree that as a tourer, the BMW exceeds the others. It's simply a comfortable whale bike.

Second, this was exclusively a comparo as tourers, not Sport Tourers, where the sporty side of the BMW would have... ahem... sucked.

Nice, concise, and very accurate summary! 

[gonzosc1]

the Beamer looks like a great bike. but I have noticed as far as write ups go. that the Beamer is having an ID crisis. one mag compares it to the C14, another compares it to the goldwing. and depending on the mag it comes come losing more then wining from what I can see.
 sure the Beamer will out tour the C14, its sheer size alone will tell anyone that without even riding the bike. but take it to the dragon and see what happens to the beamer against the C14. 
 its a bogus review to put the Beamer up against any "sport touring" bike.
the breamer is a touring bike! or a touring sport bike. the others are not. 
just my 2 cents, but I think the new will wear off quickly on this bike.

[CADMAN97]

Seems to me that the reviewers are touring/cruiser guys, I mean the one even says "I want to focus on the landscape & people". And the other says the C14's engine "disappoints at low rev's". These guys just want a crusier that rev's at 2K, so they can sit back, forget about twisties & look at the landscape. There is ABSOLUTELY no way Honda's 10yr old ST beats the Concours. Like others have stated, every other mag/website review of the sport tourers have ranked the Concours first. The reason I bought the C14 is because of the list of standard equipment, great engine, etc, etc...

[metzgerf16]

I read an article that compared the BMW to the Connie, and disagreed with a lot of their 'findings'.  I also watched the associated youtube video and noticed how unprofessional the writers/riders were.  I honestly don't know how they still have a job reviewing anything of value.  This forum played a big role in my decision to purchase a C14 by helping me get past the negative BS in some of the reviews.

Some things I disagreed with from the comparison:

The Connie needs wider grips.  Apparently the factory handle bars are too close together for such a large bike and need to be widened to match the BMW.  One writer claimed to have gotten blisters from wrestling with the C14 on their ride.  I would LOVE to find a road that is so twisty that I end up with blisters on my hands.  Wider handle bars usually result in a lower riding position for the upper body, which is not as comfortable on longer rides.

The BMW's superior torque curve smokes the C14 at any RPM.  They proved this by doing a 4th gear run.  Later they discovered the BMW rider never downshifted, so obviously the BMW would've won if they'd used 4th gear.  Unless they started this race above 100mph, 4th gear is not the best option for max acceleration on the Concours.  I'm pretty confident the Connie could take the BMW in an all out drag race.

The BMW has superior suspension and handling.  I'm sure the Bimmer is smooth, refined, and easy to ride considering it's size, but I doubt it can outperform a properly set up C14 in the twisties.  They claimed the Connie spent most of the time trailing the BMW.  Engineers can do a lot to compensate for weight and weight transfer, but that only goes so far.   

[jjsC6]

I've owned all of them except the BMW (and I have ridden a 1600GTL).  Leaving the BMW out of the mix...

Honda is a great bike for people who want to get where they are going without remembering anything good or bad about the bike itself

The FJR is a great bike that simply needs some new features to keep up with the times.  I loved mine.

The Concours is probably SLIGHTLY faster than the FJR and is the better handling bike.  But not as comfortable as the FJR

I think more than any other type of bike, owners have different priorities for their bike - probably because as a group of bikes, ST bikes get used for long distances and therefor must "fit" the riders needs in order to satisfy the owner for all day rides.  For instance, I could care less about wind protection because I happen to like more wind so I actually like a cut-down windshield.  But I push hard in the twisties, so handling is important to me.  So is speed simply because I'm a speed freak.  Seat comfort is important, but everyone's ass fit's differently and the aftermarket can put a good seat on any of the bikes.

[booger]

I'd take the C-14 over the 1600 and buy $8000 worth of farkles.

[vivo]

My 09 Connie cost me ten grand! It was a left over. I just cannot accept comparing things that have desperate and dissimilar costs attached to them... Walk into a Yamaha dealer, Honda, Kawasaki dealershiip and BMW dealership and get some real numbers of what the machines actually will cost, not list prices but what someone might have to pay for a given motorcycle and then take into consideration the value of each purchase along with subjective evaluations and measured performance of the given machines and then present opinion based on real world situations and let me know where something that costs twice as much as something else is a thing offering a better ownership experience.

All of these articles are meaningless and every NEW bike seems to get great reviews only to be given the back of the hand when another NEW machine appears! All of a sudden the Triumph Speed Triple is an "old" thing when the NEW and fugly and more ,ahhhm, focused model appears! But... in my opinion the NEW bike has no sex appeal in ANY WAY, frame, tank shape, headlamps and seating position are all to easy to forget because it is now an ugly bike but reviewers don't say that. It's NEW and so must be better... hurry and buy one! How much is enough anyway? Can't we enjoy bikes that do what we want them to do without feeling something else must be better or have more features? Do we really want all of these features? I know I don't but a do enjoy a knob to crank up rear pre-load when I am carrying a passenger and when did that knob twisting prior to my ride become to much of a problem to deal with? Sure it's cool to flip a switch and change suspension settings but personally I don't need it if I need to pay twice as much to get it.

When did oranges become the same as apples? I am so tired of reading the same crap time and time again and all with the same lack of intelligent commentary because it's just a bunch of blokes on what amounts to rental bikes, no investment needed... how about reviewing things for what they are and not picking "the winner"? And the Winner is the Kawasaki.... and yet two reviewers picked a different brand as winner.... how many times does that happen? I think most often the best bike really depends on what is important to the owner/rider.  Maybe it would be more meaningful to review four or five similar bikes and just say what they are good at, bad at and the factual stuff like mileage and measured stuff and then have the reviewers say which bike they would like to own and which bike they would purchase with their own money... no need for a "winner"...

vivo

[lt1]

Lots of good points.  No one likes to hear a negative review of a decision or of a friend, especially when the reviewer seems to be missing the important reasons for the decision or friendship.

Reviews are fair enough as long as you can get a reasonable glimpse of the reviewer.  If I were being loaned the free use of bikes, or if money were no object, that would influence my decision.  If I were addicted to the newest and latest, that would also influence.  Etc ad infinitum.

Unfortunately, much of the shaping of the motorcycles we ride is done by people with different standards than I have.    Even within the forum, a lot you share my ideas of what makes a great bike, but a lot do not.  Every day that somebody buys a bike, they have made their own comparison and picked a winner.  We picked the C14, and most of us are happy with that.  Some came from other bikes, and many will move on to something else at some point. 

So far, nothing new out there calls me enough to either replace the C14, or be added to the garage.  However, several used bikes have done so.  For me, a play toy or a workhorse that costs less than what I have in farkles on the Connie is a lot more interesting than dropping five figures on a new bike.

Anyway, it's late and I'm rambling.  Motorrad has it wrong, IMHO.   

Cheers.

[jsa]

Motorrad has it wrong, IMHO.   

I agree.  After riding both the K1600GTL and K1600GT (my favorite by far), I think if you were to ignore the initial cost, maintenance costs, and BMW's well documented reliability problems, both are great touring bikes but neither is a sport-touring bike.  Most reviewers do not even bother to include the ST1300 in a sport-touring comparison because of its weight, yet it is lighter than the K1600GT.  What I would really like to see is a comparison of how the K1600GT performs on a twisty road with elevation changes and rough pavement vs a real sport-touring bike.

[Conhardcore]

I don't put much stock in these reviews regardless of the outcome, but I will say I've ridden the BMW GTL and it is a wonderful motorcycle and likely does surpass the Connie in many areas.  It's simply a great riding motorcycle.  Having said that, and being a BMW 535i automobile owner, go to the BMW GTL/GT forum and take a look at the "list your problems with your new bike" thread.  At last count there were over 15 pages of various failures on that bike.  I have owned 3 BMW cars and truly agree they are the ultimate driving machine.  They are not even close to being the ultimate reliability machine and neither are their motorcycles.

[EpicBadass]

I think people interested in the BMW should pick up a C14 and with the extra money they saved drop a turbo on it.  They will forget any other downfalls after that.