Kawasaki Concours Forum
The C-14, aka Kawasaki Concours-14, the new one :) => The Bike - C14/GTR 1400 => Topic started by: Poseidon on March 15, 2018, 09:31:53 PM
-
I came across this new video on YouTube. I thought it was a pretty good review. Only thing is that I found all of their negatives to be positives... except for the lack of cruise control. The part I really found quite humorous was the part about muscling it thru the corners. That is all about your frame of reference. If they think you have to muscle the C-14 thru corners, they better never ride my M109R!!! Hahaha!
https://youtube.com/watch?v=VdgIwdygH-s (https://youtube.com/watch?v=VdgIwdygH-s)
-
that confused me.
Introduced by Brits , driving on the left but the scenery, road markings & road signs ain't British (& nether is the plate).
Ahhh that answered it towards the end, South Africa :)
-
I have to disagree with the part where he says the fairing dumps heat right onto your legs when in traffic and in town. That has not been my experience with the Gen II '10 model I own. Most else he says seems right on the money. With the stock Bridgestone tires there is a lot of muscling involved, without a flash it can be a bit harsh, and the trials and tribulations of many finding a windshield that works for them are well known. He seemed to like the seat but then he was just test riding, so how far did he really go? On my first trip the seat didn't reveal it's inadequacies until after 200 miles or so.
-
It hasn't been hot out since I bought mine, so I can't really say anything about the heat. Some of the reasons I bought it were for the "brutish power", the "simplicity", and because it is more "old school." I really don't like a lot of unnecessary electronics. Ones that truly benefit by adding power, making it run better, etc are ok. I don't understand why you need throttle by wire when cables work just fine. Rider modes are also a waste. If you need the bike detuned, get a different bike. A smaller, less powerful one that you can handle. Electronic suspensions... I can twist a dial thank you!
When he says "it is definitely a physical bike to ride", I would have to disagree. It is the most "flickable" bike I own. I find the handling to be excellent! I do agree with what he says about it "holding a line" tho. I think the stock shield works just fine. I keep the vent open to the middle setting. When I want more air, I lower the shield all the way down. In cold weather, I raise it up until the wind noise dissipates. I have never had any buffeting at any speed. I also find the seat to be comfortable. I have done some 200+ mile days with no issue. I wouldn't go so far as to say I'm picky about seats, but the stock seat was one of the first things that had to go on my M109. I prefer the stock seat over the Mustang I got for my Magnum (bought the Mustang so my wife would be more comfortable when we ride 2up).
Now, the cruise control comments he made, I couldn't agree with him more! They could have easily added cruise control at any point without changing anything else on the bike. It would have been HUGE!!! I know of several people I've spoke to that said they almost bought a concours, but no cruise control was a deal breaker for them.
For me, it was just like he said. The lack of electronics means less that can go wrong. The price was definitely right. $13.1k OTD including 3 year additional warranty for a total of 6 years.
I seriously hope he is wrong about this being the last of the great Japanese dinosaurs! If they are still making them, I would definitely buy another Concours in the future when I wear this one out!
-
It hasn't been hot out since I bought mine, so I can't really say anything about the heat.
It is a 1.4 liter engine. It probably has no worse heat management than any other large, faired bike out there. The 1st gen had some issues, they were dealt with in 2010 with the gen2. I am not sure there could be much more improvement.
When he says "it is definitely a physical bike to ride", I would have to disagree. It is the most "flickable" bike I own.
I agree, except in parking lots :) Then it is pretty physical.
Now, the cruise control comments he made, I couldn't agree with him more!
Most everyone agrees. It is truly baffling why they resisted.
They could have easily added cruise control at any point without changing anything else on the bike.
Not really. It is not drive-by-wire, so it wouldn't be THAT easy. Still, it is not like it would have been that difficult either.
It would have been HUGE!!! I know of several people I've spoke to that said they almost bought a concours, but no cruise control was a deal breaker for them.
They could have bought the C14, had a cruise control added, AND doubled the warranty, and still paid a lot less.... I don't think THAT should be a deciding factor, since there are options available.
For me, it was just like he said. The lack of electronics means less that can go wrong.
Well, in fairness, the C14 is now 10 years old. When it was released, it had more "electronics" than most things out there. But time marches on. And, I love features and electronics, but simply discarding an analog speedometer (and sometimes odometer too) for some stupid digital number one is NOT an improvement... and that certainly has been the trend.
-
hmm cruise control. Guess it depends where you are.
I've never really found any time for it over here even in a car as about the only time it's of any use is at 02:00 going through motorway roadworks with an average 50mph speed limit enforced by scameras ;)
-
digital v analogue clocks
I quite liked the digital speedo on my old Blackbird but then again there is something pleasurable about watching a needle sweep across the gauge.
Mind you these days there's no reason why the dash couldn't effectively be an embedded tablet which would allow the rider/driver to customise their display to their own personal preferences.
-
Mind you these days there's no reason why the dash couldn't effectively be an embedded tablet which would allow the rider/driver to customise their display to their own personal preferences.
Exactly. Give me the choice.... I don't mind a "simulated" analog dial/widget, as long as it is fast (responds and updates very quickly). Would love a programmable/customizable display. Endless hours of tweaking :)
-
I agree, except in parking lots :) Then it is pretty physical.
It still depends on your frame of reference. Compared to a light weight sport bike, maybe so. Compared to heavy fat tire cruisers, it's not to bad!
Not really. It is not drive-by-wire, so it wouldn't be THAT easy. Still, it is not like it would have been that difficult either.
My Magnum isn't throttle by wire and it has electronic cruise control. The Rostra cruise control doesn't require throttle by wire. Hell, even old carborated cars had cruise control without throttle by wire. It would not have been difficult to do it from the factory at all.
They could have bought the C14, had a cruise control added, AND doubled the warranty, and still paid a lot less.... I don't think THAT should be a deciding factor, since there are options available.
I told them the same thing. The ones that have told me that are not the mechanical type. They didn't even know there was such a thing as aftermarket electronic cruise control.
Well, in fairness, the C14 is now 10 years old. When it was released, it had more "electronics" than most things out there. But time marches on. And, I love features and electronics, but simply discarding an analog speedometer (and sometimes odometer too) for some stupid digital number one is NOT an improvement... and that certainly has been the trend.
Well, I'm one of those that like the analog gauges and watching the needle sweep. I don't need a color touch screen to tell me how fast I'm going. Or any of the other BS electronics they keep trying to tell us we need. Any electronics I feel are useful, like a GPS, I'll add on myself. I have Bluetooth in my helmet for when I want to listen to music. Other times I just listen to that 1400 sing.
-
Exactly. Give me the choice.... I don't mind a "simulated" analog dial/widget, as long as it is fast (responds and updates very quickly). Would love a programmable/customizable display. Endless hours of tweaking :)
...until it crashes or freezes up on you! No thanks, I'll take the analog gauges over digital any day! Even if they fail, they are cheaper and easier to repair or replace.
-
I agree, except in parking lots :) Then it is pretty physical
You would probably be shocked to learn that the bike is actually great at parking lot speed stuff, full lock turns, etc... it's the lousy tuning that ruins it. I'm really serious when I say it's a world class bike with third world tuning. Steve
-
Excess heat? Bull pucky!!!
Two summers ago, I rode my ‘11 in traffic in Phoenix when it was 114 degrees!
It was so hot that my iPhone wouldn’t work, the directions I wrote on my arm smeared from
sweat and when I picked up wife at Sky Harper, I had to dump water on the seat so she would
not get burned.
My legs felt no more heat than any other part of me
Cruise control ? I’m also half way done on my mccruise install, I’ll report
back later.
Reliability? I have 34k miles, under original warranty, dealer replaced a fork seal, nothing
went wrong on first three years of extended warranty. This bike is by far , the most reliable,
best built,most durable that I have owned.
For years, the best built , best finished bikes were Honda and Yamaha, but kawa really stepped up
the game with the C14.
It’s a very very reliable bike that is also comfortable, can get 50mpg and offers the acceleration of an early 90’s GSX1100r race replica bike. How can anyone say “no” to that ?
-
You would probably be shocked to learn that the bike is actually great at parking lot speed stuff, full lock turns, etc... it's the lousy tuning that ruins it. I'm really serious when I say it's a world class bike with third world tuning. Steve
:thumbs: :thumbs:
I have found this bike to be very easy to manage in the parking lot. Every time I take it out, I do about three lock to lock figure eights in my court before I leave. (Granted, I have a lot of experience in slow riding, but I’m not in practice like I used to be.)
The abrupt on throttle makes it a little tough. I’m going on a Vegas/Tombstone trip next week. Steve, when I get back, you and I need to have a little talk....
-
The abrupt on throttle makes it a little tough. I’m going on a Vegas/Tombstone trip next week. Steve, when I get back, you and I need to have a little talk....
It is the throttle abruptness (people call it "snatch") that makes it difficult. That is why I ended up installing a Throttle Tamer... which did help a lot. Of course, now it is much easier to flash the problem away, while gaining lots of other really nice stuff in the process. So although I like the Throttle Tamer, I recommend reflashing the ECU in all cases now.
I wish those C14 reviews had all been done with decent tires and a reflash....
-
I watched that this last weekend.
I thought most of the criticism was fair given the context of what other sport touring bikes now offer. Had Kawasaki added cruise control and ride by wire with ride modes, etc, then it's a more relevant comparison to other machines.
The C14 has good bones, but I had to reconcile that I was going to have to spend some money and effort to get it where I need this kind of bike to be.
Decent review, or at least fair. Kawi has ignored this bike and it shows when you look around.
-
I think he nailed it. What attracted me to my Multistrada was how easy it is to corner and the electronics. The Multi will change personalities with a touch of a button and I love how it feels in the corners over the C14. That said, no way would I have bought the Multi if it hadn't found 2 year old if perfect shape with only 2500 miles on it, totally loaded with the options I wanted for $10k less then list. The C14 is WAY more bang for the buck and if they did update it with ride modes and CC I would consider getting a new one.
-
It hasn't been hot out since I bought mine, so I can't really say anything about the heat. Some of the reasons I bought it were for the "brutish power", the "simplicity", and because it is more "old school." I really don't like a lot of unnecessary electronics. Ones that truly benefit by adding power, making it run better, etc are ok. I don't understand why you need throttle by wire when cables work just fine. Rider modes are also a waste. If you need the bike detuned, get a different bike. A smaller, less powerful one that you can handle. Electronic suspensions... I can twist a dial thank you!
When he says "it is definitely a physical bike to ride", I would have to disagree. It is the most "flickable" bike I own. I find the handling to be excellent! I do agree with what he says about it "holding a line" tho. I think the stock shield works just fine. I keep the vent open to the middle setting. When I want more air, I lower the shield all the way down. In cold weather, I raise it up until the wind noise dissipates. I have never had any buffeting at any speed. I also find the seat to be comfortable. I have done some 200+ mile days with no issue. I wouldn't go so far as to say I'm picky about seats, but the stock seat was one of the first things that had to go on my M109. I prefer the stock seat over the Mustang I got for my Magnum (bought the Mustang so my wife would be more comfortable when we ride 2up).
Now, the cruise control comments he made, I couldn't agree with him more! They could have easily added cruise control at any point without changing anything else on the bike. It would have been HUGE!!! I know of several people I've spoke to that said they almost bought a concours, but no cruise control was a deal breaker for them.
For me, it was just like he said. The lack of electronics means less that can go wrong. The price was definitely right. $13.1k OTD including 3 year additional warranty for a total of 6 years.
I seriously hope he is wrong about this being the last of the great Japanese dinosaurs! If they are still making them, I would definitely buy another Concours in the future when I wear this one out!
The stock 021 BStones will not hold a line in a fast corner, and will constantly "stand up" and wobble making them very dangerous to new riders exploring the limits. If you are happy with the Crapstone 021, you won't believe the difference of a decent tire with a "55" series rear profile instead of the stock 50. series.
-
The stock 021 BStones will not hold a line in a fast corner, and will constantly "stand up" and wobble making them very dangerous to new riders exploring the limits. If you are happy with the Crapstone 021, you won't believe the difference of a decent tire with a "55" series rear profile instead of the stock 50. series.
I agree the Bridgestone tires that come stock on the C14 are not great. About 4 years ago I switched to the Michelin Pilot Road 3, although I kept with the stock 50-series sidewall. Night and day difference! The Michelins ride much nicer, and I have more confidence leaning in corners.
Next time I get tires (probably next year) I'll be sticking with the latest Michelin Pilot Road model, but I'll probably step up to the 55-series.
-
Look how long they sold the early Connies. The 1400 is brand new, in Kawasaki years.
-
I agree the Bridgestone tires that come stock on the C14 are not great. About 4 years ago I switched to the Michelin Pilot Road 3, although I kept with the stock 50-series sidewall. Night and day difference! The Michelins ride much nicer, and I have more confidence leaning in corners.
Next time I get tires (probably next year) I'll be sticking with the latest Michelin Pilot Road model, but I'll probably step up to the 55-series.
So 55 series rear. Stock size on the front?
-
So 55 series rear. Stock size on the front?
That is the theory. The larger diameter tire will correct speedo error (3.2%) and the profile is more rounded, allowing easier/faster lean. Sounded interesting, but in my case, I can't afford ANY height increase (in this case, 0.85",22.5mm; which divided by 2 is about 1/4 inch at the center of the bike), so when I switched to the great Mich PR3-GT I kept the 50.
-
That is the theory. The larger diameter tire will correct speedo error (3.2%) and the profile is more rounded, allowing easier/faster lean. Sounded interesting, but in my case, I can't afford ANY height increase (in this case, 0.85",22.5mm; which could be almost half an inch at the center of the bike), so when I switched to the great Mich PR3-GT I kept the 50.
Why no height increase? Seems like there would be plenty of room for a taller tire.
-
Why no height increase? Seems like there would be plenty of room for a taller tire.
Max has short legs (As do I). That’s why, silly!
-
That is the theory. The larger diameter tire will correct speedo error (3.2%) and the profile is more rounded, allowing easier/faster lean. Sounded interesting, but in my case, I can't afford ANY height increase (in this case, 0.85",22.5mm; which could be almost half an inch at the center of the bike), so when I switched to the great Mich PR3-GT I kept the 50.
Presuming you're referring to the built in factory "error" on the speedo then correcting that will throw your odometer reading off as that is generally calibrated to be accurate
Certainly over here "European law (ECE-R39) says speedometers cannot show speeds less than the actual speed, and they must never show more than the 110 per cent of actual speed plus 4 km/h. So, under those rules, a car could be moving at 100 km/h, but the speedometer could legally display as high as 114 km/h."
-
Presuming you're referring to the built in factory "error" on the speedo then correcting that will throw your odometer reading off as that is generally calibrated to be accurate
Here the bikes read about 3% high, which is typical for most vehicles.
-
Here the bikes read about 3% high, which is typical for most vehicles.
thats what I asked/said :D
-
Here the bikes read about 3% high, which is typical for most vehicles.
Every bike I've ever checked does that (another crazy and annoyed entry). But when I have checked cars, they are much more accurate. At least according to gps.
-
..... (in this case, 0.85",22.5mm; which could be almost half an inch at the center of the bike)....
That seems high (pun intended), max' did you remember to divide by 2? (since only half of the increased diameter is below the axle) I came up with .375" at the rear axle which would be what?.... 3/16"-1/4" at the pegs?
-
That seems high (pun intended), max' did you remember to divide by 2? (since only half of the increased diameter is below the axle) I came up with .375" at the rear axle which would be what?.... 3/16"-1/4" at the pegs?
Sorry, you are correct. I did realize I made that mistake shortly after posting and meant to correct it and got distracted and forgot. Yes, it should be divided by two. So it is about 1/4" at the pegs/legs (if you also properly adjust the front by the same amount so as not to change the handling). In my case, that is huge. Most people won't care.
I have corrected the other post. Thanks
-
Max has short legs (As do I). That’s why, silly!
Exactly. It won't matter to most people... only those with short legs. 1/4" can make a HUGE difference in such cases.
-
Exactly. It won't matter to most people... only those with short legs. 1/4" can make a HUGE difference in such cases.
Sorry Max. That thought never crossed my mind. I was thinking maybe you had done some mods that would make clearance an issue. I fall into the "it wouldn't matter" category.
(http://www.thevog.net/attachments/img_0139-jpg.398665/)
-
So it is about 1/4" at the pegs/legs (if you also properly adjust the front by the same amount so as not to change the handling).
Wait... WHAT?...... max' you've per-snickered me.
I don't think anyone raises the front end with the 55 series rear tires, in fact I've often thought that most of the reported turn in improvement came from the slightly changed steering geometry from raising the rear. and...and... If you do raise the front end a corresponding amount at the front, why would the foot peg height increase be any less than the rear axle height increase?
-
Sorry Max. That thought never crossed my mind. I was thinking maybe you had done some mods that would make clearance an issue. I fall into the "it wouldn't matter" category.
No prob. But yes, clearance CAN be an issue too, if the bike was lowered. It is something to consider. In my http://www.zggtr.org/index.php?topic=260.0 (http://www.zggtr.org/index.php?topic=260.0) thread, when I talk about how much the bike can be safely lowered, it is assumed with STOCK tire sizes. If you put on a larger diameter rear tire, that will increase the probability of the tire hitting the frame.... and that could be very dangerous.
Without lowering the bike, there is plenty of room for a larger (taller) rear tire.
-
Sorry Max. That thought never crossed my mind.
Dang long legged flat footed show off! >:( ;) :D
-
Wait... WHAT?...... max' you've per-snickered me.
I don't think anyone raises the front end with the 55 series rear tires, in fact I've often thought that most of the reported turn in improvement came from the slightly changed steering geometry from raising the rear.
That is true. Most people do not, and I suspect that does have something to do with what some people might like. But I suspect one of the large changes people notice is from the profile of the tire. The 55 is more rounded. I am not going to comment that it is a good idea to slant the bike more forward (by raising the rear and not the front, or lowering the front and not the rear)- I just don't know. That is why I recommend always keeping the front and the same stock ratio unless you know what you are doing. I certainly don't :)
Oh, and I wouldn't necessary characterize raising the back 11.5mm OR lowering the front by 11.5mm as "slightly" changing the geometry. According to my friend who knows a lot more than I do about such things, he says that is a pretty significant (moderate) change.
and...and...If you do raise the front end a corresponding amount at the front, why would the foot peg height increase be any less than the rear axle height increase?
I think we are saying the same thing (but it has been a long day at work) If you put a larger tire on the rear by, say, 23mm larger diameter, and do NOT adjust the front, the center of the bike will rise by 1/2 of 1/2 of 23mm which is 5.75mm. (+11.5 rear, +0 front, = 5.75mm center). If you do adjust the front, raising it 11.5mm to be neutral/same handling, then it will raise the center of the bike by 1/2 of 23, which is 11.5mm. (+11.5 rear, +11.5 front, = 11.5mm center). Whew
-
Dang long legged flat footed show off! >:( ;) :D
You forgot bent knee. :rotflmao:
-
Whew.
Well there we can agree!. :D
I'm sure some engineering type or even a H.S. student that's recently taken trig could tell us exactly what the rake and trail would change to, but I don't know enough about steering geometry to interpret what the numbers really mean. I resisted the 55 series for quite awhile, somewhat worried that there might be some sort of steering instability induced under certain conditions by the changes. I haven't heard of anybody that's had any such experiences, and lots of users, so with the turn in improvement, ease of using the center stand, more accurate speedometer, and theoretical extra milage, I've switched to become one of the the 55ers.
-
The main drawback with the 55 is the reduction of the contact patch. I think I'm going back to a 50 series.
-
You forgot bent knee. :rotflmao:
:battle:
-
what the rake and trail would change to, but I don't know enough about steering geometry to interpret what the numbers really mean. I resisted the 55 series for quite awhile, somewhat worried that there might be some sort of steering instability induced under certain conditions by the changes
Well, and if you don't like it, just raise the front 11.5mm!
-
The main drawback with the 55 is the reduction of the contact patch. I think I'm going back to a 50 series.
The main drawback one is the height gain, damnit :) But otherwise, yeah, the rounder profile also means a smaller contact patch.
-
You forgot bent knee. :rotflmao:
If you have over 31 inch inseam (where it counts as the 2nd most important male body increment), you will be oh so happy with the 55 rear. That is the aspect that Kawasaki should have used as standard to begin with, according to every one I have queried.
-
Well, and if you don't like it, just raise the front 11.5mm!
I didn't say I didn't like it, I inferred I had reservations about it's safety in different situations and loading. However most ride them wetter and harder than I do so with the number of folks on 55s and no reports (that I've heard of) of weird oscillations at speed, I've decided to try 55s, and so far I like them.
I do think both forums suffer sometimes from over exuberance of the latest fad, be it the latest flash, slip on, or tire series. I guess I'm just too reserved, although I've never been accused of that publicly.
-
I guess I'm just too reserved, although I've never been accused of that publicly.
Well, "I second that emotion." But I *have* been accused :)