Does your Connie have any comfort mod's or are you running it stock? Bar risers etc., for example.
Thanks
Not geometrical changes, but I do have seat and grip heaters.
Here are some things that I jotted down during the trip. I won’t talk about the obvious things like light tilt or seat heating or lack of engine vibrations… Two things have to be remembered: I never drove a Goldwing, and I really like my 1400GTR, which I used as a basis for my observations.
The K1600 GT resists leaning up to about 20° and then falls into the corner in a scary way if you’re not used to it.
The off-on throttle jerkiness doesn’t exist on the BMW. The e-throttle is a bit numb but works, and the 3 engine maps are very accomplished and distinctive.
Driving position is very comfortable. Knees are not as bent, and a lot of weight is taken from the wrists onto the back of the rider.
In neutral, the engine gains rpms like it’s on fire. It’s almost scary. If you miss a gear and thump the gas you can easily hit the rev limiter.
The rear brake does something very funny when you step on it, that I haven’t seen on the Kawasaki: it slows the bike down. Who knew?
The suspension is more comfortable than the Kawa, but the damping is strange, hard, I’d say. In street cars, there is what’s called “primary ride” (the one dealing with large suspension travel, and taken care of by the spring and damper) and “secondary ride” (dealing with small, fast irregularities that are not deal with by suspension travel but by the bushings with which the suspension arms are attached to the vehicle). I’m not sure if it is always the case, but as far as I know motorcycles do not support suspension components with bushings, so secondary ride is a concept that does not apply. However, while the ESA on the BMW is a blessing for all the known reasons, the little irregularities on the road really affect comfort, much more so than on the (supposedly) stiffer Kawasaki. This became apparent as I was going through a fairly good stretch of road and getting some sort of buzz on the hands. Thing is, the engine is so smooth that what really gets through are road irregularities.
Heavy. And I mean weigh-that-is-always-there heavy. In the Kawa you feel the mass but for the main part it goes away as soon as you move. The BMW is a heavy object with a high CoG. Don’t forget it. It can be very expensive. In the K1600, low speed is a gamble.
Huge tank. I didn’t read anything about this bike up until now, but I just found out that the specs say that it has a 6.3 US gal fuel tank. That is nonsense, because after I rode 292 miles I put 6.9 US gallons and computer said I still had 12 miles to go. My old R1200 RT said 0 miles when there was still 30 miles worth of fuel in the tank. I received the bike supposedly 100% full of fuel, but even if I didn’t, in the worst case it managed 43 mpg fully loaded, with a mix of Autobahn (100 mph), Austrian highways (75 mph) and secondary Alpine roads (50 mph), with normal braking and accelerating.
Air management: the screen on this bike is located much more forward and up than on the Yamaha FJR or the Kawasaki. It isn’t larger, but the instrument panel is much higher, so the bottom of the screen is too, which allows it to reach higher and cover more. The upper part of the front fairing is doing the job that the screen should be doing otherwise. Since it can go so much up it doesn’t need a lip and the stream is therefore smooth and buffeting free. The screen mechanism is slow but it has a greater range than on the Kawaski (which I find rather annoyingly short). I never put it above the half, since I like looking over and not through it. Since there is so much Tupperware protecting up front, not much air will bother you, and when weather gets hotter (like it did on my trip) you can flip the scoops and get a surprising amount of air hitting you on the torso. Nice.
There is heat coming off the engine at ankle height, but bearable. With that powerplant between the legs, I’d call heat management “fantastic”. The fan cuts in much less often than on the Kawasaki.
Girlfriend found this motorcycle very comfortable (mee too), clearly more so than the Kawasaki (not so much for me), which she likes more than my old RT. I found the two glove boxes on the lower laterals of the fairing very practical, but still prefer the tank glove box on the Kawasaki, which would be great if I could lock it like in the BMW.
My conclusions:
This is a great bike, with the caveat that it isn’t exactly a bike. I mean, the thing is so big and heavy and has so much carrying capacity that I admire the fact that it stays upright on only two wheels. Thanks to whatever gods may be for the gyroscopic effect. I liken the K1600 GT (or GTL) with a 7 series. Yes, it can do curves, but that is a byproduct of a mighty engine and a very accomplished chassis, and you’ll soon notice it’s not made for that. It’s made to take you from A to B in comfort and style. You’ll get to your 4 or 5 stars booked hotel, park it and enjoy the city you’re visiting on foot. Mountain passes are not its thing. It’s not a drive-for-fun bike. I never drove a Goldwing, but I can’t fathom why somebody would buy one instead of this BMW.
The Kawasaki C14/1400GTR is a much more versatile bike. You get to your destination in probably 90% of the comfort (not your passenger, agreed), leave the ballast, and go enjoy the curves. You won’t be getting the locals in their KTM Duke or S1000RR into trouble, but you’ll enjoy. It handles better, has more feedback (from chassis, suspension, steering and engine) and on top, it costs way less.
Comparing these two excellent bikes is not for somebody who is comparing two sport tourers like, say, the FJR and the Kawasaki. It’s for somebody you doesn’t know what he wants the bike for. If you’re touring 2 up and do not plan on technical roads, this is it. It’s much more appropriate than the C14. But if you enjoy riding and getting involved with the bike, and want to travel with it, then the Kawasaki, nowadays, is the best option. And if you want to deliver pizzas, then…
