These six seven eight factors are in my tentative order of importance:
- Appearance – I like traditional standard styling with round headlights and curved fuel tanks and bodywork. I don’t think the current transformer/insect/robot styling will have lasting appeal. And why are some recent Honda’s (i.e. NM4) so weird? This may be a later rant post… Related to appearance is fit and the use of good quality materials.
- Ergonomics/Comfort – A slight lean forward with legroom and a comfortable seat. Find it amazing that some motorcycles have seats that are unbearable after 20 minutes of riding. Looking at you – Ducati Scrambler and Honda Grom. Also need to consider seat height. Usually not much of a concern on road bikes, but dual sports and dirt bikes challenge my 30″ inseam. Suspension compression allows me to feel comfortable on a machine with a 32-33 inch seat height. But a 30 inch or a less seat height is confidence inspiring.
- Weight – Less is better. Motorcycles weighing less than 400 lbs are really fun. Over 500 lbs is starting to feel like work.
- Fueling – It’s nice when this is sorted from the factory. Bad fueling can usually be corrected, but it shouldn’t happen.
- Suspension – Compliance and comfort over secondary road surfaces and firm enough to be sporting. Honda does this best.
- Engine Configuration – Twins are my favorite. Then singles, triples, and lastly fours. The triples that I’ve owned have all be great fun, so they’re tied with the singles. Also owned some great four-cylinder machines such as the Honda CB-1 and CB700S, Suzuki GS1100E, and Yamaha XS-550. The one electric motorcycle I rode had lots of low-end torque and was very quiet, it was a unique experience. I’m looking forward for this (battery) technology to mature. Would probably take the electric leap if there was a local Zero dealer.
- Exhaust Note – This quality adds considerable enjoyment to the riding experience. In my opinion, there are relatively few instances where the factory gets the right balance between character and compliance with noise regulations. The Honda CB-1, Triumph Speed/Street Triples, Triumph Street Twin (perhaps the best), and Ducati air cooled “L” twins make you want to twist the throttle to hear their engines sing while still not beating-up the ear drums.
- Factory and Aftermarket Parts – The availability of parts and accessories to make a motorcycle work, fit, or look better helps me retain a long-term interest in the machine. KTM does a good job in having lots of functional and performance parts listed in their catalog (along with reasonable prices). Ducati and Triumph fall into second tier in this category. The last generation of Triumph twin is well supported by the aftermarket.
How about you?
I agree with your Japanese motorcycle choices, I guess someone liking todays bikes will say the same thing about them in 25 years, but I prefer the cleaner styling of yesteryear. You made a comment in another post that we should horde old motorcycles and maybe we should say the same about existing new bikes that are actually “old bikes”. I have been thinking about the Honda XR650L. Another option is to search out those few remaining examples of our tear in the beer bikes or ones we wanted but never bought.
The XL650L would be a good choice. Definitely a survivor, the Suzuki DR650 would be good company. I do hit eBay and Cycle Trader occasionally to search for some of the old ones. Distance is my enemy, making an inspection unlikely and an unseen in-person purchase scary. Of new-old bikes, a Moto-Guzzi would be tempting. But travel to the nearest dealer involves crossing a mountain range and then traveling into the heart of a major city – yuk. The nearest dealer that could sell a new old bike, the CB1100EX, is Honda in Quincy (about 16 miles away). The CB looks nice, but a smaller motorcycle with the same styling and two cylinders would get me really interested.
I remember Jim’s R80 as a very pleasant all-around motorcycle. Thought the R80 was a more enjoyable ride than the K75’s that were all the rage at that time. Wish I would have purchased one (and kept it) when they were available. I was reminded of the R80 when test riding the Moto-Guzzi V7. The Triumph Street Twin also has a similar character. Jim – how about your Suzuki GS450 and GS500? They seemed like good roadsters.
Here’s what you need….can you believe the price!!
http://www.bobsbmw.com/new-motorcycles/current-motorcycle-inventory/?slug=product_info.php&cPath=27&products_id=1231
Wish I could predict how a particular motorcycle’s value will fare with age. It would be wonderful to go back in time and buy some of the motorcycles we thought about but didn’t purchase, or buy again those motorcycles foolishly sold. If my time machine and wallet were large enough I would start with these machines: BMW R80S/T or R80; Ducati Sport 1000, Honda CB1, GB500; and Yamaha RZ350, FZ400, SR500, SRX600 (just added the FZ400). There’s more to be retrieved going further back in time, but these models come immediately to mind.
My tear in the beer is the SRX600, I think of it as one of my all time (toy) favorites. If I were to list a second place bike to my R65 it would be my (tool) KLR650. Lots of history already with the KLR and it checks all the boxes but center stand (available in aftermarket). Of course the RD250 is a conduit to my early years of riding, “keep on smokin”. I regretted selling my original Reflex (actually sold it twice) and feel fortunate that I found the one I have now. But I still have that something is missing feeling and I’m trying to hone in on that exact “future bike”. I’m thinking of a bike that can still be had new; I also haven’t completely gotten rid of that fast bike itch. So guys let the games begin – What “future bike” best fits your qualities list….
Same here with the SRX600. The lines and finish on that machine were gorgeous. I wonder how that model would have fared in the market if it had an electric starter? I thought the SRX600, CB1, and NT650 were a nice grouping that showcased the best of Japanese motorcycles during the late 1980’s and early 1990’s.
My second place bike would be my 2000 Triumph Bonneville. It’s now very different from the showroom in performance and appearance and my changes make this machine “my” motorcycle. It’s also my goto when I need a quick ride to feel good.
Know what you mean on the “something missing” feeling. Will have to think about what that feeling is telling me. Perhaps a return to one’s motorcycling roots?
And the “future bike”? A model already on the market?
Airheads Rule!!
OK, we have all made our list, and now I’m issuing a challenge for everyone to take their list and come up with “one” motorcycle “that you have owned or still own” that best matches your preference list. It will be interesting to compare the various bikes we pick. We’ll try this with a “wish I had” future bike later. My best match is my ’86 BMW R65 🙂
My best match is my 2007 Ducati GT-1000. This was a tough choice, especially considering past owned motorcycles. Decided to stick with my current stable since I can’t be certain that time may have added some luster to past rides. The Ducati GT ticks the boxes on my factors and would be my pick if I could have only one motorcycle. It’s an Italian toy / thoroughbred (light weight, good power and sound, and that big twin lope at speed) masquerading as a retro-styled standard (comfortable seat, big tank, and a center stand). It would be just about perfect for me if it had a metal gas tank, alloy rims, and was red. I also have the feeling that this machine is delicate and requires attention to maintenance. Wish I had the money and foresight to have purchased the Sport and Paul Smart editions when they were available. These variants have held their value. The Triumph Thruxton is a strong second place, but don’t have the miles to commit just yet (and pending a handlebar conversion).
I knew you liked the GT, but didn’t know it would be your “one” pick. Thought maybe there was a tear in the beer back there somewhere. Neat that we both still have our “one” pick. I’ll have to go into the photo page and take another look at your GT. Do the Sport or Paul Smart additions have metal tanks? If so it may be worth buying a tank and having the whole bike painted red. I found your comment on “toys or tools” interesting. I know Peter Egan wrote a column about what was a “real” motorcycle, but your definition sounds like it may be different(?). So Jim, what’s your pick?
My choice is my BMW R80. Ergonomics were great, it had traditional styling, and it was a capable tourer and all around bike. Being new to motorcycling, I was tempted to sample other bikes with more power, fancy technology, radical styling, etc., but it is always the bike that I remember enjoying the most. It was only my second bike, and it made a big impression on me. My second choice is a tie between my 2004 Bonneville.
Thought I would limit the pick to my current stable or to those recently owned since my old memories may be inaccurate. The GT had close competition with my (heavily modified) 2000 Triumph Bonneville, KTM Duke 690, and Suzuki SV650. The contenders lost out because of weight (Bonneville), sporting specialization (Duke 690), and average build quality and not fuel injected (SV650). Before ruling out my past (Florida) motorcycles, I considered the BMW R100G/S, Honda CB1, NT650 (Hawk), CB700S (Nighthawk S), and Triumph Speed Triples as possibilities.
I’m pretty sure the Sport and Paul Smart editions were also fitted with the plastic tanks. One long term remedy is to purchase a custom aluminium or kevlar/resin gas tank. Both options cost around $2,000. Or, there’s usually a used, and occasionally NIB, plastic tank on eBay. Then a switch to tubeless spoke rims would be another $2,000. So, I’ll enjoy the GT “as is” for now. I would have preferred a red GT, but the metallic gray-green is understated and pretty in the sun.
My “toy” classification is a motorcycle that’s a joy to ride, view, and hear; it exists to tingle the senses (better exclude taste). In the car world, a 100 hp convertible sports car might be the equivalent. A “tool” motorcycle is also enjoyable (or should be), but it’s focused on accomplishing a specific mission(s). I’m thinking of a sport bike (going fast), a touring bike (going far), an adventure touring bike (going far and rough). A automotive analog might be a Subaru Forester. Still thinking about how to define this difference…
Yet another factor for day use roadster selection – exhaust note. This quality adds considerable enjoyment to the riding experience. In my opinion, there are relatively few instances where the factory gets the right balance between character and compliance with the noise regulation. The Honda CB-1, Triumph Speed/Street Triples, Triumph Street Twin (perhaps the best), and Ducati air cooled “L” twins make you want to twist the throttle to hear them sing while still not beating-up the ear drums.
I thought about this a lot last night and there are some general “things” I look for in all motorcycles.
1. Simplicity in Form and Function – This is a bit broad brushed, but it can be applied to appearance and engineering.
2. Fuel Range – This is a function of use, so it is difficult to set an exact number. Any street use should give at least a 100 mile range, and distance travel should never be less than 175 miles (200 minimum is better).
3. Bench seat. I’ve learned this is a great asset since this enables both a change in pressure points and in leg position.
4. Light Weight – But as previously stated, it is difficult to set a figure. Heavy bikes are usually less susceptible to cross winds and travelling all day in crosswinds can be a real workout. However, on the whole, lighter is much better!
5. Center Stand – Any street bike should have a center stand (difficult to find). This is important for chain maintenance, tire repair, cleaning, loading, parking, etc.
7. Type of Wheels and Tires – Spoke wheels are much stronger and a must for dirt bikes. Cast wheels with tubeless tires make for easy flat repair, as long as the tire is repairable. Tube tires can almost always be repaired even if the tire has a cut, but repair time is longer and the necessary kit for repairs adds weight and takes packing space. For adventure travel the debate is ongoing whether tube or tubeless is best. The absolute worse is a low profile tube type tire on a spoke wheel on a bike without a center stand. For example the R9T has spoke wheels that require a tube, uses low profile high speed tires, has no center stand, and requires the removal of the muffler to get the rear wheel off. This applies to many H-D’s, but at least they have an extensive dealer network. It also applies to my DRZ-SM, 🙁
8. Engine Configuration – My favorites are the air cooled, two valve, boxer twins and singles. Next would be parallel and V twins, then Maybe 3 or 4 cylinders if in a bike fitting item 1.
9. Dealer(s) – The dealership selling the bike is very important, and if it is a travel bike, the number of franchised dealers throughout the travel range should be considered. Owning a brand of bike that you don’t like the dealership is no fun, as is needing a simple part and being broken down somewhere that is a thousand miles from the nearest dealer.
10. No Cyborgs – I know it is a Luddite attitude, but I am turned off by cyborgs on motorcycles, with the possible exception of ABS on which my jury is still out.
11…….
George – like your list, it covers a wide variety of motorcycle types. I’m comparing your factors with Jim’s and my list and wondering if our differences stem from whether we prefer our machines to be toys or tools. Would place just about all of my (day use roadster) motorcycles in the toy category.
Another factor I need to consider is seat height. Not too much of a concern on road bikes, but dual sports and dirt bikes challenge my 30″ inseam. Suspension compression usually allows me to feel comfortable on a machine with a 32-33 inch seat height. But a 30 inch or a less seat height is confidence inspiring.
My preferences are:
1. Appearance – Definitely traditional or close to it. The K75 seemed unconventional when it appeared, but now it looks utterly plain (but still attractive). The original Speed Triple seemed weird to me when new, but I grew to like the looks of my 2008 Speed Triple. As for the Insect/Origami/Transformer styling, that’s here to stay. MC’s are styled like cars now, they have to project aggressiveness, technical complexity, and be overly busy with colors and lines/angles to grab the attention of the younger generation.
2. Ergonomics – Very important. Neutral seating position, but leaning slightly forward. Definitely don’t want to be doing push ups on the handlebar. Enough room on the seat to shift one’s weight around. Seats are a part of styling now, comfort is not something you can see visually, so designers ignore comfort. I think most MC designers are not riders. They’re art school grads hired to sell the product.
3. Weight – I appreciate lighter weight more now. 460 lbs. for my Bonneville seemed light to me way back when, but as time went by it seemed to be getting bigger. I guess it’s part of my growing older. My Vespa is 360 lbs and center of gravity is low. It makes it very enjoyable for me to ride. Not too small to feel like a toy, and not to big.
4. Ditto.
5. Ditto.
6. Engine configuration – Twins are my favorite, followed by triples. Singles are cool but If there is a lot of vibration in the handlebars, that aggravates carpal tunnel syndrome for me.
Obviously the requirements for a good motorcycle varies a lot for each of us, according to one’s style of riding and preferences, being off road, touring, casual, etc.
Agree with you on getting used to some non-traditional designs. Had the same experience with Street Triple and KTM Duke. Not sure why some designs find our eventual acceptance and not others. Hope you’re wrong about the insect / origami / transformer styling.
My rides on paved secondary roads are relatively short, so it was fairly easy to come up with a set of factors that apply to just this one usage (day trip roadsters?). I can see things would get complicated if also considering another kind of ride, such as a touring / travel machine, dual sport, sport, or dirt bike. And, good point on the price. That’s a big limiting factor (along with willingness of a quality dealer to barter).
I’m not sure if my ranking would be the same in all situations; I do agree with your #1 as a starting point. What makes a good motorcycle is how well it will fulfill my intended use of it. The purpose to which I wish to apply it. For example: long distance travel on varied surfaces. As part of the evaluation process for this use, I would think about it’s dependablity, ease of roadside maintnenace/repair, parts availability where it will be ridden, fuel range, comfort, and how ready is it out of the box (rear rack, bash plate, bags, etc.) I guess I would have to say weight and/or size is important, but that gets tricky because of where it will be ridden determines what size may be best. For me cost is important also. If I can meet all my requiremnts with a $5K bike, why buy a $20K bike. I’d rather have money left over to travel. The general visual appeal and engine confirguration certainly plays into my decision, but not at the detriment of the aforementioned. These are more important after the trip when it comes time to sell or keep the bike for future travels, all other things being equal. I will have to think about a genral ranking for all situations and follow up with a later post.