Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Perfect Line and Other Riding Myths' started by DesertPilot, Feb 8, 2019.
KTM is already over 1300cc and other manufacturers are following suit.
I've been thinking about one of the big Adventure Bikes, ever since trying out ten GS 12 and the Tiger 12 a couple of years ago.
To me they're not about off-roading. They're about comfortable 2-up touring without worrying about what kind of surface is under the wheels (including our legendary Ontario potholes), while having the power and handling to still be fun.
My back has been blown out by a couple of accidents in my life, and I found the suspension and riding position of the Tiger particularly comfortable.
Exactly correct, in my view.
So many large "adventure" bikes seem to simply promise a comfortable touring experience, with the capability to go a bit farther afield than a Gold Wing or a Concours. The ergonomics on the ADV rigs are especially good for those of us who aren't short enough to be comfortable on/in the comparatively cramped rider triangles of motorcycles like the two I mention here.
I considered a BMW GS ending up buying another car 'cause the Jeep is getting real tired. I actually sold a motorcycle for the first time in decades so the space has opened for a new one. it'll be a year before I make up my mind. The FT120S Indian,New Tenere',a 650 dual sporter and a few others are in the mix. May even sell down to one or two bikes over the next year.
the big adv bikes are really the new sport tourers that used to proliferate the market
That's been my feeling as well, to which I add, "Don't think of them as 'off-road' bikes, think of them as 'any road' bikes." They fill this role very well. But there's an upper limit to how much weight I want to pick up when (not 'if', alas) I drop a bike while wrestling it down 'any road'.
Isn’t that standard on the R1200GS’s? If not, delete your post and sell the IP to BMW! They’ll be pissed they didn’t think of it first!
to be fair is a 1200 gs much heavier than an old r100gs?
Triumph got it right almost 10y ago! Good to see the market is finally catching on.
When the Tenere first came out I rode my FJR1300 to the test ride.
On my ride home I was thinking the FJR engine in the Super Tenere would be pretty sweet.
So, yeah a 1300cc inline 4 Super, Super Tenere.
May as well add the FJR's electric shield to the Tenere, to complete the package.
An R100GS weighs about as much as a V-Strom 650!
Edit: While I'm thinking of it, I think the real limit to ADV bike size is already about where the GSA (and most of its displacement class) is in terms of sheer bulk and top-heaviness. Some are better than others - even as a 25-year old with good legs, I find the Multistrada 1200s, KTM 1190/1290s, and Tiger 1200s can be tricky to just get off the kickstand! My favorite in that bunch might actually be the SuperTen, which did a masterful job on its mass placement while being much narrower than the 2012-era GSA it was designed to compete with, and so feels the most natural to get up and moving for me.
The talk in the industry is all about middleweights, now. I'd take this fresh crop of leviathans as a sign that we're reaching peak mass for ADV bikes, not that they're going to get indefinitely bigger.
Egads! Somebody gets it.
When are people going to get off all this derisive "it's too big and heavy for a dirt bike" nonsense? The adventure bike concept was never about building 1200cc dirt bikes. It is about large touring bikes built for greater real-world practicality than conventional-wisdom road bikes that seem to assume the whole world is pristine asphalt, with their 4 inches of suspension supporting ever-more-metal-just-for-metal's-sake.
In other words, real-world practicality through modern, purposeful design in a bike to be used without obsessive finickiness over getting it dusty.
In other other words; the same kind of down-to-earth practicality that has pretty much replaced tiny-wheeled curb scraping minivans with SUVs. Nobody calls SUV-driving soccer moms (or dads) "Starbucks posers" just because they don't go rock-crawling with them.
It's just the practicality of functional ruggedness and surface-versatility over gratuitous spit-shine and glitz. That concept can be just as validly applied to bikes of any size. If there were a seriously ADV-configured version of a Gold Wing, that would in no way be antithetical to the original meaning and concept.
A desire for, say, a 350cc twin "ADV bike" is fine and dandy for those who desire such a thing. But that in no way invalidates the concept applied to even larger displacement bikes. Those who think it does deserve to fall victim to their own logic:
Your heart's desire is a 400 lb small twin "ADV bike" because it is ostensibly more genuinely "dirt worthy" than a 1200cc Adventure Bike, when much more powerful and off-road capable 700cc singles already exist weighing 75 lb less than that?
Basically, it sounds like many are saying they want a twin version of the RE Himalayan; i.e., about the same level of trail capability, about the same weight, but with a higher-revving twin for (I assume) a little more road legs. And if that's what they want, fine. But there's no need to try to negate the validity of large displacement Adventure Bikes to justify it.
I quite agree. I bought my own modest adventure bike -- a svelte 460-lb Tiger 800 -- with the naive assumption I might take it offroad, and discovered that it's a near perfect machine for touring less-than-pristine roads, just as you say. But I still wonder of the 'bigger-is-better' mentality can be carried too far. Surely there's an upper limit. Surely Triumph will never produce the machine I photoshopped in the original post, much though I'd love to see one
What is that limit? Is there some upper weight or engine size beyond which the 'go-anywhere' bike becomes an "I'm not sure I'd want to take that there" bike? ANd have we reached it?
I hear Boss Hoss has something in the works...
Riding one of those monsters more than a few miles, in anything other than a straight line and on anything other than perfect pavement is quite an adventure - so maybe they already qualify.
I'm with you on this bike. I am hoping it is under $10,000.
And in the end that's how most are used, upright fast street bikes.
Ideally smaller but just as powerful. The 701 tickles all my whistles but I need to slab to get anywhere from Chicago.