Sport Tourers; Where Art Thou?

[Chisenhallw]

Well, then.....um....don't buy one.

[Low Budget]

I agree with Cakeeater. Most of whats considered the sport tour bike selection is a bit overkill. If they made a more middleweight version that would suit alot of us better.......wait......they did, and it didnt sell well enough in the USA.









Not to big

Not to heavy

No heat thrown off at the rider, with excellent aerodynamics

Not to cramped or nervous

55 MPG

Kinda the Acura mid size luxury model of the Honda line. Midway between a ST1100 and a Goldwing in the way it rides.

Think of it as a easy going more touring oriented , lighter and smaller alternative to a ST . Also zero maintenance except oil changes.

[discochris]

Originally Posted by Grainbelt

Please, share your IBA number with us. I'm dying here.

And the snotty tone here is because?

[rider33]

Originally Posted by Little Bike

I was checking out KLR650s on Craig's list - I think that's my machine to park with the Rebel - when we get our furlough days back

You might want to check out DR650's as well. While similar in intent, the DR's are not quite as tall.. I've put thousands of miles on both on and off road and would say there capabilities are well matched. If the KLR felt tall, the DR might feel just right.

Back on topic: sport tourers are designed for going long distances, quickly, and in comfort while maintaining more of a grin-factor in the twisty bits than a full-up touring rig. If none of that appeals/applies to you, by all means shop the other 94% of the market. You don't win a ralley on speed tho, in fact excessive speed can hurt you. Ralley's are about long distance endurance which is why sport touring bikes are significantly over-represented in the results. You can (and I have) take a 250 on a thousand mile journey but it's at the upper edge of its design envelope. A sport touring bike, on the other hand, is just getting started right about then.

[Onyx B.]

Originally Posted by Low Budget

I agree with Cakeeater. Most of whats considered the sport tour bike selection is a bit overkill. If they made a more middleweight version that would suit alot of us better.......wait......they did, and it didnt sell well enough in the USA.









Not to big

Not to heavy

No heat thrown off at the rider, with excellent aerodynamics

Not to cramped or nervous

55 MPG

Kinda the Acura mid size luxury model of the Honda line. Midway between a ST1100 and a Goldwing in the way it rides.

Think of it as a easy going more touring oriented , lighter and smaller alternative to a ST . Also zero maintenance except oil changes.

+1

[Scott of the Sahara]

I own a Moto Guzzi Norge 1200. It is slower than most (all) of the other Sport Touring bikes, but it is comfortable, works well at speed and does all I could want. With removable hard bags that become suitcases, this bike fits everything that I was looking for. Seat height was some of the factor when deciding, and between the Yamaha, Honda, and Kawasaki, none of them worked for me. Just sitting on them at the showroom told me they would not work for my short 29" legs.
I like the character of the V twin coupled with the upright riding position. Maybe someday I will ride a cruiser, maybe not. I don't want ultra fast. I am comfortable at 70-75mph if I am on the freeway. I am not looking to get tickets so having a bike that is enjoyable to ride at legal speeds works for me.

[roadstar]

Originally Posted by Low Budget

I agree with Cakeeater. Most of whats considered the sport tour bike selection is a bit overkill. If they made a more middleweight version that would suit alot of us better.......wait......they did, and it didnt sell well enough in the USA.









Not to big

Not to heavy

No heat thrown off at the rider, with excellent aerodynamics

Not to cramped or nervous

55 MPG

Kinda the Acura mid size luxury model of the Honda line. Midway between a ST1100 and a Goldwing in the way it rides.

Think of it as a easy going more touring oriented , lighter and smaller alternative to a ST . Also zero maintenance except oil changes.

The top 4 on the list describes my R1200RT .

I think the big problem with the PC was lack of advertisement , as if it wasn`t a sport bike or a g-wing , honda didn`t spend the bucks. (you can blame all except HD) . But great looking scoot---- er ! (just kidding)

[Rider]

Originally Posted by Scott of the Sahara

I own a Moto Guzzi Norge 1200. It is slower than most (all) of the other Sport Touring bikes, but it is comfortable, works well at speed and does all I could want. With removable hard bags that become suitcases, this bike fits everything that I was looking for. Seat height was some of the factor when deciding, and between the Yamaha, Honda, and Kawasaki, none of them worked for me. Just sitting on them at the showroom told me they would not work for my short 29" legs.
I like the character of the V twin coupled with the upright riding position. Maybe someday I will ride a cruiser, maybe not. I don't want ultra fast. I am comfortable at 70-75mph if I am on the freeway. I am not looking to get tickets so having a bike that is enjoyable to ride at legal speeds works for me.

The Norge is drop-dead gorgeous too.

[Garp]

Originally Posted by Scott of the Sahara

I own a Moto Guzzi Norge 1200. It is slower than most (all) of the other Sport Touring bikes, but it is comfortable, works well at speed and does all I could want. With removable hard bags that become suitcases, this bike fits everything that I was looking for. Seat height was some of the factor when deciding, and between the Yamaha, Honda, and Kawasaki, none of them worked for me. Just sitting on them at the showroom told me they would not work for my short 29" legs.
I like the character of the V twin coupled with the upright riding position. Maybe someday I will ride a cruiser, maybe not. I don't want ultra fast. I am comfortable at 70-75mph if I am on the freeway. I am not looking to get tickets so having a bike that is enjoyable to ride at legal speeds works for me.

My current ride is a Guzzi 1200 Sport, basically a naked Norge with different suspension. A little more sport, and less touring, but Norge bags bolt right up so it's more than capable. As you said, the character of the V-Twin more than makes up for any lack of absolute punch. I don't spend a lot of time at full throttle, so more power would be wasted anyway

[FlagRS]

His and Hers Sport Tourers



We have always felt that riding motor bikes is a sport.

[dman]

I tend to think of sport-touring more as a riding style than a type of bike. Stay off the freeway, ride briskly in the twisties, and put in 500 mile days minimum. I "built" my first ST before you could really buy one (except maybe an R90 or 100RS with Krauser bags). It was a Honda CB900F, with a special-order factory Sport Control Kit (lower bars and rear-sets), a Krauser hard-bag setup, and a Bagman tankbag. I even would put on a Windjammer in the winter, with a cut-down screen. I put almost 50K miles on that bike in 4 years and then bought a factory-built ST .... a K100RS with BMW bags. At the time, the balance of sportiness and distance capability was perfect for me. But as I have gotten older, the upright ergo's of an Adv type bike are better for me, and I also ride slower and don't need the speed-friendly riding position and wind protection. I think most VStroms and GS'es are ridden as sport-tourers. I mostly ride a VStrom now, and think I'll probably have an Adv type bike as my main ride as long as I keep riding.

I do see quite a few Concours and FJRs on the road though, usually during commute hours. Most of the RT's I see are black and white and ridden by guys with 3/4 helmets and short sleeved shirts in the summer, usually sitting by the side of the road and occasionally practicing tight U turns,

-dman

[Unleaded]

Originally Posted by Cakeeater

Bingo!! We have a winner!

The most popular dog in the US is a labrador retreiver. They're big, sturdy, kinda slow at running (fast swimmers tho!!) and are amazingly easy going and mellow...after they're two years old. They are NOT sport-tourers.

When I ride my brother's ST, it seems a waste to run it below speeds that put me in peril of losing my license, and it's just not much fun to ride it at mostly legal speeds. Seems to me most ST bikes are a bridge too far...too big, too heavy, too hot to be sporty...top small, too cramped and too nervous to be long-distance two-up tourers. The F-111 of motorcycles.

Cakeeater

I don't disagree, but what is it that's caused the switch? Just the more responsive new ADV-type bikes? After all, most of us started with upright seating positions on UJMs or the like....why the rise of the ST bike in the first place, if fewer and fewer people see the point to them now? And why now? The 1100GS, Ducati Elefant, and 95-06 Triumph Tigers never set the world on fire....?

[Garp]

Originally Posted by FlagRS

We have always felt that riding motor bikes is a sport.

Sitting still and twisting a throttle is not a sport.

[Low Budget]

Originally Posted by Garp

Sitting still and twisting a throttle is not a sport.

True.......but.......if the only real genuine type of "Sport" in tarmac motorcycling involves being crunched up like a circus monkey with your arms and wrists on fire, while your ass feels like you have been passed around the prison shower, and you neck is screaming like you got hit with a 2X4, then by all means you can have it on 600 mile days !


Yes, you can tour with a sport bike, but there is a better machine for touring distance riding with a sporty style........thats why they call them sport tourers.

[Garp]

It's not about the kind of bike, Doesn't matter if its a Gixxer or a Gold Wing, riding on the public roads is not a sport any more than driving is.