I'm a little confused

[naked-daytrader]

Did anyone see the new Cycle World test. They have the 1098 topping out at 163mph? Slowest bike tested by 17mph and 3/10s slower in the quarter. I don't get it?
Remember when the 1098 was first tested by Cycle World last year, it had the lowest 1/4 mile time of any of their tested bikes. I think it was something like a 9.63, so now they claim its the slowest, they constantly change their stories, and just stir up controversy in favor of whoever advertises with them more that month. Plus the fact that the journalist rider probably sucked at launching the 1098, it takes a bit of effort to keep the front wheel down during hard launches..


So much for unbiased moto journalism.....

[sxlova07]

its ok Mark...I still think its a great bike

[ff36buell]

even worse is a couple of Buell owners have dynoed their 1125r's to within 3 whp to a 1098... the horror!

[SVRACER01]

So much for biased moto journalism.....

dont you mean UN biased

[MotoFreak]

well, guess you should sell it and buy an MV F4 RR 312 1078...and then repeat that to everyone when they ask what kinda bike it is...

[naked-daytrader]

dont you mean UN biased

Ooops,,, you are correct

[dx3162]

All reports say that my RC is gear limited to 163 as well, but my speedo tells me it goes 170+ at the top of 6th...just can't figure it out...I must have a "special" one...

[GixerJockey]

All reports say that my RC is gear limited to 163 as well, but my speedo tells me it goes 170+ at the top of 6th...just can't figure it out...I must have a "special" one...

S-P-E-E-D-O H-E-A-L-E-R...

[R7]

I'm not a magazine reader anymore, in fact other than picking up a mag once in a while just to picture read, I haven't had a subscription sence 1998.
It's whoever pays the most that month or whoever gives them the most bikes for the longest time that gets the good reviews.
Look back to 1998 for instance, the great zx9 and R1 debate...I just remember reading comments like "wow, first production bike to hit a 9.99 in the 1/4 mile, the great zx9"...and somehow when the bike reached the real world, it barely did a 10.5 in the test magazines
I always thought it was kinda funny listening to people that buy a bike just because of a magazine article or from what they read somewhere

[dx3162]

Not necessary, it's only one or two mph off at legal speeds, and I rarely wick it up in 6th...if im clocked at 150+ I highly doubt i'll be stickin around to see exactly what he clocked me at. My post was totally unnecessary and off topic, and I apologise. Bored as hell sittin in class...

[naked-daytrader]

All reports say that my RC is gear limited to 163 as well, but my speedo tells me it goes 170+ at the top of 6th...just can't figure it out...I must have a "special" one...

I dont really even care about the top speed or qtr mile, it's just the fact that their reported numbers are so far off on the same exact motocycle. I just don't see how they can call that ''UN-BIASED'' journalism. I'm sure they've done it with other model bikes as well but i don't follow them as closely because i don't own those other models.

[mrezra]

It's the norm for mags to do complete 180s, post contradicting info, change numbers, etc. I have a background in journalism, and motorcycle mags rarely publish REAL journalism. They have one goal... sell more mags. The folks over at the Triumph forums are ranting over the latest SportRider thrashing of the 675... In that case, "The bike goes from being international bike of the year in '06, winning Supertest in '06, '07, '08, winning Masterbike in '06, '07, and runner-up in '08 (to the exact same bike that it beat in '07), and half of the bikes in '08 it was beating last year in '07's shootouts." - [FLUX]

I stopped reading most mags awhile ago... I realized I don't care what other people think, and and I have a lot more fun doing my own comparisons and making my own decisions.

[ChR1s]

I'm not a magazine reader anymore, in fact other than picking up a mag once in a while just to picture read, I haven't had a subscription sence 1998.
It's whoever pays the most that month or whoever gives them the most bikes for the longest time that gets the good reviews.
Look back to 1998 for instance, the great zx9 and R1 debate...I just remember reading comments like "wow, first production bike to hit a 9.99 in the 1/4 mile, the great zx9"...and somehow when the bike reached the real world, it barely did a 10.5 in the test magazines
I always thought it was kinda funny listening to people that buy a bike just because of a magazine article or from what they read somewhere

I believe it was Kent Koonitsugoo who posted that quick ET on the green bike. Kawi was pumping that up to sell bikes once the YZF-R1 was released. The vastly superior R1, being less of a led sled than the ZX, was simply tougher to pull quick ETs with in its stock configuration.