best value in a used sport tourer?

[feralchimp]

Anyone here lived with a BMW K1200RS for a while? Opinions? Any big gotchas on the maintenance front?

[Chippertheripper]

I'm sure Steve Methia is well versed in the newer bmw sport tourers...
Where you @tricklidz??

[scottieducati]

If I didn't have an ST2 (that needs to be put back together...) I have always been super curious of the MotoGuzzi Norge. They can be found for STUPID cheap, are really easy to work on, and we have a great local Dealer to take care of all the BS...

[PhilB]

I took a testride on a 2008 Norge a couple weeks ago, and was quite impressed. This one is at a local dealer in St. Louis, in fantastic condition with under 5K miles on it, for about $8K. --
=====
Moto Guzzi Norge 1200 (2008 model)

Donelson Cycles, St. Louis, MO. Thanks!

Donelson Cycles is a St. Louis motorcycle institution, since 1962. They currently sell Ducati, Triumph, Honda, and Yamaha, as well as a decent selection of used bikes. They had a Honda VFR1200F (manual shift) and a Moto Guzzi Norge 1200 in the used bike stock, each for about $8K, so I set up to test them both. The Honda, unfortunately for me, got sold before I could test it, but here is the review for the Guzzi:
==========
This is a very impressive bike. It’s a 2008, but in really fine condition, and less than 5K miles on it. I’m generally leery of older low-mileage machines, but Guzzis are pretty solid, and this one is being kept in riding condition, and ridden at least now and then – not just left to sit and rot.

The layout is typical Moto Guzzi, similar to that of an airhead BMW. Big air/oil-cooled 90° V-twin with longitudinal crank, single-plate dry clutch, longitudinal transmission, shaft drive. In this case the V-twin is 1200cc, and the transmission a 6-spd. It does the famous Guzzi/BMW torque reaction “lean” when revved.

This is clearly a heavier bike than I am used to. Especially at rest, it’s a little ponderous. At speed, it lightens up, but doesn’t have the instant responsiveness I am used to. This is probably a quality of the entire genre. It does seem to respond well for a bike of its size.

The engine has plenty of power, and the bike accelerates well. This one has a lot less flywheel than the Guzzis I’ve ridden before, so it actually surprised me when I hit the throttle – it revved right up and bounced off the 9K rev limiter very quickly. The tach has a warning light that blinks when you get near the rev limiter, and goes solid when it hits the rev limit. As a big 2V twin, its best torque is not at the top of the rev range anyway, so short-shifting is more appropriate; I’d just have to calibrate my own responses to match.

The clutch is light and easy to modulate. The transmission shifts smoothly and cleanly; it’s been tamed a bit from the usual Guzzi kick-and-clonk. It still needs a positive foot, and still rewards you with a proper clonk, but less so than older ones. Neutral, by contrast, needs a gentle and sensitive touch, but once you get it, it’s easy and reliable to find, whether moving or stopped.

The brakes are plenty good enough. Not modern Monoblocs or anything, but give them a good squeeze and they haul the bike down well when needed. No ABS at this vintage; you’ll have to get a shiny new 2016 Norge 8V for that.

Handling is smooth and predictable, and doesn’t get upset much by tightening corners, or slowing for idiots on the onramp, etc. It’s got plenty of ground clearance; I was surprised that nothing (not even the centerstand) ever touched down – that’s good design. As noted above, you get some tilting from the crankshaft’s torque reaction if you are abrupt with the throttle (on or off), but there was no discernable shaft effect. Bump compliance is good, and the bike deals well with poorly maintained roads. It doesn’t feel heavy on the move. All of which bodes well for good travel.

The ergonomics are also remarkably good. Once you get it off the centerstand, it’s not too tall; I could put the balls of my feet solidly down with ease. The riding position is pretty upright, but comfortable. I’m generally not a fan of fairings and windshields on bikes, but this was done very well. The windshield is electrically adjustable on the fly via a button on the right handlebar. It shields the wind, without buffeting and eddy currents; it never slammed my helmet visor shut (up to 110mph, anyway). The seat was quite good, although it doesn’t have a backrest. Corbin makes one, but I’m not wild about Corbins; Sargent apparently does not make seats for Moto Guzzis. Probably a luggage rack and top box with backpad would be the answer.

Fit, finish, and quality seem high. Moto Guzzi is good at that. Aesthetics – meh. It’s a sport-touring bike. It’s nice looking enough; not pretty like a Ducati ST, but not bag-over-the-head ugly like a 1st-gen Ducati MS. The engine helps as a visual focal point. Instrumentation is pretty comprehensive, although there is no gear indicator. The basic dials are easy to read; the LCD panel for everything else is dim and fussy, but if one owned the bike I’m sure the layout would become familiar enough to not be a problem.

I’d call this a strong contender. It’s not a MOTUS, obviously, but it’s about ¾ of the bike for ¼ of the price.
=====
PhilB

[Garandman]

Burnham's Tiger 1050 is still available.....517 wet weight (over 5 gallons) and 74 ft lbs torque.

[Falko]

My good friend has a Norge, great bike. The only thing he did to it is make out the o2 sensor at low revs to make it run a little rich which keeps it cooler.
I had the 1200 Sport for a little while. Same bike, without all the plastic in the front. Again, good bike, just wasn't for me I guess. Could never get comfortable with it.

[PhilB]

Burnham's Tiger 1050 is still available.....517 wet weight (over 5 gallons) and 74 ft lbs torque.

That might work for the OP.

I don't want a tall adventure-bike stylee.

My Tiger 1050 impression (from back in Jun2010):
=====
Tiger 1050 – a good competent all-arounder, without too many high-tech gubbins.

This bike seemed relaxed and ready for pretty much anything. It’s not as flashy and advanced as a BMW R1200GS or the new MultiStrada; more along the lines of the HyperMotard or Moto Guzzi Quota. Definitely a big heavy bike, though; more road oriented, not as dirt-capable as a BMW F800GS, for example.

It’s tall and heavy, but manageable. Handling is precise enough, not clumsy like these kinds of bikes can be sometimes. The suspension was pretty well controlled. Bumps and bad surfaces are clearly felt, but not jarringly so; this is probably a good thing on this sort of adventure-bike, helps give good feedback about what terrain you are riding on.

The transmission was clonky. The annoying intake whistle/whoosh/whirr is present on this bike as well. And there were some weird engine vibrations. The triple is not a naturally balanced engine design, and this comes out at times, not as smooth as either a four or a good twin. Triumph seems to have done a good job at balancing the smaller 675, but all the big triples all have some NVH issues, to me at least.

Seems a good bike, but doesn’t really grab me.
=====
PhilB

[PhilB]

My good friend has a Norge, great bike. The only thing he did to it is make out the o2 sensor at low revs to make it run a little rich which keeps it cooler.
I had the 1200 Sport for a little while. Same bike, without all the plastic in the front. Again, good bike, just wasn't for me I guess. Could never get comfortable with it.

Guzzis have their own rhythm. They ride great if you can tap into that, but feel wonky unless/until you do. Last year I was in CA on a job without my own bike, and a friend lent me one of his Guzzis (a 1991 1000S) for a couple months. The first couple of weeks it just felt weird and awkward, but once I figured out how it wanted to be danced with, it was a lot of fun to ride.

PhilB

[jhawley]

I've just came upon 3 years and 30K of ownership wit the Honda vfr1200f (non DCT)

my thoughts are somewhere here or on Born, but the short version:

Awesome bigbore sport bike that has legitimate touring capability's.
Other than the busa and zx14 it will blow the doors off that entire list, but has the awesomeness of a driveshaft (mine had the recall done in march '16 and I cant notice a difference) and oem luggage.
My wife is more than happy being on the back for long distances and it has plenty of room for us while riding.


This is coming back from Canada 2 years ago.

[PhilB]

Yes, that's on my shortlist to try out. Somewhat oddly, it's a lot more difficult to get a testride on most Japanese bikes than it is for European or American bikes. Most dealers for Japanese bikes don't keep many (if any) demos on hand, and won't prep one up unless you can convince them you're serious about buying. If you can find the demo truck, you can try some things out, but the Honda demo truck that came to the MotoGP at Austin didn't have a VFR in the lineup. (I tested a CB1100 retro bike and a CBR1000RR superbike, and that was fun.)

PhilB

[Garandman]

That might work for the OP.

I don't want a tall adventure-bike stylee.

My Tiger 1050 impression (from back in Jun2010):
=====
Tiger 1050 – a good competent all-arounder, without too many high-tech gubbins.

This bike seemed relaxed and ready for pretty much anything. It’s not as flashy and advanced as a BMW R1200GS or the new MultiStrada; more along the lines of the HyperMotard or Moto Guzzi Quota. Definitely a big heavy bike, though; more road oriented, not as dirt-capable as a BMW F800GS, for example.

It’s tall and heavy, but manageable. Handling is precise enough, not clumsy like these kinds of bikes can be sometimes. The suspension was pretty well controlled. Bumps and bad surfaces are clearly felt, but not jarringly so; this is probably a good thing on this sort of adventure-bike, helps give good feedback about what terrain you are riding on.//

I don't consider it an "Adventure bike" whatsoever but an upright street bike with a different name. 17" front gives you much better choice of street rubber. Had Pete replace the stock Showa with a Penske and inserts in the front, handling is great. Top speed is 132mph. Mine is quite smooth. There are some awesome new bikes out but the incremental improvement hasn't made me open my wallet yet.

Relative to the OP's wants, Tiger 1050 has a chain while most "real" sport tourers have shaft drive. I prefer the lighter weight and simplicity of a modern chain, but some of you ride a lot more so the shaft drive is advantageous there. Belonging to a BMW club, I'd be worried about the rear drive on the BMW's.

[PhilB]

I don't consider it an "Adventure bike" whatsoever but an upright street bike with a different name. 17" front gives you much better choice of street rubber. Had Pete replace the stock Showa with a Penske and inserts in the front, handling is great. Top speed is 132mph. Mine is quite smooth. There are some awesome new bikes out but the incremental improvement hasn't made me open my wallet yet.

Seems a good bike, but doesn’t really grab me.

Relative to the OP's wants, Tiger 1050 has a chain while most "real" sport tourers have shaft drive. I prefer the lighter weight and simplicity of a modern chain, but some of you ride a lot more so the shaft drive is advantageous there. Belonging to a BMW club, I'd be worried about the rear drive on the BMW's.

Looking at my extended list of 25 sport-touring and touring bikes, I count 12 shaft, 8 chain, and 5 belt. Lots of options.

PhilB

[Spooler]

I don't consider it an "Adventure bike" whatsoever but an upright street bike with a different name. 17" front gives you much better choice of street rubber. Had Pete replace the stock Showa with a Penske and inserts in the front, handling is great. Top speed is 132mph. Mine is quite smooth. There are some awesome new bikes out but the incremental improvement hasn't made me open my wallet yet.

Relative to the OP's wants, Tiger 1050 has a chain while most "real" sport tourers have shaft drive. I prefer the lighter weight and simplicity of a modern chain, but some of you ride a lot more so the shaft drive is advantageous there. Belonging to a BMW club, I'd be worried about the rear drive on the BMW's.

I've ridden a lot of newer sport touring/adventure bikes recently, and each time I was very excited to get back in the Tiger and ride home. Really a fantastic do everything bike.

[Stromper]

I just did 2052 of 2 lanes in a week on my Vstrom 1 K

does all and better on poor quality pavement

[jhawley]

Wirelessly posted

I hear ya. I took a HUGE gamble when I brought it 3 years ago.

I had ridden the 800 from friends but up to that point never even seen the 1200 in person. Brought it over the phone, drove 5 hours with a check then had 350 miles in a monsoon to make nice with it.

[duganc1717]

I really think the VFR 1200 is a underrated motorcycle. I just can't get past the 5 gallon fuel tank. Hell if I could figure out how to increase my Fz1's fuel tanks capacity by 1.5 gallons I wouldn't he be looking at Sport Touring bikes.

[jhawley]

Wirelessly posted

I've got a 2010 so if I fill it. When the gas light starts blinking it only takes about 3.6 gals.

But also at that point if I rode and drained a tank, i need to get off the bike and stretch and pee.
I couldn't imagine riding a bike for 200 miles in one sitting.

[PhilB]

Wirelessly posted

I've got a 2010 so if I fill it. When the gas light starts blinking it only takes about 3.6 gals.

But also at that point if I rode and drained a tank, i need to get off the bike and stretch and pee.
I couldn't imagine riding a bike for 200 miles in one sitting.

That is an issue for me. I ride my Monster 200 miles per sitting when traveling. And I stop then because that's its gas range.

I also like a longer range because for commuting, it makes a difference in how often I need to stop and get gas. My commute varies from year to year, but it's sometimes 50 miles each way or more. A 200-mile range means gas every two days. A 100-mile range, like an S4Rs or a Brutale, would mean filling up every day.

PhilB

[SteveM]

I'm on a gold wing f6b and have done a ss1000. On a normal road trip I'll average 400-500 miles per day with the afternoon set aside for sightseeing on foot.

200 miles is a long time to be in the saddle without a break for 99.9% of riders, as it is for me. I can do it but riding distances is much more enjoyable when I keep seat time to 2 hours between breaks.

So I tend to think that >200 miles in range is of no real value to the vast majority of riders. On the other hand, substantially less than this would be a pita

[nhbubba]

So I tend to think that >200 miles in range is of no real value to the vast majority of riders.

I'm not an iron butter or anything. But I'd rather that I decided when and where to stop, not the gas tank on my bike.
Having a bike with good range has a bunch of upsides and not many downsides.

<200 mile range is a non-starter for me as a primary/daily rider at this point.

[PhilB]

I'm on a gold wing f6b and have done a ss1000. On a normal road trip I'll average 400-500 miles per day with the afternoon set aside for sightseeing on foot.

200 miles is a long time to be in the saddle without a break for 99.9% of riders, as it is for me. I can do it but riding distances is much more enjoyable when I keep seat time to 2 hours between breaks.

So I tend to think that >200 miles in range is of no real value to the vast majority of riders. On the other hand, substantially less than this would be a pita

Probably true. I was just speaking for me. I typically do 500-600 per day when traveling; that's not too hard, and leaves some time to stop and see things. Fewer gas stops means more time to see other things.

Also, if I'm really just trying to get there, fewer gas stops is helpful. In April I rode down from St. Louis to Austin for the MotoGP. I was going for the event, and I didn't want to take any more expensive days off of work than necessary (as a contractor I do not get any paid time off of any kind). So that was a 900-mile day on the Monster. A Brutale, S4Rs, or KTM 990 SuperDuke (all bikes I've considered at one point or another) would have added at least an hour to the day, just for the extra gas stops.

Also, in 2010, I had a project ending in San Diego and new one near Cleveland, OH. I intended to take the week off between and have 9 days for a nice relaxing road trip. The San Diego project had a problem at the end and ran until Wednesday of that week, leaving me 4 days to ride 2700 miles. And sometimes, way out West, there are places where it's well over 100 miles between gas stations. Range may not matter to a lot of people, but it does to me.

PhilB

[duganc1717]

I'm not an iron butter or anything. But I'd rather that I decided when and where to stop, not the gas tank on my bike.
Having a bike with good range has a bunch of upsides and not many downsides.

<200 mile range is a non-starter for me as a primary/daily rider at this point.

Exactly....

[feralchimp]

Tank range on the CRF250L is really that bike's only downside as a (non-highway) commuter. On the other hand, you don't have to stop very long to put in 1.2 gallons of gas (typical fill-up if you stop when the gauge hits 1 non-blinking bar).

[klp]

If you can get past the ugly the Busa really is a sweet tourer. Make a few ergonomic changes and add some luggage. It's good to be king.

[PhilB]

If you can get past the ugly the Busa really is a sweet tourer. Make a few ergonomic changes and add some luggage. It's good to be king.

That whole class of hypersportbike can tour well for one person. The Hayabusa, ZX-11/12/14, BMW K1300S, Honda Blackbird, Yamaha FJ 1100/1200 -- all could be fitted with bar-risers and bags, and off you go. It's harder to set those up for good long-distance two-up, but it's not impossible if your customary passenger is consenting and hardy.

PhilB