Had 20K Exotic sports bikes, and this way back when 20K was worth
something, but I have to admit, I had more fun on the street riding
around on my old butt, air cooled thumpers. Now, I have never been much of a rider, and crashed more often when trying to go fast, than actually go fast, but that was my experience. If I bought one of these modern nakeds, it would be more for style, an attempt to impress the ladies with my bad assness, than anything else. Of course I wouldn’t say this in front of the ladies, but the power of these bikes actually scares me more than enthralls me.
The easier way would have been to take the S 1000 RR, remove the fairing and leave the standard 200 horsepower engine unchanged. This is what many enthusiast riders claim they want, after all, never really thinking that they can’t use the upper reaches of the tachometer on public roads (unless, of course, they have access to the autobahn). Instead, BMW has reduced the peak horsepower to 160, still a very healthy number, in order to move the powerband lower, where street riders can actually use it. BMW claims the naked S 1000 R has 7 more foot/pounds of torque than the superbike below 7,500 rpm.The bike’s beautiful, and undoubtedly fast as anyone could possibly need, but is there really a market for a naked bike that will undoubtedly end up being $20K once all the various options are added? Perhaps I’m being pessimistic, but every time I go look at a BMW that is supposed to be $14K, all they ever have is $20K versions with electronic suspension options etc. What say BMW puts this motor into a S1000ST sport tourer with panniers and a small adjustable shield. It could be a big brother to the F800ST that’s not so luxurious as the R1200RT nor as techno-whiz-bang-feature-laden as the K1600GT. Just a nice, light, powerful bike with upright ergos, some wind protection and a place to store some stuff. How about headlight symmetry, too. Why wouldn’t the lightness and comparative simplicity of a street fighter be desireable as the foundation of a tourer? Not everyone wants to tour on a luxury machine. A GT is too heavy and feature-laden. A GSA is too tall, not to mention fugly as they come, and the boxer twin is not everyone’s favorite mill. Is the 1000R aimed at touring? Not as shown here, but with a few tweaks it would make a great tourer. YMM.ou gotta hand it to BMW for reinventing themselves in the last few years. They now make a aid range of motorcycles for a bunch of different types of riders. At one time I wondered if they were going to continue to be in the bike business. Now it looks like they will be one of the innovators.
Although the BMW is still ridiculously powerful for a naked, it looks like the KTM 1290 SuperDuke R, which claims 180 crank horsepower (as well as a higher torque peak) will rule the roost in the Naked category when it comes to brute force.BMW began this project 2 years ago with the idea of creating a fun, fast and easy to ride naked, potentially having a much wider customer base than the intensely focused S 1000 RR superbike. The object was to change the engine, as well as the chassis geometry to make the bike more suitable for day-to-day road use. Despite the reduction in peak horsepower, torque increases to provide a stronger mid-range where the tachometer will undoubtedly reside most often on the road. All the electronic gadgets found on the S 1000 RR remain, including ride-by-wire, selectable power modes (including a Rain mode), and you can get the options as well, such as quick shifter, traction control, electronic suspension adjustment, and more sophisticated, selectable driving modes.Personally, I would substantially prefer the way this engine is tuned, with power band arriving sooner in the rpm range and greater power throughout the part of the range that you use 90% of the time. This would be an awesome bike to own, no question about that. I look forward to seeing dyno measurements. Has BMW released specs for where in the rpm range the torque and power peaks are located?To optimize street handling, the aluminum chassis had to be re-engineered with new geometry. Wheelbase was increased by 22 mm, and the steering rake is more relaxed. Despite this, with the new ergos, and the wide bars for leverage, BMW intended the naked to be nimble at lower speeds. The brakes are radial-mounted Brembo 4-piston calipers in front grabbing 320 mm discs. In back is a smaller disc and a single piston caliper. Defeatable ABS is standard.Instrumentation is very thorough, as you might expect, including all of the now-expected features, as well as all the information about the current status of the electronic gadgetry, including drive mode selected, suspension settings (where electronically set) and a lap timer.Pretty much EVERY sportbike will be better on the street with more torque at the expense of peak power. Those extra 40 hp are just inaccessible on the street. In 1st and 2nd gear you can’t use the full power because you’ll wheelie and flip. In higher gears you can’t use the full power because it’s only available at very high RPMs, which means crazy speeds that you can’t reach on the street. In 3rd gear you’d have to go more than 100 mph to actually get more power out of the S1000RR than from the detuned naked bike. At every speed below 100 mph, the detuned naked bike will be stronger and faster than the S1000RR. Peak power is useless if you can’t, you know, use it.
The more relaxed ergonomics are quickly appreciated. Knees, elbows and the rest of the body assume a balanced, comfortable position that is nevertheless ready for aggressive riding. I found the seat comfortable for highway cruising, with a relatively low height of 814 mm (32 inches).
Our test included a variety of road conditions, including wind and rain. Although perhaps not the ideal for pushing the limits, it did help reveal the true nature of this machine. Despite the weather, I began by choosing the least intrusive electronic aids in order to fully judge the abilities, and balance, of the S 1000 R. With full power mode, and traction control turned off, I set the bike to permit wheelies.
Proheli – I agree with mosf of what you say, and with the gist of it. It absolutely is better to have the power band arrive at lower rpm. I don’t like to equate low-rpm performance expressly with torque the way that most people do, but that’s just a pet peeve of mine. The important point is that the lower in the rpm range that the power band arrives, the better, all else being equal. But of course all else is not equal, because a price is paid in terms of peak power. The only real question to debate is at what point the price you pay is too stiff a price to justify moving the power band further down the rpm range. There is no absolute, objective answer to this; it is very subjective. But, the comment that Jim made simply asserts that there isn’t any reason for moving the power band lower in the rpm range, and that is just silly. There is always, always a reason to do that.Wouldn’t own one if they were free but I continue to be amazed at the breadth of options for motorcyclists. Forgetting the really cheap stuff buyers today can pick from a 300 twin sport bike to a 2.3 liter cruiser to a 200 HP sport bike to a 900 pound touring bike to a naked bike that would take an NFL linebacker to hang onto at top speed.The 2014 Naked Superbikes Battle Royale: Godzilla vs King Kong vs Mothra vs…Donatella Versace?
Admittedly, I’m a sucker for those BMW heated grips. That right there could almost sway me to this goggle-eyed Teutonic space shuttle. Nevertheless, the Tuono just seems so much cooler to me, and the KTM is even cooler still. Sure, 180 hp with a 410 wet weight on an upright naked seems like sheer lunacy, but give that KTM the half orange, half white wheels we saw with the prototype and that’d be the one I’d grab.Also, living in a world where a 1000CC motorcycle engine is de-tuned to “only” 160 HP is mind boggling. I still have articles from the seventies showing how to hop up a superbike to 80 HP. What is it like to ride a bike that can’t be held over 1/4 throttle from more than two seconds without risking you license and maybe even jail time? I would think it would be more frustrating than fun.One more point … Being used to a twin, or to any particular configuration, whether in terms of cylinder quantity or the way the are arranged, does not in and of itself imply that you would be used stronger midrange performance. Or less. Neither the cylinder quantity nor the particular arrangement of the cylinders has any direct affect on the location of the torque peak or the shape of the two performance curves. The only design elements that can possibly have that sort of effect are design elements that directly influence the quantity of air that the engine draws in with each complete rotation of the crank. The cylinder count will have that sort of effect if the displacement per cylinder is the same no matter the quantity of cylinders, but if the total displacement is the same regardless of the quantity of cylinders, then the quantity of cylinders in and of itself does not influence the quantity of air drawn in per each rotation of the crank. As such, there is no influence on actual engine torque, and if there is no influence on actual engine torque, there is no influence on the location of the torque peak or on the overall shape of the performance curves. The bore/stroke ratio is another matter. It influences the quantity of air the engine draws in per each intake stroke, in a manner that interacts with the duration of the intake stroke and therefore the rpm. Because it has this influence, it also influences the rpm at which the torque peak occurs, and thus has a strong, direct affect on the shape of the torque curve and the power curve.The first part of ride included roughly 32 miles of twisty, ascending mountain roads. It took me a while to understand the bike, and I used the first open straight to fully explore the powerband. With strong drive from 6,000 rpm, at roughly 9,000 rpm the front wheel left the tarmac and it continued to pull hard through redline.Jim, laugh all you want, but you evidently do not accept the fact that given a choice between having a given amount of power at a lower rpm vs. a higher rpm, it is better for it to be available at lower rpm. To me this is so obvious that it puzzles me that you would think otherwise. If the extreme amount of power that the RR offers at very high rpm is a useful amount of power to have, why isn’t an amount of power that isn’t even nearly that extreme useful at lower rpm? LOL, indeed.With my tires as warm as they would get, despite the cold weather and snowy peaks, as well as dark clouds approaching, I aggressively attacked the corners. I was rewarded with huge grip and confidence. The handling was sublime and corner exits offered all the forward thrust I could ask for. When I spun up the rear tire, I had no trouble controlling the spin, and I was able to continue steering the bike toward the desired corner exit. The stock Pirelli tires handled the acceleration, braking and corner forces well. I was having a blast!As we started to descend on the same mountain road, the turns became tighter and traction was deteriorating, At this point I had great confidence in the S 1000 R, and the same dance continued. The flexible engine allowed me, at times, to stay in the same gear from corner to straightaway to corner, yet still enjoy adequate acceleration. It was then that the rain began and the road became extremely treacherous. I finally switched to “Rain” mode and leaned more on the electronic “saviors”, which allowed me to again relax. With the electronics on my side, I was able to increase the pace. I was having so much fun I was able to largely ignore my frozen fingers and the torture of the cold. Entertainment can do this. In fact, I had forgotten I had heated grips available, but it was too late as our ride came to an end.
Are you kidding me? Not attractive? What is your idea of attractive? The
engine is beautiful. The fairing is elegant and looks in the pictures
to be sleek functional. It was designed to attract TOUR riders. Kids
will ride the fugly crotch rocket sport bikes. Mature riders, the ones
with actual money and experience will love this machine. It has the seat
height of homely V twin cruisers, a relaxed riding position and the
seat looks comfortable. It is NOT too big. It's not as bulky as the
ST1300, and not nearly as huge has the current Gold Wing. I think
Honda's only drawback here is that it is priced two thousand dollars too
high and it needs a cruise control. At $15,000 it would attract a huge
following to those of us who don't want 800 lb plus touring bikes.Some motorcycles take a proven formula and change it up a little.
Then there’s Honda’s new CTX family of bikes—they’ve blown their class
wide open and completely reinvented it.The new CTX1300 is a great
example: With a 1261cc V-4 engine it has plenty of power. Innovations
abound in the integrated bodywork. Best of all, it’s available in two
versions: the CTX1300 and the CTX1300 Deluxe, with Bluetooth® Audio,
anti-lock brakes, self-cancelling turn signals, traction control and a
blacked-out look.Honda’s
CTX line of motorcycles are some of the most innovative we’ve ever
produced. One look can tell you that, and that’s really saying something
when you realize that no other company leads the way in innovative
solutions and technologies like Honda. Just check out the new CTX1300’s
long list of features, and you’ll see that this is a bike that can take
you cruising into the next century.Nothing
sounds like a V-4 engine, and nothing feels like one either.
Longitudinal engine mounting improves power transfer and drivetrain
efficiency, two engine counterbalancers eliminate vibration for
super-smooth running, and its specially tuned 1261 cc engine offers
plenty of power for long-distance touring.Available on the CTX1300 Deluxe, traction control gives you additional peace of mind under challenging riding conditions.The
dual pre-load adjustable rear shocks pair with the CTX1300’s aluminum
swingarm to allow you to dial in the level of comfort and handling
that’s right for you.A
feature that not only looks great but works even better, the CTX1300’s
inverted fork helps with the bike’s precise steering and excellent
comfort and handling.Motorcycling
can throw you lots of unexpected surprises—that’s where Anti-Lock
Brakes can be a big help, when you need to make controlled stops in
less-than-ideal conditions. Under normal operation you’ll never know it
they’re there, but when you need them, they’re always there to back you
up.A fat 200-series rear tire and stylish 10-spoke cast wheels give the
CTX1300 aggressive style—on the Deluxe model, the wheels are blacked-out
to match the other styling elements.The CTX1300’s weather resistant, lockable saddlebags are big enough for many full-face helmets or a weekend’s worth of gear.Nice
and low—that’s how most riders like their seat heights, and that’s
exactly how we built the new CTX1300. The low seat makes it easy to
flat-foot it in parking lots or at stoplights, and just plain feels
great, too. The low seat and uniquely designed fuel tank help lower the
bike’s center of gravity and inspire confidence.The
CTX1300’s fairing helps make both your commute and long distance trips a
whole lot more pleasant. Stylish and functional, the bodywork reduces
wind buffeting and provides some extra storage, too.Tucked
into the CTX1300’s fairing are two storage containers for smaller
items. On the Deluxe model, you also get a USB port to charge your phone
or play MP3 music files.Tucked
into the CTX1300’s fairing are two storage containers for smaller
items. On the Deluxe model, you also get a USB port to charge your phone
or play MP3 music files.Clear,
crisp, bright: the latest LED technology lets the CTX1300’s headlight
and unique accent lights do more than just light up the night—it gives
the bike a strong styling element.. The tallight and turn signals are
also brilliant, long-lasting LEDs.The
low-cut windscreen helps reduce wind buffeting and blends perfectly
with the low, lean styling of the CTX1300. Need a taller screen? No
problem—there’s one available as an accessory.Mounted
in the center of the instrument console, the LCD screen provides useful
information such as fuel range, MPG, ambient air temperature, and trip
odometer. The Deluxe model can also display song and artist information
from your device.I see nothing attractive in that bike - especially from a company that
has the goldwing. Innovation? Where? The seating position looks
reminiscent of the terrible DN-01, styling makes it look plastic with an
unfinished front fairing, the exhaust looks bulky, heavy, and FAR too
big and while it looks like the wet dream of a kid in the 80s, is that
kind of styling current today? So many manufacturers are showing the
engines, calming down on plastic, and focusing on the ride rather than
trying to attain a modern look - it seems outdated and attractive only
to a short term minority (nobody will be excited about buying this
second hand in 5 years). In my opinion If it's under 10k they have a
shot, if not, I suggest another flop in Honda's history. Shame, the used
to produce some great bikes.
The first Valkyrie used a simple formula well-known to American hot-rod
builders: take the frame and motor of a big, heavy car and chop away
everything you don’t need. That first iteration was built right here in
the USA from 1996-2003 and still has legions of fans. It used the
flat-six, liquid-cooled 1520cc motor and five-speed gearbox from the old
GL1500 Gold Wing (1988-2000), but with a different tube-steel chassis.
It weighed in at 682 pounds dry—much lighter than its touring brother.
Owner forums for the Valk are still active (hot topic: using a car tire
on the rear wheel), and one thing is clear: these folks love their
bikes. They handle well (for something so heavy), are comfortable,
reliable, smooth, fast and have a heck of a presence—for a while, it was
the biggest, baddest cruiser you could buy. “Surely, with this
motorcycle,” speculated Motorcycle.com’s Andy Saunders in 1997, “Honda
has reached the limit of cruiser size.” How quaint.
The F3 800 is loaded with top shelf components and electronic assist
mechanisms. The Marzocchi forks measure 43 mm in diameter and are fully
adjustable for spring preload, as well as compression and rebound
damping. The Sachs shock features a separate nitrogen reservoir, and is
also fully adjustable for preload, compression and rebound.