ADV Bikes: Too damn heavy...

[RichieGoatGruff]

There is no excuse for an ADV bike to be over 400 lbs, no bags 1/2 tank of gas. My FJ1200 is 500 no gas, no luggage, 1980s tech. Big engine, poorly packeged in modern terms.

Why are the Tenere, and Africa Twin, over 500 lbs?  No excuse... The GS, well, BMW.,

[timbanditos]

Xr650r weighs in just around 300pounds.....almost perfect for adv riding!

[Ragge_]

On 2/22/2019 at 7:52 AM, RichBaker said:

1980s tech

I love tech, but I'd definitely take a 90s engine over a FI and water cooled lump if it still was an option. Suspension, breaks etc, yeah as fresh as possible please.

Far as I'm concerned the big bikes are not dualsport bikes they're street bikes with off-tarmac capabilities. Obviously a professional racer can take pretty much whatever anywhere, , me a mere mortal though, not so.

My thinking is dual sport adventure has fallen between chairs for a long time, you can get a race bike no problem, you can get a long haul tourer no problem. A dirt oriented light bike with luggage and a big tank is just a plain and simple 'nope'. Well almost, AJP has the PR7 which looks trick AF, CCM had the GP450 etc. If you're willing to leave the mainstream, there are options.

On the plus side it's a problem you always can solve by throwing money at it

[SparkinPegs]

Hum..welp, different bikes for different terrain, skill level, taste, and most of all expectations. "Adventure touring bikes" are confusing to me personally, I don't understand, and with the huge growing popularity of them, I'm really trying to get it. But bikes like the XR650R, 650L, DR650, KTM 500 640, even the drz400. Any of those machines can cruise at speed. Any of those bikes can handle long distance. An yes, any of those bikes are a better performers in a off road environment. I'm like ??? I'd ride the TAT on my xr650r for sure. Actually I'd prefer it..I think bikes like the KTM 690 and husky 701 could truly fill the gap if they were offered in a touring trim. You know, the touring trim, bags and panniers, wind shields, heated this and that. Do dads and luggage capacity for a 7 member family to survive the fall out of humanity bro. Seriously though, one guys idea of a adventure is and can be much different than another's..and manufacturers haven't found the middle ground to suit all...but the 690 and 701 are close..really really close in my opinion.

[Ragge_]

I like the 690, it's damn fun, I also loved the old lc4 640 lineup. But in my opinion they share the same core problem, they're to high tuned, maybe just by 5hp or so. But to me doing an overland trip on a 690 would feel like sitting on a potential grenade.

The GS650 rotax lump in a ktm exc chassis would perhaps be the ultimate machine in my eyes. Something I don't get is why offroaders have to be "nice", like the 250l why is the suspension softer than butter in sunshine?

[adam728]

On 2/26/2019 at 8:54 PM, SparkinPegs said:

Seriously though, one guys idea of a adventure is and can be much different than another's..

And a scroll through ride reports on ADV Rider certainly shows this.  Seems to range from riding across the country on only freeways, to a half day jaunt of single track. Neither is wrong, nor is either the "only" way. Which tends to be where arguments start. 

 

My opinion is that adventure riding is heavily dirt-oriented. I wouldn't go less trail worthy than my DR650, and it's teetering on the edge, after mods. Something like a 690/701 seems about perfect on paper. Maybe trade a few hp for better (perceived) reliability.

[Dirt Hokie]

Yep

To me, a Africa twin is like a Jeep.  Its not really a off road vehicle.  Its a road vehicle that can handle some light off road.

If my trip has me choosing highway ability over off road ability its not going to be a adventure in my eyes.  

[Windblown]

There are plenty of bikes out there to Adventure on that are sub 400lbs. It all just depends on what your adventure will consist of, what roads will be traveled to get there, and how much time you have.  I know two guys (one on a Husky 501 & one on a DRZ) that did the cross country TAT taking all the hard options they could find.  Fellow going by the handle RTW Paul has been practically everywhere around the world multiple times on a few different thumpers.

The trick is the compromises: Time, Distance, Difficulty, Comfort.   

Big bikes limit the degree of technical difficulty that can be achieved but can make anything that isn't actually technically too hard core for the bike or the riders skill more fun, more challenging, and more comfortable.  I've said it before and it's still true. I give up comfort grudgingly on long trips. Only if there is something in the cards that actually requires a small bike. I love riding my 250XC-F for a day on trails but I don't want to ride it back to back 400 mile days. I like my 690 for a spin out through the area or intermediate distance multi-day trips (longest on the 690 was 3k) but I still don't want to ride it multiple 400+ mile days back to back to get to the fun.

Some folks handle the long distance to the fun parts by throwing a plated dirtbike in a truck and that's cool, I've done it too! But that's not a motorcycle Adventure ride, that's driving somewhere to ride your bike. 

Now the folks that ride around the world or even just across the US on a dual sport? I take my hat off to them. They may be making it easier for themselves on the hard parts compared to me but they are making the long pavement days getting somewhere a whole lot tougher! I just ain't that hard. 

 

Edited March 3, 2019 by Windblown

[OKDinosaur]

Adventure bikes are normally bought by middle aged guys who ride 90% street and 10% forest service roads. They give up basically nothing to a standard touring motorcycle on the street with the way most people ride (ie not dragging pegs), and they’re better on forest service roads. Plus they give off that rugged “adventure” look that their mid-life-crisis buyers are so into because it makes them feel young. Their main design goal is to be a good highway cruiser because most owners never even ride dirt they just want to look adventurous while parked at Starbucks. Just look on CL, many many ADV bikes for sale advertising “never seen dirt”.

Dual sports are bikes that are actually somewhat capable off-road, like the 650 singles, drz400, wr250r, ktm 690 / husq 701, etc etc.

You can take a dual sport on an adventure, that doesn’t make it an adventure bike. You can ride a Honda trail 90 cross country but that doesn’t make it a touring motorcycle.

[Windblown]

53 minutes ago, OKDinosaur said:

Adventure bikes are normally bought by middle aged guys who ride 90% street and 10% forest service roads. They give up basically nothing to a standard touring motorcycle on the street with the way most people ride (ie not dragging pegs), and they’re better on forest service roads. Plus they give off that rugged “adventure” look that their mid-life-crisis buyers are so into because it makes them feel young. Their main design goal is to be a good highway cruiser because most owners never even ride dirt they just want to look adventurous while parked at Starbucks. Just look on CL, many many ADV bikes for sale advertising “never seen dirt”.

Dual sports are bikes that are actually somewhat capable off-road, like the 650 singles, drz400, wr250r, ktm 690 / husq 701, etc etc.

You can take a dual sport on an adventure, that doesn’t make it an adventure bike. You can ride a Honda trail 90 cross country but that doesn’t make it a touring motorcycle.

 

Yep, Adventure bikes have become a status symbol of sorts for a segment of middle aged and older dudes in the US.  They are big comfy beasts and easier on the knees for us aging folks with more than a 32" inseam.  But beside that, who else can afford them besides old dudes? 

Gotta go, Starbucks is calling.

 

[SparkinPegs]

OKdinosaur, you made a good point about the market target for these motorcycles. It's almost always that crowd riding them, and you what..I totally get it. Is it a mid life crisis for them, maybe, a gnarly divorce, perhaps, or the kids moved out, that's done and over, so they are just living that next chapter bro. Me personally, I'm 33, I got another 20 years [ I hope] of MX, hare scrambles, enduro and other riding to do. Would love to fit a coast to coast TAT, on a tagged dirtbike in before I ripen to time. After the years, injuries, and beaten about I actually dream to own and ride one of these large adventure bikes, and go on those big ride trips, touring, sight seeing. Silly it may seem, but seeing myself in the mid 50's, cruising on a 25k$ BMW GS to a destination 10 days away, and maybe just maybe, grow civilized enough to enjoy a Starbucks too, some tyme in the journey. To me that's a damn successful life of once was younger dirt biker. So the bikes are heavy, and not made for serious off road, perhaps it's just that way and I see it now. Because of who those bikes are for. A status symbol, maybe true, but hey, I'm not going to hate about it, I hope to have the "symbol" and be THAT old dude one day myself...

[cman60]

Love my KTM 500. Would not ride it 500 plus miles to a rally. Would ride the 1190 though.

[cman60]

One other thing, ride across any of the plains plains states on a lighter weight adventure bike , for me I'll take a heavier bike and deal with it when racking up the miles to a destination. 

[Windblown]

11 hours ago, cman60 said:

One other thing, ride across any of the plains plains states on a lighter weight adventure bike , for me I'll take a heavier bike and deal with it when racking up the miles to a destination. 

Exactly. I live on the east coast. I do not have the time nor inclination to ride across the plains states on a thumper.  I'd much rather suffer a little in the tough stuff than be bored to death and uncomfortable on the fast or easy stuff. ?

[7800]

I suppose its all down to what adventure means to the individual. Riding through India and never leaving tarmac would be as much an adventure as the TET or TAT to me. I personally don't see the point in these huge bikes but that is just my opinion. Some guys can really throw the things around though and have the cash for the repairs. Good luck and safe riding I say

[NoFiddyPilot]

On 2/22/2019 at 1:52 AM, RichBaker said:

There is no excuse for an ADV bike to be over 400 lbs, no bags 1/2 tank of gas. My FJ1200 is 500 no gas, no luggage, 1980s tech. Big engine, poorly packeged in modern terms.

Why are the Tenere, and Africa Twin, over 500 lbs?  No excuse... The GS, well, BMW.,

Maybe these mfr didn't try to hit sub 400lbs adv bikes? Maybe their market research indicated that the money is with what they are marking? I know riders are smart, but I also know the mfr employ some pretty smart people that put a lot of time, effort and money into market research. And, every mfr has corporate goals & objectives that often times have to align with global goals. I'm sure they have more perspective and data to digest and consider than we're aware of. 

The reality is, there is no unicorn ADV bike that does it all. I can make the case for owning several bikes to best suit what I'd like to do and the terrain it includes. As it has been pointed out, in some conditions such as longer distance travel, a  bike like the  GS 1200 would be the bike of choice. Different tools for different missions and weight isn't necessarily the only factor to consider when choosing the tool that best suits your needs.

 

[RichieGoatGruff]

Yamaha is releasing the 700 Tenere. Based on the 400 lb FZ-07, the stated weight is ~440 lbs. Somewhere they added 40 lbs... They added a minimal fairing, but that replaces the existing stuff on the FZ. Different gauges and headlight, but weight shouldn't be much different. 

Still, 440# vs 525 - 550#... Looks like Yamaha may be on the right track.

[Flagstaff]

On 3/4/2019 at 10:33 AM, RichBaker said:

Yamaha is releasing the 700 Tenere. Based on the 400 lb FZ-07, the stated weight is ~440 lbs. Somewhere they added 40 lbs... They added a minimal fairing, but that replaces the existing stuff on the FZ. Different gauges and headlight, but weight shouldn't be much different. 

Still, 440# vs 525 - 550#... Looks like Yamaha may be on the right track.

I think the KTM 790 is in that weight range.

Pondering taking the 690 in that direction, but wouldn't be much interested in much more than a day at a time without a nice dirt interruption. Easy to do out west. For true cross-country I've thought about one of the larger adventure bikes but for now am happy with the street bike. 

[Truman Sparks]

https://advrider.com/f/threads/minimalist-touring-thread-250cc-and-under.201349/

[NORTY]

I must agree. The weight of offroad motorcycles should be "job #1." Bikes that are 220 lbs are a lot easier to ride on unstable ground than 500+ lb. behemoths. Even if the 550 pounders have 900 horsepower, they're still a chore to ride, especially when the pace picks up.

Being an old guy, I look for lower weight, before almost anything else. Torque curve and suspension travel/quality are probably next on my list. Most riders focus on total inches of travel, and don't pay much attention to the quality of progression during the stroke. BOTH ways. 

Then again, I'm going to a dealer tomorrow to negotiate on a bike. We'll see what happens.