VFR Discontinued/Replacement? CycleWorld story

Walzer, Carl wrote: "Honda already makes that, it is called an
ST1300. Personally, if they don't go back to the roots, a sport bike
with some touring concessions, then they should disband the name and
get on with life. I want a good middle-weight that you can throw
around on a track one day and ride from Michigan to Texas the next.
------------------
Carl has got it right. For all but the truly youthful (not me or my
wife) the VFR never did cut it as a two-up touring machine. As a
two-up sporting machine, OK, Mike Schwab & his wife can have some
serious fun - something you can't do with so-called sport bikes.
Horsepower sells, but torque satisfies, especially down low grunt. So
the next VFR could do with more displacement. Keep the two-up sporting
/ one-up touring focus but skip the two-up touring pretensions and all
the extra weight that goes with it.

Regards, Routemeister


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 7950 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try SPAMfighter for free now!

_______________________________________________
vfr mailing list
vfr@xxxxxx
For subscription and delivery options:
https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vfr

David Thompson wrote:

>Walzer, Carl wrote: "Honda already makes that, it is called an
>ST1300. Personally, if they don't go back to the roots, a sport bike
>with some touring concessions, then they should disband the name and
>get on with life. I want a good middle-weight that you can throw
>around on a track one day and ride from Michigan to Texas the next.
>------------------
>Carl has got it right. For all but the truly youthful (not me or my
>wife) the VFR never did cut it as a two-up touring machine. As a
>two-up sporting machine, OK, Mike Schwab & his wife can have some
>serious fun - something you can't do with so-called sport bikes.
>Horsepower sells, but torque satisfies, especially down low grunt. So
>the next VFR could do with more displacement. Keep the two-up sporting
>/ one-up touring focus but skip the two-up touring pretensions and all
>the extra weight that goes with it.
>
>
>
>
Well, just because I want a better perch for the missus does not mean
that it has to be a bloated TOURING bike. An ST1300 weighs 700 freekin
pounds!! Compare that to the 5th gen VFR at only 516. I don't really
see why the desire for a slightly better rear seat has to result in a
200 lb weight penalty.

Point of reference, even the FJR1300 only weighs around 600 lbs. wet.


--

-Fred W

'98 Honda VFR800Fi SPORTtourer
'01 Kawi Concours sportTOURER
'05 Yammi FJR1300 SPORTTOURER

_______________________________________________
vfr mailing list
vfr@xxxxxx
For subscription and delivery options:
https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vfr

Didn't we just have this conversation in the "Are VFR owners power
crazed" thread?

Or maybe I'm just having flash-backs...

;-)

Later,
Johnj

On Wednesday 22Nov, 2006, at 1:59 PM, Fred Wills wrote:

> David Thompson wrote:
>
>> Walzer, Carl wrote: "Honda already makes that, it is called an
>> ST1300. Personally, if they don't go back to the roots, a sport bike
>> with some touring concessions, then they should disband the name and
>> get on with life. I want a good middle-weight that you can throw
>> around on a track one day and ride from Michigan to Texas the next.
>> ------------------
>> Carl has got it right. For all but the truly youthful (not me or my
>> wife) the VFR never did cut it as a two-up touring machine. As a
>> two-up sporting machine, OK, Mike Schwab & his wife can have some
>> serious fun - something you can't do with so-called sport bikes.
>> Horsepower sells, but torque satisfies, especially down low
>> grunt. So
>> the next VFR could do with more displacement. Keep the two-up
>> sporting
>> / one-up touring focus but skip the two-up touring pretensions and
>> all
>> the extra weight that goes with it.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> Well, just because I want a better perch for the missus does not mean
> that it has to be a bloated TOURING bike. An ST1300 weighs 700
> freekin
> pounds!! Compare that to the 5th gen VFR at only 516. I don't
> really
> see why the desire for a slightly better rear seat has to result in a
> 200 lb weight penalty.
>
> Point of reference, even the FJR1300 only weighs around 600 lbs. wet.
>
>
> --
>
> -Fred W
>
> '98 Honda VFR800Fi SPORTtourer
> '01 Kawi Concours sportTOURER
> '05 Yammi FJR1300 SPORTTOURER
>
> _______________________________________________
> vfr mailing list
> vfr@xxxxxx
> For subscription and delivery options:
> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vfr

_______________________________________________
vfr mailing list
vfr@xxxxxx
For subscription and delivery options:
https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vfr

Fred Wills wrote: Well, just because I want a
better perch for the missus does not mean that it has to be a bloated
TOURING bike. An ST1300 weighs 700 freekin pounds!! Compare that to
the 5th gen VFR at only 516. I don't really see why the desire for a
slightly better rear seat has to result in a 200 lb weight penalty.
Point of reference, even the FJR1300 only weighs around 600 lbs. wet.
--------------------------
Carl Walzer accurately defined the VFR's roots as a middle weight
sport tourer, capable on the track and all day on the road. Tossing
500+ lbs around a track doesn't cut it, so I stand by my statement.
The current VFR, while it may suit your needs, is a long step away
from its roots. That may have some bearing on it's luke-warm
reception by the buying public compared to the earlier versions.

Regards, David "Routemeister" Thompson
http://home.rochester.rr.com/backroads/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 7950 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try SPAMfighter for free now!

_______________________________________________
vfr mailing list
vfr@xxxxxx
For subscription and delivery options:
https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vfr

David Thompson wrote:

> Fred Wills wrote: Well, just because I want a
>better perch for the missus does not mean that it has to be a bloated
>TOURING bike. An ST1300 weighs 700 freekin pounds!! Compare that to
>the 5th gen VFR at only 516. I don't really see why the desire for a
>slightly better rear seat has to result in a 200 lb weight penalty.
>Point of reference, even the FJR1300 only weighs around 600 lbs. wet.
>--------------------------
>Carl Walzer accurately defined the VFR's roots as a middle weight
>sport tourer, capable on the track and all day on the road. Tossing
>500+ lbs around a track doesn't cut it, so I stand by my statement.
>The current VFR, while it may suit your needs, is a long step away
>from its roots. That may have some bearing on it's luke-warm
>reception by the buying public compared to the earlier versions.
>
>Regards, David "Routemeister" Thompson
>
>
>
OK, I guess my understanding was that ~500 lbs IS a middleweight.
....and you are correct that the VFR does meet (some of) my needs as a
sport touring machine. Whether this falls within the VFR's roots or not
I will leave up to the historians. Personally, history does not mean
very much to me. I'm more interested in the here and now.

As to why the VFR has never sold particularly well, I would venture to
say that it's because it is (and always has been) a bike that falls
squarely *between* niches. It's not the best sport bike (obviously at
500 lbs) and it's not the best touring bike. This is the reason that
the entire sport touring category has limited appeal to motorcycle
buyers. While they may meet the *needs* they just don't meet the
*desires* of many buyers.

The VFR is a 'tweener if ever there was one. I dare say that lightening
it by 75 lbs and adding 30 hp would not change that one iota. There
would still be far better sport bikes and far better touring bikes.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

--

-Fred W

'98 Honda VFR800Fi SPORTtourer
'01 Kawi Concours sportTOURER
'05 Yammi FJR1300 SPORTTOURER

_______________________________________________
vfr mailing list
vfr@xxxxxx
For subscription and delivery options:
https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vfr

Well said Fred. That's why today most of you enthusiasts have so many bikes
in your garage 'cause you want one for every season and every occasion. I
would too if the wife and the insurance company was more supportive of my
dreams to have a garage full. IMHO the VFR has basically stayed the same:
around 500 lbs, around 100HP, comfortable seating position, and adequate
suspension. Back in the day it kept up with more sporting rides, but
nowadays the ante is too big to even keep up w/ the 600s. Weights are way
down, hp & ft-lbs are way up and available suspension bits are phenomenal.
So in today's bunch, the viffer is solidly a "tweener" whereas in the 80s &
90s it was more of a sleeper, plus a great companion for the long haul
(never a great companion hauler, though). It WAS always more sport than
tour. Now it can't sport enough. In today's bunch all it is a solid
commuter with available lean angle, and with enough handling and go for the
street.

Lee

Fred wrote:
>The VFR is a 'tweener if ever there was one. I dare say that lightening
>it by 75 lbs and adding 30 hp would not change that one iota. There
>would still be far better sport bikes and far better touring bikes.

_______________________________________________
vfr mailing list
vfr@xxxxxx
For subscription and delivery options:
https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vfr

_______________________________________________
vfr mailing list
vfr@xxxxxx
For subscription and delivery options:
https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vfr

Let's face it everyone, in the Sport/Touring market at Honda the
ST is like the gifted child that gets anything and everything it
wants and then some and the VFR has become like the bastard child
that is fed just enough to keep it healthy. Minor improvements
here and there for the VFR while the ST gets the major make over
and all the bells and whistles. And now the VFR, like the bastard
child when they turn 18, is being booted out the door.
I've enjoyed my 96 VFR immensely over the almost 7 years I've had
it. It has 66k miles on it and still runs great. I always wanted
a new one but Honda never saw fit to bring the blue model to the
US. I did actually go and look at an 06 the other day and thought
seriously about trying to make a deal on it but I haven't heard
anything good about the V-TEC engine so I shied away from it.
Yesterday I went out and bought an 06 Triumph Sprint ST. A blue
one, of course. Do I feel like I have abandoned Honda and the
VFR? Honda, NO. The VFR, a bit. But, personally I feel that since
Honda has refused to produce a VFR that its customers have been
begging for for years that Honda has abandoned me.
I'm sad to see the end of the VFR's production. Of all the
vehicles I've owned (cage/motorcycle) my VFR has been the one
I've had the longest and enjoyed the most. A friend on another
list I'm on made this comment when I posted about purchasing the
TSST, "Congrats on the new ride, hope it brings you more joy than
the viffer ever did." If it does it is going to be one hell of a
ride. :-)
Hope everyone has a nice Thanksgiving.
Speed Safe,
Don
06 Sprint ST
96 VFR
San Diego, CA.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Adams"
To: ; "'David Thompson'"

Cc:
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 6:43 AM
Subject: RE: VFR Discontinued/Replacement? CycleWorld story


>
> Well said Fred. That's why today most of you enthusiasts have
> so many bikes
> in your garage 'cause you want one for every season and every
> occasion. I
> would too if the wife and the insurance company was more
> supportive of my
> dreams to have a garage full. IMHO the VFR has basically
> stayed the same:
> around 500 lbs, around 100HP, comfortable seating position, and
> adequate
> suspension. Back in the day it kept up with more sporting
> rides, but
> nowadays the ante is too big to even keep up w/ the 600s.
> Weights are way
> down, hp & ft-lbs are way up and available suspension bits are
> phenomenal.
> So in today's bunch, the viffer is solidly a "tweener" whereas
> in the 80s &
> 90s it was more of a sleeper, plus a great companion for the
> long haul
> (never a great companion hauler, though). It WAS always more
> sport than
> tour. Now it can't sport enough. In today's bunch all it is a
> solid
> commuter with available lean angle, and with enough handling
> and go for the
> street.
>
> Lee
>
> Fred wrote:
>>The VFR is a 'tweener if ever there was one. I dare say that
>>lightening
>>it by 75 lbs and adding 30 hp would not change that one iota.
>>There
>>would still be far better sport bikes and far better touring
>>bikes.
>
> _______________________________________________
> vfr mailing list
> vfr@xxxxxx
> For subscription and delivery options:
> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vfr
>
> _______________________________________________
> vfr mailing list
> vfr@xxxxxx
> For subscription and delivery options:
> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vfr

_______________________________________________
vfr mailing list
vfr@xxxxxx
For subscription and delivery options:
https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vfr

Let's face it everyone, in the Sport/Touring market at Honda the
ST is like the gifted child that gets anything and everything it
wants and then some and the VFR has become like the bastard child
that is fed just enough to keep it healthy. Minor improvements
here and there for the VFR while the ST gets the major make over
and all the bells and whistles. And now the VFR, like the bastard
child when they turn 18, is being booted out the door.
I've enjoyed my 96 VFR immensely over the almost 7 years I've had
it. It has 66k miles on it and still runs great. I always wanted
a new one but Honda never saw fit to bring the blue model to the
US. I did actually go and look at an 06 the other day and thought
seriously about trying to make a deal on it but I haven't heard
anything good about the V-TEC engine so I shied away from it.
Yesterday I went out and bought an 06 Triumph Sprint ST. A blue
one, of course. Do I feel like I have abandoned Honda and the
VFR? Honda, NO. The VFR, a bit. But, personally I feel that since
Honda has refused to produce a VFR that its customers have been
begging for for years that Honda has abandoned me.
I'm sad to see the end of the VFR's production. Of all the
vehicles I've owned (cage/motorcycle) my VFR has been the one
I've had the longest and enjoyed the most. A friend on another
list I'm on made this comment when I posted about purchasing the
TSST, "Congrats on the new ride, hope it brings you more joy than
the viffer ever did." If it does it is going to be one hell of a
ride. :-)
Hope everyone has a nice Thanksgiving.
Speed Safe,
Don
06 Sprint ST
96 VFR
San Diego, CA.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Adams"
To: ; "'David Thompson'"

Cc:
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 6:43 AM
Subject: RE: VFR Discontinued/Replacement? CycleWorld story


>
> Well said Fred. That's why today most of you enthusiasts have
> so many bikes
> in your garage 'cause you want one for every season and every
> occasion. I
> would too if the wife and the insurance company was more
> supportive of my
> dreams to have a garage full. IMHO the VFR has basically
> stayed the same:
> around 500 lbs, around 100HP, comfortable seating position, and
> adequate
> suspension. Back in the day it kept up with more sporting
> rides, but
> nowadays the ante is too big to even keep up w/ the 600s.
> Weights are way
> down, hp & ft-lbs are way up and available suspension bits are
> phenomenal.
> So in today's bunch, the viffer is solidly a "tweener" whereas
> in the 80s &
> 90s it was more of a sleeper, plus a great companion for the
> long haul
> (never a great companion hauler, though). It WAS always more
> sport than
> tour. Now it can't sport enough. In today's bunch all it is a
> solid
> commuter with available lean angle, and with enough handling
> and go for the
> street.
>
> Lee
>
> Fred wrote:
>>The VFR is a 'tweener if ever there was one. I dare say that
>>lightening
>>it by 75 lbs and adding 30 hp would not change that one iota.
>>There
>>would still be far better sport bikes and far better touring
>>bikes.
>
> _______________________________________________
> vfr mailing list
> vfr@xxxxxx
> For subscription and delivery options:
> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vfr
>
> _______________________________________________
> vfr mailing list
> vfr@xxxxxx
> For subscription and delivery options:
> https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vfr

_______________________________________________
vfr mailing list
vfr@xxxxxx
For subscription and delivery options:
https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vfr