Originally Posted by rlv
If you got to run up to a 100 mph to finally over take an fjr, what is the use. Sure, even in the report they said that the gt would finally over take the fjr in high speed.
And just what do you consider high speed?
Originally Posted by SportRider
60-80 MPH, 80-100 MPH
BMW: 3.10 sec., 3.28 sec.
Kawasaki: 4.28 sec., 4.74 sec.
Yamaha: 3.73 sec., 4.36 sec.
BMW: 152.3 mph
Kawasaki: 150.2 mph
Yamaha: 146.2 mph
BMW: 10.69 sec. @ 130.5 mph
Kawasaki: 10.52 sec. @ 130.5 mph
Yamaha: 10.93 sec. @ 124.7 mph
So the GT wins on 60-80 and 80-100 roll-on, it wins at top speed, and it beats the FJR and matches the Connie for speed in the 1/4 mile.
So much for the accuracy of the ass-dyno. Obviously even the "professional" ones are mis-calibrated.
Remember, this article was from Sport
Rider mag. The three testers blatantly admitted none of the bikes were "sporty" enough for them, and the BMW is the least "sporty" (meaning most comfortable) of the bunch. But I can tell you that out on the open roads, it hangs with just about anything out there and is a hell of a lot more comfortable while doing so. I think those guys would have been better off testing a Hayabusa/ZX14, or maybe they should stick with the GSXR/R1 and stay on the track.
Besides, these guys didn't even ask the most important question: which of these bikes can be fitted with highway pegs?
I have the same response to the "slab-sided" fairing as I do the roundel. Basically, I don't care what a bike looks like from the side. I care what it looks and feels
like while riding. What some random stranger thinks is so totally out of the picture for me as to be irrelevant. I chose the bike that works for me
, and when and if something better for me
comes along, then I'll switch.
And as to who really runs that hard, well there are a few of us, but we're usually too busy riding to pay attention to such worthless and blatantly biased reviews.