Are motorcycles getting better, worse, or staying the same?

[ctfz1]

Sometimes yes, sometimes not. Gen2 FZ1 is better sporty bike (when sorted) than Gen 1. First gen suits me fine, with minor mods.  Sport or Cruiser are better, standards what were they thinking? Marketing is trying.  VFR  vtec not. Sprint certainly. fjr1300AE NOT. New BMWs?

[Hardware]

I see your point, Hardware. But mine was a reference that Vifferati biotch about Honda not upgrading the VFR (more displacement or less weight, pick one) for the last 3, 4 years.

I agree 120%.  If they made a litre+ version of the Viffer I'da had one in a New York minute.

That said, they are still awesome, refined bikes.  Just compare a stock early generation VFR to anything comparable from the same model year.  Better yet, look at an average '70s era UJM to anything made in the US or the UK at that time.

[basco]

I say they are getting better unless you own a VFR.  

[mdloops]

I used to own a 2003 VFR.  Lets put it this way the 800CC VFR (if i remember correctly) is actually heavier than my brother's busa with a 1300+CC engine. ? I think the bike has a lot of character, but I just do not see why honda makes it so heavy.  BTW: I used to think the VFR handled well until I bought the R6.  In terms of performance (engine, handling) the VFR sucks compared to a super sport.  I mean, I know it does all things well, but it truely does not handle that well.  IF you think it does then just hop on any generic sport bike and go find some corners.

Honda needs to shave it down to 500 LBS (Full tank) and at least increase the hp to the stock numbers of a 600CC Supersport.  The VFR is WAY too heavy.  I loved it though and should have bought another one over my 07 R6, but oh well.  

[Mike-H]

Definitely better....from a running prospective....but worse in the sense with a lot of new bikes if the battery goes dead....your stuck....good luck bum starting alot of them....so maybe the answer is staying the same?.... .....

[Stormer]

In general way?
Better, for sure.

But, just a moment...if so, why I drive a 1975 bike?

[Busy Little Whiner]

Motorcycles in general are getting better... someday they might even surpass Mr.RC45... but I believe that honor will got to the Desmosedici V4... that is of course if Ducati ever releases it... mercy...

[jschmidt]

While I'm as guilty as anyone of nostalgia --why the heck else would I look at ebay ads for XS650s, of which I've owned three --  I'll say it again: this is the golden age of motorcycling. The quality, value, and reliability of today's bikes is unprecedented.

We own two, my wife's '79 Special and my '76 Standard. Bikes are getting better every year, but what the old bikes teach us is that they were quite servicable, just as much fun and that the improvements over time are basically incremental rather than earth-shattering.

[jhampshire]

Kawasakis get better about every 20 years.  That's how long they run a model before replacing it.  Having said that, why change something that works so well.

Send me your unwanted Concours!!!!

[Oilhed]

They are getting better but, some types are disappearing.  The smaller displacement bikes, between 600 & 1000cc are mostly gone.  Also, some are becoming overly complicated. Something like the Kawi Concours has no replacement.

[timk]

   When I started riding, I had to carry 2 spare sparkplugs, due to the weak ignitions back then. I think the # of Iron Butters has gone up steadilly also,to the point of making 1500 the new bench mark.

[Lawn Dart]

Good topic.  Actually, very good topic.  Are bikes getting better?  The real question is, can someone define better?  Better what, power?  Handling?  Reliability?  Economy?

Power:  Yes, bikes are more powerful.  However to get more power more fuel needs to be burned.  Sorry, there's no other way around it.  1000+cc superbikes are increadible bikes, but to make 180 hp means that they have to burn fuel at a rate that can support 180hp.  People bitch about Buell's XB12r only making "100hp" in an antiquated aircooled motor that redlines at 7k.  Buell also advertises as much as 65mpg on the highway...  Low horses, low power...higher fuel economy.  Damned, that equation hasn't changed since, what?  The advent of the internal combustion engine.  The real question?  What is actually needed in the real world.  

But build a bike for the real world it's tossed in the trash without a single kind word.  Honda Deauxville anyone?  Honda Hornet 919?  BMW telelever and to some extent hossack suspensions, maligned and distrusted by the press.  The telelever front is a marvel of technology and allows a 600+ # bike to handle far better than any bike weighing 600+ should - damn, it's not an Ohlins USD fork and doesn't give enough feedback on the track...the hell with the real world.

Bike manufacturers who have answered the question of "what is needed in the real world" are ridiculed and labeled as "Never-has-beens" and lousy bikes.  BMW Boxers, VFR's, Buells, Bandit 1200's - all piss poor examples of overweight (VFR), underpowered (Buell, Bandit - note that the bandit and the xb12r make the same power:  100 horses), Techno-inferior (Buell, Bandit), Techno-superior (VFR, BMW) bikes that are maligned by the bike press for their shortcomings of not having Busa-like power or 600cc handling.

Bikes ARE getting better.  It's our attitudes that are getting worse.  

People, moto-journalists, riders, US, we want, no DEMAND higher horsepower bikes.  We DEMAND that Honda make a bike that can do cut sub 10 second quarter miles.  We DEMAND that Yamaha make a 1000cc bike handle like a 400.  We DEMAND more specialization.  We DEMAND that Michelin build tires that stick to walls without warmup.  

We DEMAND extremes.  Yet we don't live in the extreme.

Yes, we ARE living in the Golden Age of Motorcycling.

We are just too stupid to get it.

[Hardware]

Good topic.  Actually, very good topic.  Are bikes getting better?  The real question is, can someone define better?  Better what, power?  Handling?  Reliability?  Economy?

Power:  Yes, bikes are more powerful.  However to get more power more fuel needs to be burned.  Sorry, there's no other way around it.  1000+cc superbikes are increadible bikes, but to make 180 hp means that they have to burn fuel at a rate that can support 180hp.  People bitch about Buell's XB12r only making "100hp" in an antiquated aircooled motor that redlines at 7k.  Buell also advertises as much as 65mpg on the highway...  Low horses, low power...higher fuel economy.  Damned, that equation hasn't changed since, what?  The advent of the internal combustion engine.  The real question?  What is actually needed in the real world.  

But build a bike for the real world it's tossed in the trash without a single kind word.  Honda Deauxville anyone?  Honda Hornet 919?  BMW telelever and to some extent hossack suspensions, maligned and distrusted by the press.  The telelever front is a marvel of technology and allows a 600+ # bike to handle far better than any bike weighing 600+ should - damn, it's not an Ohlins USD fork and doesn't give enough feedback on the track...the hell with the real world.

Bike manufacturers who have answered the question of "what is needed in the real world" are ridiculed and labeled as "Never-has-beens" and lousy bikes.  BMW Boxers, VFR's, Buells, Bandit 1200's - all piss poor examples of overweight (VFR), underpowered (Buell, Bandit - note that the bandit and the xb12r make the same power:  100 horses), Techno-inferior (Buell, Bandit), Techno-superior (VFR, BMW) bikes that are maligned by the bike press for their shortcomings of not having Busa-like power or 600cc handling.

Bikes ARE getting better.  It's our attitudes that are getting worse.  

People, moto-journalists, riders, US, we want, no DEMAND higher horsepower bikes.  We DEMAND that Honda make a bike that can do cut sub 10 second quarter miles.  We DEMAND that Yamaha make a 1000cc bike handle like a 400.  We DEMAND more specialization.  We DEMAND that Michelin build tires that stick to walls without warmup.  

We DEMAND extremes.  Yet we don't live in the extreme.

Yes, we ARE living in the Golden Age of Motorcycling.

We are just too stupid to get it.

Well said.    Now, go take a valium and lie down with a cold cloth on your forehead...

[Lawn Dart]

LMAO!  Nice  

[Busy Little Whiner]

We DEMAND extremes.  Yet we don't live in the extreme.

Yes, we ARE living in the Golden Age of Motorcycling.

We are just too stupid to get it.

WTG... I like this train of thought...

[sprale]

It all depends...

Harley's are still gas guzzlers. No one imports a decent 250 other than Kawasaki. A true standard is hard to find anymore. Good small bikes are still only foreign market.

On the other hand, more people are riding today than ever here in the States. The bikes themselves are inexpensive forms of transportation for those not wanting a huge car payment. Keep a beater cage at home and take the bike every day, no problem. Especially in metropolitans. Fuel economy is good, but not leaps beyond the 1950s.

I suppose it is all a matter of opinion...

[highside]

It all depends...

Harley's are still gas guzzlers. No one imports a decent 250 other than Kawasaki. A true standard is hard to find anymore. Good small bikes are still only foreign market.

On the other hand, more people are riding today than ever here in the States. The bikes themselves are inexpensive forms of transportation for those not wanting a huge car payment. Keep a beater cage at home and take the bike every day, no problem. Especially in metropolitans. Fuel economy is good, but not leaps beyond the 1950s.

I suppose it is all a matter of opinion...

I think the reason why bikes in the US arent made for economy is because there isnt really a huge market for them here. Most bikes are sold as toys and luxury items in this country, few people consider them to be legitimate modes of transportation. If that changes the shear size of our market might prompt the manufacturers to start considering the importation (and innovation) of new economy models. There is probably a huge potential for more fuel effecient (and still well performing) motorcycles, there just isnt enough money at stake to justify making them yet.

[maddjack]

Good topic.  Actually, very good topic.  Are bikes getting better?  The real question is, can someone define better?  Better what, power?  Handling?  Reliability?  Economy?

Power:  Yes, bikes are more powerful.  However to get more power more fuel needs to be burned.  Sorry, there's no other way around it.  1000+cc superbikes are increadible bikes, but to make 180 hp means that they have to burn fuel at a rate that can support 180hp.  People bitch about Buell's XB12r only making "100hp" in an antiquated aircooled motor that redlines at 7k.  Buell also advertises as much as 65mpg on the highway...  Low horses, low power...higher fuel economy.  Damned, that equation hasn't changed since, what?  The advent of the internal combustion engine.  The real question?  What is actually needed in the real world.  

But build a bike for the real world it's tossed in the trash without a single kind word.  Honda Deauxville anyone?  Honda Hornet 919?  BMW telelever and to some extent hossack suspensions, maligned and distrusted by the press.  The telelever front is a marvel of technology and allows a 600+ # bike to handle far better than any bike weighing 600+ should - damn, it's not an Ohlins USD fork and doesn't give enough feedback on the track...the hell with the real world.

Bike manufacturers who have answered the question of "what is needed in the real world" are ridiculed and labeled as "Never-has-beens" and lousy bikes.  BMW Boxers, VFR's, Buells, Bandit 1200's - all piss poor examples of overweight (VFR), underpowered (Buell, Bandit - note that the bandit and the xb12r make the same power:  100 horses), Techno-inferior (Buell, Bandit), Techno-superior (VFR, BMW) bikes that are maligned by the bike press for their shortcomings of not having Busa-like power or 600cc handling.

Bikes ARE getting better.  It's our attitudes that are getting worse.  

People, moto-journalists, riders, US, we want, no DEMAND higher horsepower bikes.  We DEMAND that Honda make a bike that can do cut sub 10 second quarter miles.  We DEMAND that Yamaha make a 1000cc bike handle like a 400.  We DEMAND more specialization.  We DEMAND that Michelin build tires that stick to walls without warmup.  

We DEMAND extremes.  Yet we don't live in the extreme.

Yes, we ARE living in the Golden Age of Motorcycling.

We are just too stupid to get it.

excellent post,well said

[xbud]

 I think the more horsepower, better braking, better handling bikes of today beat the bikes of just 5 years ago, Hands Down...