Poll
Question: Pick one from each option category
Engine config: I4 - 176 (0.7%)
Engine config: I3 - 78 (0.3%)
Engine config: I2 - 11 (0%)
Engine config: V2 or opposed twin - 122 (0.5%)
Engine config: V4 - 233 (0.9%)
Engine config: specify below - 5 (0%)
Displacement:  ~750cc - 78 (0.3%)
Displacement:  ~1000cc - 247 (1%)
Displacement:  ~1200cc - 219 (0.9%)
Displacement:  ~1400cc - 90 (0.4%)
Wet weight:  ~500 lbs - 283 (1.1%)
Wet weight:  ~550 lbs - 227 (0.9%)
Wet weight:  ~600 lbs - 77 (0.3%)
Wet weight:  ~650 lbs - 24 (0.1%)
Final drive: chain - 120 (0.5%)
Final drive: shaft - 364 (1.5%)
Final drive: belt - 139 (0.6%)
Fuel: ~5.0 gal - 91 (0.4%)
Fuel: ~6.0 gal - 328 (1.3%)
Fuel: ~7.0 gal - 203 (0.8%)
Ergos: Manual adjust (seat, bars, pegs) - 495 (2%)
Ergos: Static - 81 (0.3%)
Heated: Grips - 199 (0.8%)
Heated: Grips & seat - 166 (0.7%)
Heated: Optional - 201 (0.8%)
ABS: Standard - 223 (0.9%)
ABS: Optional - 355 (1.4%)
Windscreen: Motorized - 312 (1.3%)
Windscreen: Manual step adjust - 190 (0.8%)
Windscreen: Static - 98 (0.4%)
Windscreen: Naked! - 13 (0.1%)
Swingarm: Standard - 255 (1%)
Swingarm: Single sided - 306 (1.2%)
Hardbags: Standard integrated - 33 (0.1%)
Hardbags: Standard removable - 460 (1.9%)
Hardbags: Optional - 114 (0.5%)
GPS: Integrated - 120 (0.5%)
GPS: Optional - 396 (1.6%)
Suspension: ESA type - 85 (0.3%)
Suspension: Fully adjustable, manual - 434 (1.8%)
Suspension: Semi-adjustable - 72 (0.3%)
Power outlets: 1 standard - 129 (0.5%)
Power outlets: 2 standard - 309 (1.2%)
Power outlets: 3 standard - 96 (0.4%)
Power outlets: optional - 68 (0.3%)
Instruments:  Mostly analog (like the current Busa) - 320 (1.3%)
Instruments:  Mostly digital with full computer - 274 (1.1%)
Engine cooling:  Liquid - 551 (2.2%)
Engine cooling:  Air/oil - 61 (0.2%)
Color options: 1 - 29 (0.1%)
Color options: More than 1 - 522 (2.1%)
Gas tank:  metal - 462 (1.9%)
Gas tank:  plastic - 103 (0.4%)
Generator output:  ~500W - 42 (0.2%)
Generator output:  ~600W - 240 (1%)
Generator output:  ~700W - 286 (1.2%)
Gears: 5 - 35 (0.1%)
Gears: 6 - 576 (2.3%)
Signals: Integrated, self canceling - 321 (1.3%)
Signals: Integrated, manual canceling - 174 (0.7%)
Signals: On stalks, self canceling - 64 (0.3%)
Signals: On stalks, manual canceling - 41 (0.2%)
Cruise control:  Standard - 226 (0.9%)
Cruise control:  optional - 331 (1.3%)
Linked brakes:  Yes - 179 (0.7%)
Linked brakes:  No - 391 (1.6%)
Lights: HID - 459 (1.9%)
Lights: Standard - 116 (0.5%)
Tail light: LED - 493 (2%)
Tail light: Standard - 70 (0.3%)
Glove box: Yes - 368 (1.5%)
Glove box: No - 160 (0.6%)
Underseat helmet hooks: Yes - 384 (1.6%)
Underseat helmet hooks: No - 145 (0.6%)
Front brakes: Standard - 197 (0.8%)
Front brakes: Radial mount - 347 (1.4%)
Front fork: Standard - 156 (0.6%)
Front fork: USD Standard - 300 (1.2%)
Front fork: Single sided (like GTS) - 12 (0%)
Front fork: Paralever, duolever, Hossack, etc - 86 (0.3%)
Fueling: Fuel injection - 571 (2.3%)
Fueling: Old school carbs - 28 (0.1%)
Wheels: 17 inch - 511 (2.1%)
Wheels: Other (specify below) - 10 (0%)
Ignition: Manual key - 446 (1.8%)
Ignition: KPASS type (keyless) - 112 (0.5%)
Instrument controls:  Left side, dash mount - 192 (0.8%)
Instrument controls:  Right side, dash mount - 51 (0.2%)
Instrument controls:  Left side, bar mount - 192 (0.8%)
Instrument controls:  Right side, bar mount - 29 (0.1%)
Mirrors: Adjustable length, manual - 340 (1.4%)
Mirrors: Standard - 199 (0.8%)
Frame styling:  Aluminum - 222 (0.9%)
Frame styling:  Annodized aluminum (ie. black) - 205 (0.8%)
Frame styling: Trellis type - 100 (0.4%)
Overall styling:  Angular, aggressive - 114 (0.5%)
Overall styling:  Angular, conservative - 102 (0.4%)
Overall styling:  Smooth, aggressive - 261 (1.1%)
Overall styling:  Smooth, conservative - 90 (0.4%)
Fairing: Forms of adjustable ducting - 256 (1%)
Fairing: Engine mostly sealed - 88 (0.4%)
Fairing: Traditional type ducting - 174 (0.7%)
Exhaust: Single side - 175 (0.7%)
Exhaust: Dual - 250 (1%)
Exhaust: Underseat - 155 (0.6%)
Cat: Between header and can - 194 (0.8%)
Cat: In can - 252 (1%)
Valve train: Variable for perf and/or mileage - 198 (0.8%)
Valve train: Standard overhead - 255 (1%)
Valve train: Desmo type - 39 (0.2%)
Valve adjust: ~10K miles - 25 (0.1%)
Valve adjust: ~20K miles - 184 (0.7%)
Valve adjust: ~30K miles - 312 (1.3%)
Valve adjust type: Screw - 132 (0.5%)
Valve adjust type: Shim over bucket - 70 (0.3%)
Valve adjust type: Shim under bucket - 59 (0.2%)
Valve adjust type: Hydraulic type - 235 (0.9%)
Ideal price point for options you picked:  $8000 - 64 (0.3%)
Ideal price point for options you picked:  $10000 - 116 (0.5%)
Ideal price point for options you picked:  $12000 - 210 (0.8%)
Ideal price point for options you picked:  $14000 - 130 (0.5%)
Ideal price point for options you picked:  $16000 - 71 (0.3%)
Ideal price point for options you picked:  $18000 - 14 (0.1%)
Ideal price point for options you picked:  $20000+ - 4 (0%)
Load capacity:  Specifically designed for solo STing - 190 (0.8%)
Load capacity:  Traditional 2 up touring - 286 (1.2%)
Total Voters: 619

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5  All   Go Down
Print

Topic: Design the ST.N sport tourer!  (Read 24148 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
UFO
*

Reputation 184
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: Duc MTS1200R
GPS: Here in the now...
Miles Typed: 13100

My Photo Gallery


Teh rainbows!!



« on: August 15, 2007, 03:15:59 PM »

The poll to end all polls. Lol

Everyone likes to talk about what they think makes the perfect sport-touring bike.  Here's your chance.

Make your votes, but please only vote once in each category.  Please vote the combinations you ACTUALLY like to see on a bike, regardless of what you currently own.  If it happens to match what you own, great.  But try not to let what you currently own bias your choices.  There are 43 categories.  The poll will not let you vote more than that.  So only pick one from each category.

I tried to think of as many relevent options as possible.  If something isn't covered in the poll choices, post it below.  I can added choices to the poll if some good ones come up.

Keep in mind that you can't have your cake and eat it too when it comes to design.  Options cost money.  Options cost weight.  Try to make logical choices.  You can't have a 1400cc bike with a huge tank and tons of options weigh 500lbs wet.

A horsepower/torque option isn't given.  It's assumed that's baked into the displacement choice, and that the bikes are tuned for performance and not greatly neutered.

Have fun!  Maybe some lurkers will find this information useful.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2007, 03:18:48 PM by UFO » Logged

Neal
InfiniSpace.Net - A site for geeks/nerds
bubba zanetti

« Reply #1 on: August 15, 2007, 03:22:42 PM »

The poll to start all trolls??  Twofinger

That was fun ...  Thumbsup
Logged
desert_rider
When in doubt - keep moving!
*

Reputation 18
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '07, '08
Years Supported: '11
Motorcycles: 2000 Suzuki Bandit 1200s, 1977 Yamaha XS360
GPS: Yucca Valley, SoCal
Miles Typed: 2307

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #2 on: August 15, 2007, 03:33:38 PM »

I skipped engine config. - I don't care as long as the engine is solid and has an appropriate amount of power.  Also - I love old school analog guages, but wouldn't mind a digital trip computer.
Logged

   IBA#39121
Stray Cat
*

Reputation 15
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '07, '09, '10
Years Supported: '11
Motorcycles: 2001 "Damn Sexy" Honda CBR1100XX
GPS: Isle of Cat, Pugetopolis
Miles Typed: 2565

My Photo Gallery


Weeeeeee!!!!!


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #3 on: August 15, 2007, 03:39:31 PM »

Hey Skip, are you going to send the results off to Honda?   Wink
Logged
UFO
*

Reputation 184
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: Duc MTS1200R
GPS: Here in the now...
Miles Typed: 13100

My Photo Gallery


Teh rainbows!!



« Reply #4 on: August 15, 2007, 04:00:19 PM »

I added an option at the end about Load Capacity.  The reason ST bikes are on the porky side is because one of the main design requirements is that they handle 2 up touring.  Personally the only stuff I ever haul around is myself and what's in the bags.  Removing a 2 up type requirement (if it isn't agains some DOT rule  Rolleyes ) would lighten these bikes up considerably.
Logged

Neal
InfiniSpace.Net - A site for geeks/nerds
jude
Refried Confusion
*

Reputation 10
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: FJR1300
GPS: SoCal
Miles Typed: 2119

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #5 on: August 15, 2007, 04:21:58 PM »


 You can't have a 1400cc bike with a huge tank and tons of options weigh 500lbs wet.


Yes, yes you can.  

Quote
"I want to say one word to you. Just one word."
"Yes, sir."
"Are you listening?"
"Yes, I am."
"Plastics."


The power to weight ratio of an F1 car is about 1.784 lbs/HP (current stats, full FIA spec and weight [wet with driver]).  750 HP, 1338 lbs.  The car is mostly 'plastic'.

My FJR has a PWR of 5.55, fully fueled with rider.  145HP, 805 lbs.  The bike is mostly 'metal'.

I you take the same 145 HP and use the PWR of the F1 car, the finished weight would be just 258.68 lbs!  That leaves another 240 lbs. for 'options'!

I'm just sayin'...


 Bigsmile
Logged
UFO
*

Reputation 184
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: Duc MTS1200R
GPS: Here in the now...
Miles Typed: 13100

My Photo Gallery


Teh rainbows!!



« Reply #6 on: August 15, 2007, 04:29:18 PM »

Fair point.  But we have to live in a world of every day and all day reliability, inexpensive high volume manufacturing...and lawyers.

But you make a good point.  Some of these bikes are so over designed it's kind of comical.  All for the sake of uber reliability and law suits.  The FJR frame for example.  It ludicrous how big it is. Lol

I see some people are being optimistic with their weight requirments vs. options. Bigsmile
Logged

Neal
InfiniSpace.Net - A site for geeks/nerds
jude
Refried Confusion
*

Reputation 10
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: FJR1300
GPS: SoCal
Miles Typed: 2119

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #7 on: August 15, 2007, 05:03:02 PM »

Fair point.  But we have to live in a world of every day and all day reliability, inexpensive high volume manufacturing...and lawyers.

But you make a good point.  Some of these bikes are so over designed it's kind of comical.  All for the sake of uber reliability and law suits.  The FJR frame for example.  It ludicrous how big it is. Lol

I see some people are being optimistic with their weight requirments vs. options. Bigsmile

Mass production would handle the costs, but certainly not the lawyers.  And yes, the FJR's frame is massively overdone.  The plus side is that it is very hard to hurt the damn thing.  I know of several, documented multi-crashed FJR's that are still straight and on the road.

As for the optimism...  A guy can dream, can't he?
Logged
cultureslayer
*

Reputation 9
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '08, '09
Motorcycles: '89 ex250
GPS: NC USA
Miles Typed: 5798

My Photo Gallery


furry ninja




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: August 15, 2007, 05:43:41 PM »

This poll is flawed!  Nothing below 750ccs exists?  I think a FI V2 or V4 500cc would be perfect.  I'd gladly take a VFR400.  Then again, I think most of you must pack luggage that weighs more than I do.  
Logged

Lauren
desert_rider
When in doubt - keep moving!
*

Reputation 18
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '07, '08
Years Supported: '11
Motorcycles: 2000 Suzuki Bandit 1200s, 1977 Yamaha XS360
GPS: Yucca Valley, SoCal
Miles Typed: 2307

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #9 on: August 15, 2007, 05:48:13 PM »


  Then again, I think most of you must pack luggage that weighs more than I do.  


With me it's not luggage that weighs a lot - it's me!  Lol
Logged

   IBA#39121
Yankee Dog
*

Reputation 16
Offline Offline

Years Supported: '11
Motorcycles: 12 Tiger 800 ..................... 05.Ural.GearUp ........................................ 05.BMW.F650GS
GPS: Decatur, AL
Miles Typed: 2298

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #10 on: August 15, 2007, 06:10:47 PM »


..................The reason ST bikes are on the porky side is because one of the main design requirements is that they handle 2 up touring.  ..............


I disagree.  My beemer is lighter than  both the ST and FJR1300 and the load capacity is way more.  

I do agree that the manuafactures are building way more farkles into a bike than I would prefer.  Look that the new Connie.  It got a tire pressure monitor for cryin out loud.  

My only real priorites are decent light weight, decent HP, ABS, and removeable luggage.  However since all of my touring is two up the missus will insist on comfortable ergos as well.  

Yankee Dog

Logged
vitaminC
Good for you.
*

Reputation 15
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '07
Motorcycles: BMW
GPS: Redwood City, CA
Miles Typed: 1371

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #11 on: August 15, 2007, 06:21:55 PM »


This poll is flawed!  Nothing below 750ccs exists?  I think a FI V2 or V4 500cc would be perfect.  I'd gladly take a VFR400.  Then again, I think most of you must pack luggage that weighs more than I do.  


+1 But then look what we're currently riding!  Lol
Logged
UFO
*

Reputation 184
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: Duc MTS1200R
GPS: Here in the now...
Miles Typed: 13100

My Photo Gallery


Teh rainbows!!



« Reply #12 on: August 15, 2007, 06:22:28 PM »



I disagree.  My beemer is lighter than  both the ST and FJR1300 and the load capacity is way more.  


In general my statement is correct.  Design a specific bike for solo riding vs. the same bike for 2 up riding and the solo version will be lighter due to less structure being required for the extra load capacity.  I wasn't saying a lighter bike Y can't carry more than a heavier bike X that were designed by different teams and companies using different requirements.
Logged

Neal
InfiniSpace.Net - A site for geeks/nerds
highside
*

Reputation 11
Offline Offline

GPS: Seattle
Miles Typed: 4293

My Photo Gallery




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: August 15, 2007, 07:41:43 PM »

So I wound up with a sub500lb 1000cc V-twin with belt drive, a smallish windscreen, USD fully adjustable forks, and removable hardbags, set up for one-up touring.

Basically, this with a curvey cafe type fairing (with a relatively tall windscreen) and a set of hard bags with very subtle racks that arent too hideous whithout the bags mounted, and a belt drive.



I'd honestly pay 12K or so for that, which is pretty reasonable, I think. That would accomplish everything that I have ever asked from a motorcycle. EDIT: I'd really like a 20K+ mile valve interval too.

Yeah, I know a Vstrom is actually closer to what I asked for and is readily available for a song, but your silly list didn't present a box for "not horribly ugly" or I woulda checked it, twice.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2007, 07:45:42 PM by highside » Logged
UFO
*

Reputation 184
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: Duc MTS1200R
GPS: Here in the now...
Miles Typed: 13100

My Photo Gallery


Teh rainbows!!



« Reply #14 on: August 15, 2007, 07:52:56 PM »


Yeah, I know a Vstrom is actually closer to what I asked for and is readily available for a song, but your silly list didn't present a box for "not horribly ugly" or I woulda checked it, twice.


It's a given that it shouldn't be fugly. Bigsmile  But we know that's not always the case. Crazy

BTW, some interesting information gathered already. Bigok
« Last Edit: August 15, 2007, 07:56:19 PM by UFO » Logged

Neal
InfiniSpace.Net - A site for geeks/nerds
Mookie
1/31/07 Never forget
*

Reputation -363
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '07, '10
Motorcycles: Slotard and a Duke
GPS: land of the sea chickens
Miles Typed: 7831

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #15 on: August 15, 2007, 07:58:45 PM »

NO BLINKERZZ!
Logged

Mookie, the king of stupid Obamunist trolls on STN.
-FiremanBob
highside
*

Reputation 11
Offline Offline

GPS: Seattle
Miles Typed: 4293

My Photo Gallery




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: August 15, 2007, 07:59:12 PM »




It's a given that it shouldn't be fugly. Bigsmile  But we know that's not always the case. Crazy


It seems that when a bike is clinically designed soley for its versatility or ability, that you often end up with something really ugly. I think a bike should be purchased with a little emotion involved, and that the best results are achieved when they are designed with a little as well. I think the genesis of a really great motorcycle starts off with people drawing pictures of it on bar napkins, not with a spreadsheet and a list of features.
Logged
Barabus
Junior Member
*

Reputation 10
Offline Offline

GPS: Huntington Beach, CA
Miles Typed: 113

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #17 on: August 15, 2007, 09:13:32 PM »

The good news is that Sport Touring is the second fastest growing segment, next to dual sport.  So we will be seeing a lot more innovation is the ST market.  Perhaps someone that has influence will see the Skipper's poll?
Logged

2006 FJR 1300A
cultureslayer
*

Reputation 9
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '08, '09
Motorcycles: '89 ex250
GPS: NC USA
Miles Typed: 5798

My Photo Gallery


furry ninja




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: August 15, 2007, 09:16:38 PM »




+1 But then look what we're currently riding!  Lol

Yes, I have a terminal case of small bike disease.  Sad that most of the smaller bikes are 80s leftovers, but at least they're dependable, more so than some of the current stuff.
Logged

Lauren
Chick
BMW R1200ST
*

Reputation 10
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '09
Motorcycles: BMW R1200ST
GPS: Mendocino, CA
Miles Typed: 225

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #19 on: August 15, 2007, 10:38:35 PM »

You left one out for linked brakes:  The BMW has semi linked; pull the front and the rear reacts too.  Stomp on the rear, and only the rear works.  This is great for slow parking lot speeds, or going down my 20% slope 150 foot long gravel driveway.

Great poll!  fun to see what everybody else thinks is important.
Logged

I'd Rather Die Happy Than Not Die At All
Robbie Robertson, WSWalcott'e Medecine Show
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5  All   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  



ST.N

Copyright © 2001 - 2013 Sport-Touring.Net.
All rights reserved.

SimplePortal 2.3.1 © 2008-2009, SimplePortal