Page 1 of 4

Cruisers/Tourers vs. Sport Tourers

Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 6:40 am
by tonyric
So, here is my situation... I am in Afghanistan right now and am looking to purchase my third bike when I return Sept 2011. My 08 V-Star 650 just isn't cutting it any longer as I find myself riding longer and longer on my typical trips. I have been looking at the following:

cruisers:
Yamaha V-Star 1300 Tourer
Yamaha Raider and Stryker (yes I know they are choppers)
Suzuki Boulevard M109R
Kawasaki Vulcan 1700 Nomad

sport tourers:
Yamaha FJR1300
Kawasaki Concours 14 ABS

I have only ridden cruisers so I am looking to those of you that have opinions after moving toward one or the other having owned/ridden both. I am looking for something good for long trips (1000 miles in 2-3 days) and also something good for commuting. I have sat on M109R and Vulcan, and owning V-Star I can't imagine the 1300 is much different other than size and weight.

What are your opinions either way, pluses and minus'?

Thanks
Tony

Re: Cruisers/Tourers vs. Sport Tourers

Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 11:41 am
by JC Viper
I rode my Vulcan 500 1000 miles in 2 days then another 320 mile trip 3 weeks later. Put on ~40K miles on it before being totaled.
Switched to a 1984 GPz 900 (Ninja 900R) which is now considered a sport tourer and put on 7k miles on it so far.

I know the engines are different in size but both are smooth at 75MPH but the Vulcan left me quite sore and tired when riding really long distances. The GPz does not and I find I can go much further. Also Sport tourers have bigger fuel tanks compared to cruisers so refueling is less often. Sport tourers also handle better than cruisers, have more options for powered accessories and better wind protection and aerodynamics.

Sport tourers tend to be more ergonomic than sport bikes or cruisers but that varies from bike to bike and person to person.

Re: Cruisers/Tourers vs. Sport Tourers

Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 1:49 pm
by Lion_Lady
The FJR and Concours are more often tricked out as long distance rally machines, than any of the cruisers. That is, they are frequently chosen by those who will ride for 15 to 20 hours in 24. They handle well, and the more upright/tilted slightly forward (NOT leaning on hands or tank) is more comfortable for long seat time. The leaned back seating position exaggerates the curve or your lower spine which can result in back pain.

Don't discount BMWs as another possible option. The inline 4s (K bikes) and flat twins (R bikes/oilheads) are dependable, mile eating machines, with plenty of comfort/touring options available.

P

Re: Cruisers/Tourers vs. Sport Tourers

Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 12:04 am
by tonyric
I like the BMW's a lot, my problem with them is the entry price. :)

Re: Cruisers/Tourers vs. Sport Tourers

Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 12:09 pm
by ibswooft
Ask someone about a backrest for yourself with a cruiser.

Re: Cruisers/Tourers vs. Sport Tourers

Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 1:57 pm
by jstark47
Don't forget, big adventure tourers (R/GS, VStrom, Stelvio, Tiger, Ulysses, etc.) make almost-as-good sport tourers as the sport touring genre does.

Re: Cruisers/Tourers vs. Sport Tourers

Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 12:06 am
by tonyric
ibswooft wrote:Ask someone about a backrest for yourself with a cruiser.
The backrest would be on the list if I go the cruiser route. :)

Re: Cruisers/Tourers vs. Sport Tourers

Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 12:08 am
by tonyric
jstark47 wrote:Don't forget, big adventure tourers (R/GS, VStrom, Stelvio, Tiger, Ulysses, etc.) make almost-as-good sport tourers as the sport touring genre does.
I hadn't considered them, and I was thinking that the sport tourers above have a LOT more power than I need, I will have to check them out. :) Thanks

Re: Cruisers/Tourers vs. Sport Tourers

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:42 am
by tonyric
So, after looking at all of the above and a few new ones (reviews and previews) for 2011, I have narrowed the list to:

cruisers:
Yamaha V-Star 1300 Tourer
Kawasaki Vulcan 1700 Vaquero

sport tourers:
Yamaha FJR1300
Kawasaki Concours 14 ABS

Pluses' and minus' to all of the bikes listed.

I didn't look at the BMW's as I am buying new, not used (can be 2007 new but not previously owned), because of the price.

I didn't consider any of the adventure tourers because of the aggressive seating positions compared to the ST's. I am not considering the Honda ST1300 for the same reason as the BMW, I am not one ot pay for a name, I would rather pay for features, not names.

What are everyone's personal opinions of the remaining 4 bikes?

Re: Cruisers/Tourers vs. Sport Tourers

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 5:15 am
by jstark47
tonyric wrote:I didn't consider any of the adventure tourers because of the aggressive seating positions compared to the ST's.
WTF???? :confused: Aggressive seating position? On an ADV bike? What are you talking about? Have you ever sat on one of these? The seating position is totally neutral, bone-standard, straight up and down. Sport-tourers often will have you leaning over in something starting to approach a sport bike position.