I have never been so excited by a new bike...

However, I just know it will be a disappointment.

There is no real market for proper adventure bikes. There is a HUGE market for bloated, over weight , super expensive and over 'gadgeted' rolling sofa's with pretend knobblies. They are the big selling bikes. Honda want to make lots of money, not keep a few die-hards happy.

My guess it that it's going to be a 1200 rolling computer with a big tank, wide seat and weigh 250kg dry.. And cost more than any serious overlander could get a carnet for. Like Mollydog says, it will be like the big KTM's and BMW's. Great for posing and standing up on the pegs over a gravel driveway.


If they went head to head with the Triumph 800XC, then I'd be seriously impressed.

__________________
Did some trips.
Rode some bikes.
Fix them for a living.
Can't say anymore.

You're not wrong, mate. I was very much looking forward to the launch of a LIGHTER, bike. No need for a 1200cc motor, no need for 150 hp, etc, no need for ride by wire electronics.

Just LIGHTER, as proof HONDA was putting it's "TRUE" Adventure money where it's mouth is....

Disappointed, as well. And a bit outraged. HONDA comes on with this "True" Adventure hype, dances around the essential WEIGHT factor in the promo video by saying, "Well, really, when riding it, it FEELS light".

Give me a break.

Other than than for the 'mystique' of the old Africa Twin on which HONDA marketing is so flagrantly piggybacking, other than the "UNTrue Adventure" nomenclature, other than the narrow profile (which IS good, thanks for small favors!)... why would anyone with his head not in the sand buy a 93 HP, sub 1000cc bike instead of.....

1200 cc GS, MST, KTM at 20% greater displacement?
at 50-60% greater HP?
at the SAME 500 lbs+

So, let's see. WAY Overweight. 50% Underpowered. 20% Undercapacity.

And.... OVERHYPED.

__________________
"If you're not on the Edge, you're taking up too much room."

That's my main problem with the specs. OK, so a Honda will be (hopefully) very reliable, BUT at the same (to a few KGs) weight as a 1200GS it's not going to work for many people. If it weighed the same and had more power, I could see the point; if it weighed the same with a full, larger tank I could see the point; if power were roughly the same but it weighed less, I could see the point. I guess they're banking on DTC selling the bike over everything else.

For me, it's too heavy for real off road (my F800 isn't exactly light, although it is less than the new AT!), it isn't spec'd enough to compete with road tourers (no cruise control etc) and it doesn't seem flash enough (electronics wise - fancy suspension etc) for bragging rights down the pub. I'm a little confused who this might be for? I read somewhere that someone else felt they'd made a bike "just good enough", without really going overboard. When the new Fireblade came out in the '90's, the low weight changed the face of the sports bike - I appreciate 'off road' bikes take more punishment, but to have not really shown any interest at all about addressing this aspect of a new bike is a real disappointment.

Still, perhaps they'll be a smaller cc version in the future

I doubt this, however. Fewer cc's cost the same to produce, but sell for less. The economics of the situation say this is unlikely to happen.

what you said, plus the cost will be over $10K usd. I sold my highly modified klr and stashed the $ to buy one of these, until I saw the weight. I have a very nice dl650 instead.

Nearly 1/4 tonne kerb weight in the DCT model.
Honda Worldwide | October 16, 2015 "16YM HONDA CRF1000L Africa Twin"

Near future bike shows will produce pricing information.

The claimed fuel economy figure is about 61 miles per UK gallon, by the way.

__________________
Dave

From the above website: "The lightweight subframe features diagonal cross bracing and will carry a cargo weight of 30kg".

Now, if it's essentially (as near as damn it) the same weight as a 12GS, then this doesn't sound like a lot. Perhaps the 30KG is in addition to a pillion? I appreciate that the mantra here is often 'lighter is better', but as Honda seem to be pitching the new AT pretty much in the same territory as the BM, then this figure looks a bit weedy.

234kg for the ABS model is just too heavy!

I think it's going to be OK for it's intended audience. I'd call the new AT a road biased "All Rounder" sports touring ADV bike. Will probably compete more directly with other similar bikes in class:
Yamaha 1200 Tenere'
Suzuki DL1000
Aprilia Capo Nord

May not be able to match off road ability with BMW or KTM. But hopefully the price will reflect this ... should be thousands less than either. (Honda have not released price yet, far as I know)

If it's comfortable on highway two up, doesn't vibe too much, has reasonably quiet shield and gets good fuel economy ... could be a winner for Honda. I do like the LOOK of the bike. Think that's not important? IT IS!

I'm sure the 30 kgs. figure is for the rear rack alone. That is A LOT for a rear rack. Rear racks typically rated about 11 kgs.
(3 Tigers, CapoNord, Vstroms, GS's) I'd never hang that much crap off the back. Asking for trouble on washboard roads.

But this AT may never go too far beyond nice dirt roads? But should be a good "bad road" bike ... which frankly is what most riders really want.