Touring about europe doesn't require you have a capable off roader so thought I'd buy an Africa twin or VFR750, both are about £3000. VFR has 18K miles and AT has 45K miles. For an hour commute every day and then 2 up touring has anyone had both as I can't choose. Only point is Ive got short legs but I won't be off road so the AT height shouldn't pose a problem anyway.

I've owned a VFR800 and two Africa Twins amongst many others.

The VFR was a fantastic bike. Great handling and loads of power. Build quality was the best of any bike I've owned. I used mine two up alot and most of the time was unaware my wife was on the back. She loved the seat and found it very comfortable. I have a couple of critisms. For me, and I must be the only person in the world who found it so, it made my wrists and lower back ache on long, two hour plus rides (but then I'm old!). The other thing was was that the bike was almost too perfect. Unless I was travelling at well in excess of the speed limit there was virtually sense of speed due to the superb fairing (the only bike I didn't ever need to use ear plugs on)and the fantastically smooth engine.

I love Africa Twins. I like the riding position, the lazy V-Twin engine, the handling and for me the riding position is perfect. The seat is shorter than alot of bikes and the standard seat is not the best and thats being polite. I've fitted a 'Touratech' seat, which we find is the best for us. 'Corbin' do a replacement as well, but I found it a bit on the soft side for me. Also I love the look of the AT and all the goodies that you can fit to this type of bike. I have a 'Garmin' GPS. 'Touratech' Ali panniers, 'Acerbis' handguards, crash bars from 'African Queens' 'Baglux' harness and tank bag, 'Touratech' headlamp guard, 'Remus' can (now road legal but, the race can did sound fantastic)

In short, I think both bikes are great and you would be disappointed with either. I think it all comes down to what sort of rider you are and what you like the look of.

Good luck, I'd be interested in your choice.



[This message has been edited by mcdarbyfeast (edited 26 March 2004).]

__________________
\"Bon Chance\"

My 2p worth:

All I´m going to say is that I have heavily abused my AT recently around central america, and she just keeps pulling me up the mountains like I was as light as a feather.

The bike continues to make me smile, and yes, that lovely little burble she makes. Hmmmmm, maybe I should get out a little more.

Brian
http://colesyboy.tripod.com

__________________
http://www.trailsunexpected.com

Both great bikes, but the AT is the lazier (more relaxed?) option. If you're into covering long distance (motorways?) to get to your destination then I'd say the VFR. If you like to meander a little bit, and maybe stop when you feel like it and carry on again when you feel like it, then the AT.

The VFR would suit someone who likes to stick to a schedule. Whereas the AT isn't in such a hurry, and is happy to see what's up that track.

Like mcdarbyfeast I had a VFR800 for a year before getting the AT 18 months ago. I also found I got an ache in my shoulders after an hour or so on the VFR. In the 12 months I had the VFR I did about 3k miles on it, in the same time on the AT I did nearly 10k - I just love getting on the AT and riding. A modified seat is definitely a good idea though.

__________________
Steve Lee