Straying off topic here .... sorry all!

Wet weight is as I quouted. 425 lbs. (193 kgs.) I think the new G650 is about the same. Really not bad when considering all the extras it comes with. ABS, F.I. center stand and more. Nice, comfy, easy to ride bike. But my DR650 is only 425 lbs. and that with all luggage on board, 5 gallons of gas, and at about half the price!

Seems the 660cc Yam motor has been around a long time. We never got the bike in the US, but I see the XT and 660 seem to be pretty popular in the UK and EU. Quite a few fans of it here on HUBB, no? It's not economical compared to BMW but pretty reliable according to some here.

I have read a lot of RTW reports with the F650/Dakars with plenty of problems on those reports. In fact your buddy Tony had his shock mount break off, which has happened on several others as well, no?

I'm sure XT/660 reports show some negatives too but can anyone ever match that Smelly Biker guy? The F650's & Dakars lose it for me just based on batteries/overcharging problems and bearings alone!

I don't know a thing about her bike ... maybe she can chime in here. She seems quite capable of pleading the Tenere' case! But if the Tenere' needs all that to be rideable then that is a big disappointment to me. I wonder what her loaded up bike weighs? Guess I'll be sticking with my old, out dated Japanese dinosaurs for the time being.

Yea, $7000 is about right, although MSRP is about $8000. A true adventure bike would have to be a lot stronger than a stock WR450, which is really a race bike. Seems to me the frame and sub frame may have to be re-worked some for luggage carrying ability. Be a shame if they ended up with another Piggy Tenere'! As you say, better seat would have to be worked in somehow too.

The WR250R is a good example of what can be done. It's 40 lbs.(18 kgs.)heavier than the WR250F (race version). But it is amazing to see how much crap guys are able to carry on the WR250R on tour. ADV rider has huge threads specific to this bike. Impressive reports, most all good. Full street legal bike with all road based electrics. Don't know anyone who has done RTW on a WR250R, but that is bound to happen.

The WR250R however is not very snappy compared to the the WR250F but has great gearing for highway, is well suspended stock and can go 85 mph, and with F.I. gets amazing MPG. (60 to 70 mpg) The WR250F (race bike) tops out (stock gearing) at only 60 mph, sucks gas but is faster and has better out of the box suspension, and 40 lbs. less weight.

But the WR450F would be the perfect place to start. Big tank, sub frame, F.I., wider seat and leave the rest up to the owner. Minimalism is best. I feel there is a good chance Yamaha will actually do this as the WR250R has been a big seller in the USA so far. With taller gearing the WR450 adventure bike could be the real deal. Reliable, packable and touring capable.

But for me, much of life on the road is simply long range road droning and some of this is just plain sitting there ... all day, day after day.
This is where my ancient DR650 Suzuki seems OK. It's comfortable and can be ridden 10 hours a day. Off road, not bad once set up. No, I can't attack a rock section like on my race bike, but I can make it through. Does anyone really ride in attack mode when loaded up with a full complement of luggage? I've seen what happens to the KTM guys when they do this in Baja. Bent wheels! Broken radiators and usually a broken collarbone or two! I love KTM's .... would never own another. Young hot shots bike!

Compromises everywhere I guess.

Super Tenere is in the copy of MCN I just picked up ,.... lets see what they say. Journalists always love these big trail bikes ... and never criticise them, since the bike companies would stop giving them free bikes if they did

__________________

It's probably a damned fine bike; I am amazed at the inverted snobbery on this thread.

Many riders of my vintage grew up modifying bikes and keeping them running without dealers - maybe it's just that now we want to simply ride the bloody things, not build them or work on them so much.

It's not a road bike, or an enduro, it's an adventure tourer; it will handle rougher roads very well and be safe and comfortable on the tarmac.

The price is a bit steep but I'd buy one over a GS any day of the week and twice on a Saturday. And I'm gonna.

I was just reviewing the photos on the first couple pages and noticed it said:
"1st Edition" In a not so subtle way, Yamaha may be revealing a long term commitment here to this model. This opens the possibility of significant up grades every year or two ... a la the latest sport bikes. (IE : 2nd Edition!)

No longer can a company just ignore a bike. Bikes now require constant upgrades beyond "Bold New Graphics" to make it fresh every year, changes to solve "problems" and of course more features and even more aftermarket farkles. Yamaha know well how to do this but it's expensive.
But if you read everything about the latest YZ450F or R1, you see just what incredible innovation they are capable of. If the 1200 Tenere' gets even half of this attention it could be a world beater.

I'm thinking this bike will take a good sized bite out of BMW, KTM and Suzuki's market share in the Adventure bike segment. There is risk because trends shift, classifications morph and re-form into all kinds of weird hybridized incarnations. We are a very fickle bunch.

Look at the Aprilia Desoduro or latest Multistrada and or HyperMotos KTM 950SE or SMR. The adventure touring landscape is clearly in flux. IMHO, giant adventure bikes popularity may be on the wane unless lots of creative innovation and marketing are employed ... and soon.

BMW's big GS is losing ground to its own F800GS, Vstrom sales are very slow (Vstrom fans are fed up with a great bike that has never, ever got any love from Suzuki .... talk about blowing it). KTM's are too expensive and still have mechanical issues that should have been purged years ago. At present KTM future is in question. Very thin ice. And why haven't KTM produced a mid-sized Adventure Twin to compete with the F800GS? Something with 20% less weight and better performance??

Another interesting potential player here could be Triumph and the rumored 675cc Tiger Cub Enduro. If done right, it could trump the F800GS
and leap frog everyone in one go. Triumph are perfectly placed to do this, and I hope they jump in.

If BMW put half the effort into a new Adventure bike that they've poured into the SS1000 they could dominate. Will they?

Honda? WTF is up with Honda? They had the world by the balls and just let it all go. Imagine a totally modern Africa Twin? Lightweight modern twin motor in super light Ally chassis, top shelf suspension. Could be real competition for Yam's 1200 Tenere' and everyone else. Instead we get the Rune' and other Jackass inspired cruisers that go no where.

Is that such a bad move from Honda's point of view? In almost every biking category, buyers want performance and handling, in a package that excites them, aesthetically.

Cruisers are one segment where handling and performance are not such a big consideration; looks are the deal-closer.

On top of that, as we've sort of established the buying population are often very interested in the image projected.

An image based market that sells on looks not corner speed and chassis tech and weight is not an issue: far lower R&D costs in my opinion and usually quite a big retail price tag....

Sounds like a winner for H, to me....

__________________
Adventure: it's an experience, not a style!
(so ride what you like, but ride it somewhere new!)

Point well taken! It's been a winner for many years. With cruisers image is key. But the fact is .... most of Honda's cruisers have not sold all that well in the last few years. The Rune is discontinued, this after Honda spent 10's of millions in R&D. The new Fury is too new to know how sales will be. The VTX cruiser class that Honda sold for so many years with success, has pretty much disappeared. They are just no longer selling.

Like many of us here I am biased against cruisers, even though I understand the business logic behind their production. I've always liked motorcycles that are actually ridable, that are versatile, stop well and handle. Most cruisers don't, but there are a few exceptions! What I think we will see regards cruisers are new bikes that have the look but actually perform. The Victory sport tourer bikes seem to head in this direction.

The fact is, many cruiser riders are new, inexperienced riders. The good news about that is that some younger riders leave cruisers behind and buy a real motorcycle.

Since when has being critical of weight on a bike become "snobbery"? All the criticism of the bike in this thread is directed at the weight. Thats one fact about it that we know. Whether is a "damned fine" bike or not, will sell or not etc, is pure speculation. But what we do know as fact is the weight.

The weight appears ridiculous. Consumers being critical of weight is the only thing that will keep the manufacturers focussed on it.

I can say with confidence that the weight is too high ... because we know the weight. Its a fact. How you can say with confidence "it will handle rougher roads very well" is a little beyond me ... that's pure speculation. Wanting Adventure bikes to be lighter is hardly "unreasonable" bias. Making a claim about how well a brand new untried and tested 240kg bike will handle rough roads, sight unseen, simply because you may be a fan of the brand strikes me as an "unreasonable" claim.


Mickey has raised very good points about manufacturers either going in a different direction to consumers or trying to "steer" consumers towards larger, heavier bikes because they are more profitable. Its up to the consumer to be more discerning. BMW will not make an adventure version of the 800 for example because it is BMW policy that the only bike to be promoted as being capable for round the world travel is the 1200. KTM want to spend money upping the 990 Adventure to a 1190 Adventure rather than spend money developing a lighter simpler 690 Adventure, because an 1190 would cost loads more. Again its manufacturers trying to develop larger heavier more complicated bikes despite no-one with a 990 screaming for 200cc more, and despite hundreds of customers around the world screaming for a 690 Adventure. The jury is out on whether they should build to meet demand or rather build according to pre-determined marketing policy is best in the long run. But certainly pretty much all the manufacturers operate on the "if we build it, they will come" approach, rather than specifically trying to meet existing buyer demand. i.e. they are trying to create demand, rather than meet existing demand.

If consumers are not discerning about weight (for right or for wrong) then one thing I do know, is manufacturers will make these 'tanks' (Varadero, Multistrada, Stelvio, Tiger) even bigger.

As for the points about the effort and resources brands put into developing bikes, I can tell you it costs infinitely more to develop a new sports bike than to develop an adventure bike. Sports bikes are built to be ultra compact and ultra high tech. They are built with loads of weight saving technology. The money is put into sports bike development because (1) the manufacturers perceive the buyers in that segment as being very critical of those issues and (2) there are a lot more sports bike buyers than adventure bike buyers. They don't perceive adventure bike buyers as being as discerning.

Thats a big part of our problem.

__________________

I was a big big fan of Japanese bikes, but is clearly now that they have lost their compass in the ADV segment.

The Tenere is too big, too heavy, too much road oriented? You want a modern Africa twin more powerful, less weight, better suspensions, better on road/off road performance.... Well, you have it. The 950 KTM is all that. It is like AT should be if it was remade.

You want the new Tenere 660 to be less weight, more power, better suspension. Well, you have it, the KTM 640 ADV has all of that.

These are two example of excellent adv bikes which are ready to go from the shop.

And don't start now with mechanical failures. All the bikes have their own failures, so does the KTM's, but they can be fixed on the road by some mechanic skills which all the ADV riders should anyway have.

Do you remember the three funny polak going to Siberia on KTM ADV 640? No problems at all, and they were absolutely thrilled with the bikes.

Nothing is perfect ... you cant buy the 950 or the 640 Adventure anymore because they are carburettored, and that means they don't meet emissions rules anymore. So you cant get them in the shop anymore. Sadly KTM is the only major manufacturer who does not seem to have mastered fuel injection yet ...

And its not totally true the Poles had no problems with the bikes ... they had a few - including problems related to the bikes being carburettored in the high altitude of the Pamir. They liked the bikes but to say they were "absolutely thrilled" is a bit too strong. They were complaining privately about the weight of the bikes as soon as they finished. All 3 guys have since sold them. Mac and Mirek have 400s now and Safran has a 200.


- - -


As a footnote, I would just like to say that this is an online forum about adventure motorcycling ... a new bike comes out, and its natural that people with an interest in adventure motorcycles discuss their opinions about it. A lot of people clearly think its way too heavy. A few others seem personally aggrieved by this line of thought.

But there are no personal attacks here ... we are discussing a motorcycle for crying out loud. No one is saying if you like this motorcycle you are a halfwit or have a small penis. But if we cant say we don't like the bike and why, then whats the point of discussing it. We can all be like the bike magazines and say every new bike is wonderful, but then there is no integrity in the forum. We're not supposed to be a bunch of cheerleaders are we?

I cant really see how people get offended because someone else doesnt like a motorcycle they like. Its just a lump of rubber, plastic and metal. Its not a person! :confused1:

If "pushing an agenda" is (a) hoping for better adventure motorcycles or (b) being disappointed by this one, then hell yeah, I am guilty.

By the way, what exactly is this "agenda" people who dont like this bike are supposed to be pushing?

__________________

Here here. A few days ago I was going to post that I was surprised that this thread wasn't degenerating into the usual "handbags at 5 paces" session of other "which bike" type threads. I think it's great that the vast majority of overland bike travel enthusiasts on this forum are able to dispassionately give and take opinions.

FWIW, my opinion on the new 1200 Tenere: Too fat and heavy, like the other fat and heavy 1100/1150/1200GS/1050Tiger type bikes. Then again, Yamaha are trying to get a foot hold in the Obese bike niche. Good luck to them.

Don't have the cash either.

cheers
Fat Boy:alucard:

__________________

TBS.com

I'm not!

Seems to me that people tend to push their own agenda ON THREADS LIKE THIS and are dead against other bikes they don't happen to have owned.

FACT - The Yamaha XT family of bikes are simply LEGENDARY in terms of overland adventure. Together with BMW (boxers) they set the standards for all future overland bikes.

The likes of KTM (although fine machines in their own right) do not possess the provenence of Yamaha in this discipline or a long history in producing top notch overland bikes. In any case, KTM's are way too expensive in the UK.

This new bike seem to me to be almost exactly the same as the BMW 1200 GS - too heavy and cumbersome for hardcore offroad travel but perfect for 70% road 30% light trails. I would imagine the bike will appeal to those seeking an alternative to a GS?

__________________
Triumph Bonneville 800 (2004), Yamaha XT600E (1999), Honda XBR500 (1986).

The whole brand fanboy routine is pretty boring. You can't argue that it's a good bike simply because it's a Yamaha XT. What has it got in common with the 'famed' XTs of the 80s and 90s? But (and this is going to annoy you and any other XT fanboys even more), surely most of the old XT range were not even very good bikes anyway? - Cheap poor quality suspension and wheels ring a bell, as does broken subframes and dodgy electrics...


Back on topic:
I don't see how this bike offers anything more than the big BMWs? Surely if you want to steal market share from another brand you need to offer something bigger and better. The only thing that seems to set the bikes apart is engine layout, but even that would be a mark for BMW in my mind.

__________________
UK to Mongolia 2009, on a DR350

God you guys are a finicky bunch!

This 1200 Tenere has nothing to offer the motorcycling community as an improved enduro for RTW travellers.
All Yamaha's entry into this niche is doing is acknowledging that there is a pot of gold to be shared.

Proof of both of these is Ducati entering this segment.
2010 Ducati Multistrada 1200 First Look - Ducati Street Bike First Look - Motorcycle USA


So why is this Tenere being fretted about on the HUBB? As Ted noted...there isn't and never will be a turn-key solution for the overlander...as our mules have to be special for our finicky needs

2010 Yamaha Super Tenere - ADVrider

105 pages of posts(1711 posts)...OMG.

__________________
edde
93 BMW K75s
www.motoedde.com

Not sure what you're saying when you say the engine layout of the new XT1200 would be "a mark for BMW". Nath, study up on 'yer history their mate! Do you think BMW "invented" the parallel twin?

BMW have never, ever designed or manufactured a parallel twin. The F800 line is designed and built by Rotax, not BMW. Ever notice anything familiar about that F800 motor? Yep, it's a near copy of Yamaha's early XTZ Tenere'/TDM parallel twin 750/850 motor designed in the early 80's. You remember the one? Nine Dakar wins might refresh your memory!

The new 1200 Tenere' is a bigger, more modern version of this motor. Yamaha are pretty innovative. Did you know they built a full suspension bicycle in 1973! A friend just bought one off Ebay!! Who knew?

No need to go over the top trying to create an argument from a simple innoccent comment!

Maybe I was a bit vague as you misinterpret what I meant. The biggest difference between the big BMW 1200s and the new Tenere 1200, is the engine layout. Those boxer twins have a massive following, and most people who have owned a BMW will rave on about the 'character' of the engine and other crap like that. They've also been the iconic BMW engine throughout the history of the brand, and they have a reputation for being ultra reliable work horses. And of course there's the supposed lower weight distribution.

Now I personally don't see the appeal of the big boxer twin, and I don't neccessarily agree with the above. But to my mind it's one of the key attractions to the big beemers. I can't see how a new and unproven watercooled 1200cc parrallell twin is going to get people drooling and be the deciding factor to make them choose the Yamaha over the BMW.


The BMW is an established market leader. What does this new Yamaha offer to tempt away customers? I think it would have made more sense for them to make the bike as lightweight as possible, and sell it as a large CC progression from the old 750, or from their current 660. What they've actually done is make it as big and heavy as possible whereby they're competing for the exact same customers as the beemer.

__________________
UK to Mongolia 2009, on a DR350