Bottom line for me in comparing the K1600B vs New Goldwing:
tech: comparable
price: comparable
performance and zoom/gee-wiz factor: comparable
reliability: favors the Honda
cost of ownership: greatly favors Honda
So that's the way I'll roll once they are both out and the initial bugs are flushed out
pete
Originally Posted by Texas F6B
--------------------------------------------
2013 F6B Deluxe Black
2004 BMW R1150RT
2005 Yamaha Zuma
Interesting....
While I agree with MOST of what you wrote, I am curious about your projection on the performance factor. The K1600B blows the doors of the F6B. All of the K1600 series bikes have 160hp, and several of our members have had the pleasure of watching the K-series taillights get smaller and smaller. Hornblower and a couple others actually own or owned both a K1600 and an F6B. According to them, though the F6B is a great performer in its own right, it isn't comparable at all performance-wise. The K-series are faster with more clearance in the turns.
The new Goldwing's engine is supposed to be an improvement on the current engine (how much remains to be seen...but the displacement has only gone up by 1cc), and there is a slight difference in weight between it and the F6B (90 pounds lighter than the current full-dressed wing... less so with our bikes). How are you drawing the conclusion that the performance is comparable? Better than what we have (which is great IMO)?...probably. Comparable to the beastly inline 6 that the K1600 has?... I see no evidence of that in any of the reviews.
At the end of the day, there are several factors that go into making a bike purchase besides speed and handling. I'm just curious if you came across some info that paints a different comparative picture between the performance of the new bikes. If so, please share.
Being simple minded, it amuses me to think Mother Honda increased each cylinder size by 1/6th of a cc. Maybe they shaved a little off of each piston to increase the volume and save weight.Interesting....
While I agree with MOST of what you wrote, I am curious about your projection on the performance factor. The K1600B blows the doors of the F6B. All of the K1600 series bikes have 160hp, and several of our members have had the pleasure of watching the K-series taillights get smaller and smaller. Hornblower and a couple others actually own or owned both a K1600 and an F6B. According to them, though the F6B is a great performer in its own right, it isn't comparable at all performance-wise. The K-series are faster with more clearance in the turns.
The new Goldwing's engine is supposed to be an improvement on the current engine (how much remains to be seen...but the displacement has only gone up by 1cc), and there is a slight difference in weight between it and the F6B (90 pounds lighter than the current full-dressed wing... less so with our bikes). How are you drawing the conclusion that the performance is comparable? Better than what we have (which is great IMO)?...probably. Comparable to the beastly inline 6 that the K1600 has?... I see no evidence of that in any of the reviews.
At the end of the day, there are several factors that go into making a bike purchase besides speed and handling. I'm just curious if you came across some info that paints a different comparative picture between the performance of the new bikes. If so, please share.
They reduced the cylinder dia. by 1mm and increased the stroke by 2mm to make it an even 73mm X 73mm configuration. Not sure why except it did reduce the size (physical) of the engine a little bit and with a little more stroke should improve torque even if it is a small amount. Seems like the strategy was to reduce the weight first and foremost to make the bike feel lighter and faster. But anyway that's where the extra 1cc came from.Being simple minded, it amuses me to think Mother Honda increased each cylinder size by 1/6th of a cc. Maybe they shaved a little off of each piston to increase the volume and save weight.
Save a biker........Open your f-ing eyes!! (and get off your phone)
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Reliability is even more important than price to me.
The annual USAÂ-consumer survey of the top 10 brands found similar results to last year with the Japanese marques leading the reliability stakes. Yamaha recorded the lowest failure rate for four-year-old motorcycles with 11%, followed by Suzuki and Honda (12%) and Kawasaki (15%).
American brands Victory (17%) and Harley-Â-Davidson (26%) were midpack, and Triumph (29%), Ducati (33%), BMW (40%), and Can-Am (42%) were the more trouble-prone brands.
Yamaha and Suzuki beat Honda in reliably? Wow... I never would have guessed. Also surprised that BMW is so trouble prone
If you are not part of the solution, YOU are the problem.
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.
BMW +=
They are nice bikes but will not have one. They are high maintenance.
21 years Army (retired)
...been everywhere, seen everything, done almost everything.
IBA 80537
Interesting info. I am real surprised by the results. It suggests that 1 in 8 of us will have trouble within four years.
I question what constituted a failure. And maybe it should have been measured in miles vs years.
Albuquerque, NM
The failure rate included sport bikes which were higher than for cruisers. So the 12% would be lower for our bikes I think.
Agree with your post about the speed and handling differences between the 2 bikes...My riding buddy on his 08 R1200RT can out run my F6B eaisly..The new 1600B from BMW is very, very, fast and will out accelerate the F6B without effort....If speed and a little better handling in corners is your thing it might be worth to take a look at the BMW...Maint. costs will be much higher as I am told, but who knows??....Regards and ride safeInteresting....
While I agree with MOST of what you wrote, I am curious about your projection on the performance factor. The K1600B blows the doors of the F6B. All of the K1600 series bikes have 160hp, and several of our members have had the pleasure of watching the K-series taillights get smaller and smaller. Hornblower and a couple others actually own or owned both a K1600 and an F6B. According to them, though the F6B is a great performer in its own right, it isn't comparable at all performance-wise. The K-series are faster with more clearance in the turns.
The new Goldwing's engine is supposed to be an improvement on the current engine (how much remains to be seen...but the displacement has only gone up by 1cc), and there is a slight difference in weight between it and the F6B (90 pounds lighter than the current full-dressed wing... less so with our bikes). How are you drawing the conclusion that the performance is comparable? Better than what we have (which is great IMO)?...probably. Comparable to the beastly inline 6 that the K1600 has?... I see no evidence of that in any of the reviews.
At the end of the day, there are several factors that go into making a bike purchase besides speed and handling. I'm just curious if you came across some info that paints a different comparative picture between the performance of the new bikes. If so, please share.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
