Star Venture Transcontinental Sit Test

Local Yamaha dealer finally has a unit on the floor. They called me to let me know, which I appreciate. No test ride; it is 12 degrees here today.

I am 6'1", 230 lbs, 34" inseam, beard, handsome fellow.

First thing I noticed it is big out back. Looks like it is carrying several pieces of luggage. Speaking of luggage, I brought two XL snowmobile helmets in from my car, and both easily fit in the trunk with some room left over.

Next thing I checked is the size of the bags. They open from the top, hinged on the outside. The left side bag is deeper and slightly wider than the right side. I used my HP laptop bag w/shoulder strap as a way to measure volume. It fit into the left bag, but tightly. For comparison, this laptop bag will fit into the Honda's bag about as easily...just have to stuff it into the opening of the clamshell a bit.

A thoughtful feature that Yamaha used was nicely stitched, heavy duty vinyl as a limiter for how far the lid of the bag will open. This not only protects whatever you put in there, but also folds up nicely on its own and does not take up any storage capacity. Both the the trunk and side bag lids use a large push button to operate the latch and close with a nice, quality feel.

Lots of neat little storage cubbies around the fairing...and these spaces were designed with size of modern smartphones in mind.

I sat on the bike and quickly noticed the wide tank, as some have mentioned online. I have fairly long legs, so while I noticed it, that is a fairly neutral seating position for me anyway. However, someone with shorter legs...not sure how that would feel because the rider is forced to sit like that, no choice.

The reason I am even looking at this bike is the leg room. I don't miss much from running V Twin cruisers, but space for my legs and feet is definitely one of them. LOTS of leg room, with boards that offer plenty of choice for foot placement. Other folks online on forums and videos have mentioned the handlebars being very swept back and awkward feeling; I did not notice that. They just seemed like traditional cruiser bars.

This bike is HEAVY to get off the side stand....noticeably more than the F6Bs. Flat-footing is never an issue at my height, so I didn't really pay attention to that. Others say that you sit low; I didn't really notice that, just seems like a typical cruiser.

While I would like more leg and foot room on my Honda, there is plenty of room on the seat and it has good butt and thigh support. The F6B has more seat room than the Venture. The Venture is not as tight as the 01-17 full Wing, but anyone my height has no need to move its adjustable lumbar support forward. Controls fell to hand easily. I like the max height of the adjustable windshield; right about at eye level (I would just get a Madstad anyway). As it is lowered, its track is curved so its actual drop is pretty significant. It is annoying that the switch only lowers it completely or raises it completely. Incremental adjustments need to be done on the touchscreen or with two clicks on the button.

Gauges and infotainment system look top notch.

Mirrors are much larger than typical cruisers, but smaller than our flat-6ers.

There are factory Baker wing-type deflectors which operate easily and look effective. There are vents for legs and feet for increased airflow.

Something I noticed when I put my hands on the grips...Yamaha added soft rubber to cushion one's hands as they rest against the control block on the inside of the grips. Nice touch.

Obviously, I did not ride the bike, but I honestly felt a little intimidated by its heft. Our bikes are heavy, but the weight seems a lot less noticeable, probably due to the big flat motor sitting low in the frame. I know I would feel like the Venture would want to topple over at low speeds, but I am sure it would require getting used to. The F6B is a BIG bike that feels light on its feet, and nimble. In fact, I consider that to be a strong safety feature. The best way to not have an accident is to avoid one.

A MAJOR turnoff...it requires premium fuel.

Tomorrow, I may head out to my local Honda dealer as they just got a new GW on the floor.

Nice write up VSR, thanks!

WEG

Thanks for your write up. I want to get a new tourer next year. However, between the higher seat/small bags on the new GW and the weight/heat of the TCT i think I may be forced to a BMW.

:yes: Good info. I do like the looks of that bike but premium gas is a bummer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaWadd

:yes: Good info. I do like the looks of that bike but premium gas is a bummer.

---

I did some quick math...

50,000 miles / 45 mpg: 1,111 gals.

Premium costs about $.50 more per gallon.

1,111x.50: $556 over 50,000 miles, or $69/year for 8 years (assuming ~6000 miles per season).

So, I guess it isn't too big of a deal ... I just like that I can put regular ol' 87 in my Honda and still get 40-45 mpg.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VStarRider

I did some quick math...

50,000 miles / 45 mpg: 1,111 gals.

Premium costs about $.50 more per gallon.

1,111x.50: $556 over 50,000 miles, or $69/year for 8 years (assuming ~6000 miles per season).

So, I guess it isn't too big of a deal ... I just like that I can put regular ol' 87 in my Honda and still get 40-45 mpg.

---

Unless one travels across the country a few times a year, I for one cannot see where Premium gas would be an issue for me in purchasing a $25,000+ motorcycle...Granted it might cost a couple bucks more, but if you can afford that expensive of a bike, I guess one could give up a couple of extra cheesburgers and a beer or two and not worry about the fuel costs as most bikes get 35-45 mpg anyhow....JMHO

Does the BMW REQUIRE premium gas regarding pre-ignition OR does it require it to achieve the HP rating? Germans are good at putting Premium required for max HP but many will run on regular and the HP drops down. I doubt, IMO, that the BMW has to have premium to run. My old VW Vanagon with the VR6 engine stated the same, that it needed high test gas. The service tech back then told me that was for max HP and run it on mid grade or worse if necessary. It ran fine on either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Walcrow

Does the BMW REQUIRE premium gas regarding pre-ignition OR does it require it to achieve the HP rating? Germans are good at putting Premium required for max HP but many will run on regular and the HP drops down. I doubt, IMO, that the BMW has to have premium to run. My old VW Vanagon with the VR6 engine stated the same, that it needed high test gas. The service tech back then told me that was for max HP and run it on mid grade or worse if necessary. It ran fine on either.

---

I think this is pretty much the case. I have a VW GTI which the manual says requires premium. According to the GTI Forum, it will run just fine on a lower octane except the computer makes adjustments in the timing to avoid detonation but at a small sacrifice in HP. I wouldn't know since mine has never had any gas other than Shell V-Power and all is well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by six2go

I think this is pretty much the case. I have a VW GTI which the manual says requires premium. According to the GTI Forum, it will run just fine on a lower octane except the computer makes adjustments in the timing to avoid detonation but at a small sacrifice in HP. I wouldn't know since mine has never had any gas other than Shell V-Power and all is well.

---

Agreed. I also had a GTI after the Vanagon and ran it on 89 for several years. I ran like scalded dog and never pinged...ever, AND it was chipped with Austrian software which was recommended by the dealer. That GTI needed wings for take-off. It was a blast to drive.

I wonder if the Venture needs high octane to help control detonation in hot running environments...and/or to squeeze a few more ponies out of what is a low compression engine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by opas ride

Unless one travels across the country a few times a year, I for one cannot see where Premium gas would be an issue for me in purchasing a $25,000+ motorcycle...Granted it might cost a couple bucks more, but if you can afford that expensive of a bike, I guess one could give up a couple of extra cheesburgers and a beer or two and not worry about the fuel costs as most bikes get 35-45 mpg anyhow....JMHO

---

:agree:Not really a deal breaker.

I did sit on the new Yamaha Eluder at the dealership. Sort of like a F6B with a v-twin, has a cool touch screen, gauges look good. The comments about premium fuel required gets my attention, as I am with Honda on this one, drive on 86 octane!

I don't know how many times I am riding with people on their big V and I am smoking by slow moving traffic on two lane highways, that is why I tell them the big mirrors on the F6B are there because that is where I am going to be watching for THEM to complete the same pass.

But what really makes me like the Honda's 86 octane requirement, is that at times we need to get fuel while driving on these back roads. Guess what, they need to find 91 and we can't!!!! I don't know how many times we have to figure out the exact range from their motorcycle to make it to another town that MAY have 91. Usually not. they put in the 87 ethanol mix and if it is hot out, their engines ping like a pig in the acceleration phase.

Damage? Who knows, they trade their Harley's before they get 5,000 miles on them. My Indian buddies don't seem to have the same amount of ping, my understanding is the computer is better at retarding the spark. For me, I don't worry about anything. 300,000 mile engine if you ride a lot, and never a concern about damaging the engine by running regular pump gas.

A V twin motor does offer some advantages. They provide a lot of practical power (low end torque), don't take up precious leg room, and provide a nice sound (just an opinion).

However, in my opinion, there are just as many disadvantages...and the balance gets tipped when they are air-cooled. Sure, less maintenance, fewer parts, but they get hot; they ping when running at high temps and lose power; the thud-thud-thud (or potato-potato-potato) gets annoying; you have to be a licensed surgeon to get to the valve covers.

As for dumping 87 in it instead of 91, we will have to wait for reports from the field to know for sure. It is a Yamaha, so I am sure their technology will have a way to compensate for faster burning fuel.

Yamaha really should have liquid cooled this engine. Their 1300 is liquid cooled, and despite 500 fewer cc's, I think it makes the same horsepower.

I get the market they are going after, the culture, the nostalgia, their market research that indicates the 50-60 year old cruiser buyer insists on air-cooling ... but, come on, too much sacrifice to get the look.

Yet, I still have my eye on one, and it will be interesting to ride a Venture and see how it feels with me behind the bars; but on paper, there are some turnoffs.

I think the Yamaha is a good looking machine.. Yamaha makes great motorcycles, just didn't think they needed to chase the air-cooled V-twin market. Thats ok, not my style anyways. I had a V-twin once but it was a Honda.Attachment 4742.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by broncsrule21

I think the Yamaha is a good looking machine.. Yamaha makes great motorcycles, just didn't think they needed to chase the air-cooled V-twin market. Thats ok, not my style anyways. I had a V-twin once but it was a Honda.Attachment 4742.

---

I owned two 1100 Yamaha V's and they were as good as that engine configuration can be. Smooth, decent low end torque, no heat issues (probably due to low compression; I don't think it even required more than 87 octane).

The air-cooled twin market is mostly veteran riders; seems as though most under 50 are going for adventure, dual-purpose bikes, or more sophisticated / efficient touring setups. Seems strange to me that they would invest this much into a market that is at the end of their bike buying years, not in the middle or beginning.

I want to ride this bike and see what it is all about. The wide tank may bother me, plus it just feels bulky. Maybe that is different once underway. I need to feel comfortable throwing a bike around in an evasive maneuver in order relax while out riding.

As for heat, I live and ride in upstate NY; we only get a couple dozen days above 85 F most years anyway, and I ride on state and county highways with little traffic so engine heat in hot temps and stop and go traffic are not really factors for me.

I think it's a decent looking bike, and I usually like anything on two wheels anyway. But I feel like they missed a cool opportunity to use the Vmax engine in a touring configuration. Small, powerful, water cooled, balanced. Could've been a great contender for a lightweight but very sturdy tourer.

Jason

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Verismo

I think it's a decent looking bike, and I usually like anything on two wheels anyway. But I feel like they missed a cool opportunity to use the Vmax engine in a touring configuration. Small, powerful, water cooled, balanced. Could've been a great contender for a lightweight but very sturdy tourer.

Jason

---

Exactly.:icon_ditto:

Double :icon_ditto: