Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Comments on the AMCN litre-bike test?

Discussion in 'Bike Reviews, Questions and Suggestions' at netrider.net.au started by hornet, Jun 14, 2008.

  1. This is the second magazine that has pitted the new Blade against the rest and had it come out on top; (BIKE was the other, but they're besotted by the big Honda anyway :LOL:).

    So what do the people who've ridden these devices in the real world think?

    PS, I'm not in a position to buy any one of them, just an interested on-looker :).
  2. They all go faster than 99.9% of riders will ever be able to do, but that won't stop the masses buying one particular bike on the basis of popular led opinion rather than their own.
  3. Doesn't matter what brand the bike is, just find one that is comfortable for you, and take it for a test ride. As long as you are happy with it, the bikes ability will always out perform your own ... unless you are on a track ... lol
  4. Their 'road' segment of the test was a joke.

    Like almost all Auto journalists, they base their decision on which bike would make the best race vehicle. Which is fine, but what was the point of the road test?

    Examples: How do the MV and the Ducati possibly outscore the R1 on the road?

    The road test seemed to be based on the testers personal preference and the pooftenth difference in handling and power.

    Both the italians are uncomfortable, the mirrors and tank range on the ducati are woefull, and they are both too expensive and probably unreliable. But these things are unimportant compared to looks and feel apparently.

    Read and contrast the tests, and you really wonder how they could rate the italians as road bikes.
  5. #1 fashion accessory around Oakleigh has to be the red brand ( not honda BTW ).

    You just can't pull the birds sipping your latte with a Jap bike next to your table...

    the birds obviously have no idea what the 1 1/2"wide chicken stripe on each side of the back tyre says about the rider...... :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:
  6. hah hah, if I could afford a Ducati, I wouldn't care what people thought of my chicken strips. Then again, with Macquarie Pass on my doorstep, it wouldn't be a problem, would it?

    Seriously, though, a Fireblade would be utterly wasted on me, so is it wrong that I would love to have one???

  7. You test rode these bikes and came up with your conclusions yourself after extensive testing like those experienced riders?

  8. No I read the review. They have nothing major to stick on the yamaha. Whereas the testers rip on the italians for having poor ergo's, shit mirrors, poor fuel range etc... But apparently practicalities don't matter :?

    They chose the italians as better road bikes, in spite of being less practicle.

    They confess the ducati compared to the japanese bikes is uncomfortable, tiring to tour, crap mirrors, crap fuel range etc... But it's better than the GSXR and the R1 as a road bike because it handles better and has a "gnarly, muscly engine".

    Just doesn't make sense to me. If you're going to select the best road bike based on which one goes hardest, handles best, looks hottest, why not just have the track test alone?

    I realise many people buy based on which is the coolest, hardest, sportiest bike. Why have the road test then? When the bike rated 3rd best on the road is argueably the worst tourer what is it proving?
  9. What's the point of ANY test, from any aspect? They drool over the latest and greatest, and six months later they publish the real story when owners start complaining about mice in the gear-box, or something? Then in a year's time, they rhapsodise over the latest model and try and convice us that the previous year's effort was a wheelbarrow by comparison.
  10. Fun factor and character.
    inline 4 jappers fast characterless bland and does everything right with no issue.
    Italian twins, quirky, soulful, full of character and has a wonderful rumble despite ergonomics. Reliability these days isn't an issue.
    So it comes down to which bike is more fun to ride?
    It's all subjective.
  11. i use this exact knowledge, to ensure that i am always more interesting than my bike.
  12. Motoring journalists strain to say positive things about new cars and rarely seem to notice the faults that everyday motorists have to live with. And after a while motoring writers’ articles start to bear a curious resemblance to the shiny ads sitting on the page next to them.

    Writers are dreamers too; most car reviewers would be better described as racing journalists. Everything they write is judged according to whether it would make a good racing car – one cam is bad, two cams are good, four cams better still.

    A car that reliably transports a family to work, school and on holidays is always called boring.

    According to most reviewers, a good car is one that can out-accelerate a Ferrari and corner at three times the legal speed limit. Just what the hell has that attitude got to do with everyday motoring?

    We don’t have a problem with people who enjoy racing cars for a hobby, provided it’s done safely. But who gave them the right to judge cars on behalf of the average motorist?

    Further, the exciting cars are also generally either expensive or unreliable, or both. When the reviewers are raving about the latest Alfa Romeo sportscar, it never occurs to them that this dream car may be some poor sod’s nightmare in two years’ time.

    Some motoring journalists are just reporters doing their job as best they can. However, many motoring journalists start out as racing enthusiasts who write about their hobby and then gradually mutate into little pilot fish who willingly swim alongside the sharks that run the car companies. It’s never far from their immediate consciousness that if the car companies die, they die too.
  13. What about the many, significant, objective criteria on which both the italians fell down?
    Why does it come down to which bike is more fun to ride?

    It's supposed to be a road test. If it's about fun, then the track test will give all the answers to the rider who cares about that.

    Reliability is debatable, but fairly sure the ducati, and without doubt the MV will cost way more to service and maintain. Don't you think this is an important factor to mention to the average motorist who may be thinking of buying one of these?

    Many riders will buy these bikes to commute or tour on. If the article is supposed to be written to a broad, general bike buying audience, on an average income, who is going to use it for all purposes, would you really recommend the Ducati over any of the Japanese bikes?
  14. Mate, I hate to break it to you, but they're reviewing sports bikes designed specifically to be taken around a race track at the maximum possible speed, or perhaps you hadn't noticed World SuperStock 1000, or World Superbike, into which these bikes, which are little more than race bikes with lights, are raced with great fervour.

    Anyone who buys a hardcore sports bike and expect it to be a great commuter and long-distance pannier laden tourer with a pillion on board has shit for brains. Yes, you CAN use them for that purpose, but in the same way that you can use a rugby football to play lawn bowls with. It's not designed for that purpose.

    Sports bikes are designed to go fast with a seating/bar/peg position designed for maximum control at maximum lean. You would actually want said reviewers to review said sportsbike on their ability to lug Joe Suit to work with a box of apples on the back?
  15. I wouldn't buy any of those bikes for commuting period.
    I think you had better revisit your priorities when it comes to commuting.
  16. I guess a lot depends on whether you buy with your head or your heart, wouldn't you say, smee :)?
  17. I agree absolutely with everything you said. That's why they had a track section. If they came to their conclusions based just on the track section all would be cool.

    What I'm asking is, what was the point of their 'road' test, if they were just going to vote for the fastest, sexiest bikes? Because that's so much different on the road?

    I would think the road test section would be written for the majority of people who will never go near a track. Would be a more rounded article, looking at it from two perspectives, etc...
  18. I personally wouldn't by any inline 4 jappa

    Honda firestorm yes!!
    BMW ducati etc just call me twins tragic.
    tho the bmw k1200r is horn as well and thats an il 4.

    I'm just opposed to blandless.
  19. I have ridden the new Blade and the new ZX10R. I have also tested last years' gixxer (isn't it the same?).

    I give it to the ZX10R hands down. I know all testers are giving the top spot to the honda but hu, I wasn't that impressed with it.
  20. I used to hit Mac pass all the time when I was living in NSW also, in my tracked MY00 WRX and never found a biker that could stay with it. I came to the conclusion that it wasn't well suited to bikers and in particular the bigger bikes like the R1 as the straights weren't long enough for an advantage, and AWD just owns on the road.

    Different story on the longer sweepers and stuff over the top though...