When you have a product that is fundamentally sound, refinement typically beats re-design. The manufacturer can focus intently on improving specific areas of the existing design.
After waiting two decades to introduce an all-new Concours 14 in 2008, Kawasaki quickly responded to owner comments and made some changes for the 2010 model year. MD has been impressed by the 2008 model, as well as the 2010 changes, and Kawasaki is introducing even more refinements for the 2015 model year.
Kawasaki invited MD, along with other journalists, to test the 2015 model in Southern California earlier this week. Uncharacteristically, California had just received a heavy rain storm, providing a mixture of road conditions that actually underscored the characteristics of the Concours 14 for our test rider.
The fundamentals of the Concours 14 have remained unchanged since 2008, and are centered around a supremely powerful sport touring engine: a massive 1352 cc inline four-cylinder engine augmented by variable valve-timing. A stiff chassis with adjustable suspension (both preload and rebound damping adjustments, front and rear), stout linked-brakes (with four-piston calipers in front and ABS), and shaft drive together with the comfort and conveniences associated with touring, such as electrically adjustable windscreen and ample luggage capacity from the well-integrated saddlebags, round out the package.
Kawasaki has summarized the changes for the 2015 model year as follows:
- NEW First gear ratio for easier starts from a standstill and low-speed maneuvering
- NEW Steering stem seal provides lighter steering at low speeds
- NEW Stiffer rear suspension settings for enhanced control and carrying ability
- NEW Sculpted seat for improved comfort (optional Touring Seat available)
- NEW Electrically adjustable windshield with three-position vent
- NEW Exhaust heat shield improves rider comfort when stationary
- NEW Revised ABS settings to reduce the linked braking effect
- NEW Silver bezels on instrumentation
During our test, we were reminded of the effortless thrust provided by the Concours 14 powerplant. Power delivery is seemless, allowing the journalists to keep a good pace through somewhat dicey traction following the rain storm. Throttle response is very predictable, and this allowed us to exit corners aggressively and confidently (together with the standard traction control) despite the less-than-ideal conditions.
Testing on twisty roads also allowed us to assess Kawasaki’s efforts to improve the linked brakes. When this feature was introduced in 2010, it exaggerated front suspension dive when entering corners aggressively, and even, at times, at low speeds. Kawasaki made changes for 2015 to “reduce the linked braking effect.” We found the brakes much improved and more natural feeling, in general, essentially transparent in their effect at most speeds. Experienced, aggressive riders may still prefer independent brake control, of course, but we think Kawasaki achieved their goal.
The changes to the brakes involved more than just software tweaks. Kawasaki changed the master cylinder and the ABS module in the process. For riders who like to drag the rear brake entering corners, as well as riders who generally like to use the rear brake alone at lower speeds, the overall effect is a significant improvement, as the primary change is a reduction in the amount of front brake applied when the rear brake lever is pressed.
The other significant change involves the windshield, which now includes an adjustable vent intended to improve the air flow around the rider and reduce buffeting by removing the low-pressure zone in front of the rider. Many large windscreens on bikes actually suck the rider forward by creating a pronounced low-pressure zone. Kawasaki sought to improve comfort by reducing this effect with the new vent system.
We put a lot of effort into assessing the impact of the new vent system on the windscreen. Raising and lowering it repeatedly at higher speeds, both with the vent open and closed, it appears Kawasaki has created a comfortable environment for average sized riders with the ability (in the top position … we preferred the vent fully open) to create a quiet, serene bubble of still air around the rider’s upper chest and head. For reference, our rider is roughly 5’11”, who sits tall in the saddle with a longer than average torso.
By changing the steering stem seal, Kawasaki also claims lighter steering at low speeds for the 2015 Concours 14. It was difficult to assess the impact of this change without riding the new model back-to-back with the 2014 bike. We can say that the new model steers easier than its claimed curb weight (690 pounds with 5.8 gallons of fuel) suggests. More about that below.
The new, lower first gear allows the 2015 Concours to pull away from a stop easily, without having to slip the clutch unnecessarily. The big engine torque plays into this, as well. We appreciated the fact that the new silver bezels surrounding the instrumentation had a brushed, non-reflective finish. A nice touch. We don’t like chromed bezels that bounce sunlight back into our eyes.
We were really impressed by the suspension performance, and feedback from the tire contact patches during our test. This is a big bike, but it really does combine a high level of sporting capability with long-distance comfort. Handling was neutral, aided in part by the stiffer rear suspension settings for 2015, which places more weight over the front wheel. In the past, I would have added shock preload (an easy thing to do with the remote adjuster) to achieve the same balance.
The 2015 Kawasaki Concours 14 ABS offers a high level of performance in every category required of a sport tourer. The engine is powerful and flexible without transmitting too much vibration to the rider, the suspension is stiff enough to allow aggressive sport riding while still absorbing smaller chop and stutter bumps to provide a compliant ride, while the ergonomics, adjustable windshield, new seat and large saddle bags provide the other elements necessary for long distance touring. We expect to perform further testing when we get the 2015 Concours 14 into MD’s garage a bit later, but for now it appears Kawasaki has made a very capable sport tourer even better for 2015.
The 2015 Kawasaki Concours 14 ABS has a U.S. MSRP of $15,499. Color choices include Candy Lime Green and Metallic Spark Black (both pictured in this article). For additional details and specifications, visit Kawasaki’s web site.
Nice bike. It’s my dream. My heart and soul belongs to it…
I’ve ridden a lot of Jap UJM’s over 40 years, and needed something smoother and more comfortable for LD touring. I bought an ’09 C14 and have put on 110,000 miles with Zero issues. The bike needs Michelin PR tires with a 55 rear tire aspect ratio to boogie with the Porsches, which it now does. This thing is a bullet proof cruise missile, and very low cost maintenance- just fluids, tires and brake pads.
I own a 2010 ABS version and would like to change 2 things.
1) Throw out the linked brakes. Not Kawasaki’s best effort.
2) A bigger windshield.
It is a little top heavy, but other than that, I love it.
Bloated plastics, way too heavy and fugly.
I really don’t understand why Japanese companies (and BMW) are cranking out fatties. Considered the new Concours last February and rejected it for all the above reasons. Bought a 2005 Ducati ST3 AND a 2001 VFR instead. Still had cash in my pocket, too.
Look at the 1000 Ninja.
A Concours 650-800 would be nicer.
I concur.
A touring bike capable of carrying two American adults and their gear requires a certain size base. It’s going to be big and it’s going to be heavy and a 650-800 cc motor in one is going to be a dog. lightweight mid size bikes are ok for solo tourers with small bags and small fairings and there are plenty of those already available ( think Wee Strom, Versys 650, Ninja 650, BMW F800, FJ-09,Triumph 800, Honda NC700, Honda 650) but those won’t get it for two up travel on the U.S. Super highways.
It sounds like you’ve never ridder a mid displacement bike. Years ago I did a long distance, two up camping trip (big full backpacks) on a 33hp GB500 single. I could still get it up to around 100, passing cars was no problem, and I was getting over 50 mpg the whole time. It doesn’t take gobs of power to pass cars.
Well, in the early 70’s when we were in our 20’s and skinny, my wife and I toured on a RD 350..then a XS650
That was ok when we were young, seeing the country, camping in a pup tent. Fun even.
I know a guy that tent camped across the country on a CB 160 in the late 60’s.
Heck there are people who PEDAL across the country camping the whole way.
But ….. Just because something CAN be done, doesn’t mean it’s the best way to do it.
Now in our 60’s I think we will stick with our ST 1300 or something comparable ( like a Concours) to transverse the country. There is something to be said for a bit of luxury and comfort when traveling if you can afford it. We couldn’t then. We can now.
I bet you even passed some cars in you day too.
Yep 3 downshifts and 1/4 mile later I was past them. Now I just gas it and zip around them. That’s what an extra 90 horsepower will do for you.
Just out of curiosity, what is your obsession with passing cars?
Just responding to your suggestion that a middle weight bike is not suitable for the highway. And you need to admit you are exaggerating a bit by suggesting it takes three downshifts and a quarter mile to pass. For some reason, all my little bikes are a lot more capable than what your recollections are.
Either you don’t remember or never experienced an RD 350. Little 6 speed 2 stroke twin with a powerband about 2000 rpms wide from 6000-8000 rpms. . If you were cruising, especially double up, and needed to accelerate quickly, it required several downshifts to get in the meat of the powerband and took awhile to make things happen.
There is no way a 33 HP naked can compete riding cross country double up with a 145 HP fully faired dedicated sport tourer. I know, I have done it both ways, and there is just no comparison
I have admired the C-14 since it was introduced. Now that it has been around for a few years, everyone has forgotten what a huge improvement it is over the bike it replaced, which was itself an excellent motorcycle. A significant amount of the seemingly excess weight is attributable to the shaft drive and the articulated suspension, and while this weight does affect straight-line acceleration and stopping distance, it has comparatively little impact on handling, owing to the fact that this weight is very close to the ground. One of the things that I particularly like on this bike is the engine. It is the same configuration that Honda used in the blackbird, down to the use of dual counter-rotating counterbalancers. (Of course the same is true for Kawisaki’s other bike with the same engine.) This counterbalancing technique was patented by Mitsubishi in the 1980s, and has been used by Porsche in cars with in-line four-cylinder engines, among other manufacturers. When this technique is implemented correctly, the in-line four-cylinder engine can closely rival the straight six in term of vibration avoidance. When I took a very short test drive on the C-14 shortly after it was introduced, I did detect a hint of high-frequency vibration that I never felt in the Blackbird, but it still was exemplary. There is another Japanese sport-touring motorcycle that uses an in-line four-cylinder engine, and that also uses dual counter-rotating counterbalancers. But that other bike exhibits a very noticeable high-frequency buzz, and it does so because the implementaion is not correct. One of the counterbalancers is located close to one end of the crank, the other is close to the far, and one is higher than the other. It seems odd, but I expect that that was originally designed without any counterbalancers, and that the prototypes were excessively buzzy, leading to a last-minute addition of counterbalancers and no way to put them in the proper locations without making major changes. In any case, the two Kawasaki motorcyles with this engine are the only two motorcycles presently in production, with a proper implementation of this inherently superior design.
Thanks for info, it’s always nice to know.
I’ll give wikipedia/internet a check for the “counter-rotating counterbalancers” entry.
Again: Amazing bike in 2008 and my wife liked it also which is rare for us as I have a 2 biggie buttttt and she is tall so we do not fit on many bikes.
Most of our nits related to the two up part:
1. The downward seat angle (see pix) for the passenger is too severe ….every passenger complained of sliding forward.
2. Seat angle is also a big issue if passenger is taller…say 5’8″ or more as angle puts their head 3-4 inches above the riders if both are the same height (more/less) and as such it impossible to adjust the screen so both are happy
3. Also an issue with the 2008 model was it did not have a front or back compression adjustment……maybe this is still the case with the 2015. Our 2008 just rode wayyyyy too hard and stiff over bumps two up and the suspension adjustments avail then could not compensate for this.
Our 2008 was used when we bought it and came with the stock seat and a Corbin. The Corbin was about 1.5″ to 2″ longer which worked and is a great feature for any passenger.
Solo riding…. my view was it was a great sport, sport, tour bike and certainly worth a test ride if this is the type of bike you want.
We kept it for 2-3 years and moved on to a Victory Vision…..a great tour, tour, tour bike which worked better for us at the time for what we wanted.
Does it have (1) Cruise Control, (2) Self-canceling indicators and (3) Heated Grips? If not, it isn’t a smart buy.
It does have adjustable heated grips that work well. Has had this feature for awhile, not new this year.
re: “Does it have (1) Cruise Control”
I think we’ll find the cruise control (or lack thereof) is really a hold back for now. what I mean is they’re waiting till they convert this kit over to Ride By Wire aren’t they…? once RBW’s fitted, implementing cruise is a simple software fix (a 2-for-1). but so long as there’s a cable connection between the right grip and those main throttle plates (and I think there is)…? sorting cruise by itself becomes a somewhat costly hardware endeavour. hardware that’s basically obsolete the minute they install it.
you know what I’m talking about, you’ve seen it in older cars, if there isn’t room on the throttle bodies to mount an additional direct drive servo for the primarys (I believe this already has servo controlled secondarys) then it has to be mounted remotely at the end of whole ‘nother throttle cable (see entry for cost, see entry for weight). if you ever seen the old mkI BMW 1200 LT with it’s tupper ware off, that’s how Munich used to sort cruise, just like their cars.
What could be the harm in running 87 or 89 octane? Isn’t this a MODERN engine?
It depends on if 90+ octane is required or recommended. If it is required, running lower octane can cause detonation and damage. If it is recommended, then the ECU will pull timing and you will just lose power and fuel economy.
There are no knock sensors, so better fill up with premium.
I believe #2 has stumbled upon “root ’cause”. looking at the specs of this engine, I personally see nothing to warrant premium fuel…? dare I say it looks like it was built by Honda who we know builds some of the most docile (sanitized for your protection) kit around.
whether that’s good or bad depends on your reference, but don’t get side tracked. since it’s also equipped with VVT, the sage observation by Texas Jeremy Burgess suggests (to me) that this is just a CYA for warranty purposes, since at the time this kit was developed (some time ago) no provisions were made for knock sensing and correction. the C14 would likely go it’s whole life just fine on 87 (like so much ULEV Accord).
for a bike, it’s not really HIGH performance, it’s just BIG displacement. the Zed engine is really that one needs premium if anything. anybody know what K-Heavy spec for that…? Bueller…? anyone…?
It’s another $1.20 to fill the empty tank than if it used regular. I don’t think that would be too much strain on most wallets. It’s the same as with my Norge. Regular has less octane than recommended and premium is higher. Sometimes I fill with a middle grade and sometimes premium, but it’s a big ol’ air-cooled twin so I’ve never thought to run regular.
MG there are many gas stations around here that carry 87 only. I have used it in the ST before when desperate withput issue, but the ST has knock sensors. Also here regular used to be say 2.80, mid grade was 2.90 and premium 3.00. Now regular is 2.80 midgrade 2.95 and premium 3.10. Don’t know why the price gap changing…and lord help the people driving diesels its like 3.50.
Btw I was shocked when I went to Cali this summer and had to pay over 5 .00 for premium.
“Don’t know why the price gap changing”
That is the result of some pretty significant declines in the demand for premium fuel. The price of fuel goes up at the wholesale level as production and distribution costs per unit go up, and there can be quite a bit of volatility in the price too with the lessened demand.
Demand for premium is down about 70% from ten years ago. I’ve come across a few stations in rural areas here that only offer 87-octane because they don’t have a large enough customer base for premium fuel to justify stocking it.
That makes sense. Wonder if they will eventually discontinue premium all together? Wonder if any cars even require it anymore?
There are a fair number of cars, mostly luxury/high-performance engines, forced-induction engines and engines used in hybrids, that still do require/recommend it, but the number of vehicles that require it has dropped greatly.
There are variables that could cause demand for premium to decrease or increase (as a % of total fuel sold, not necessarily gross volume) going forward. Who knows?
re: “lord help the people driving diesels its like 3.50”
cry not for me Argentina.
i LOVE the smell of diesel in the morning. smells like…?
well, diesel.
I have 66000 trouble free miles on my 2008 and I love it.I don’t know why everyone thinks a cruise control is such a great feature. I have never felt the need. I have and do now own a great number of motorcycles and this is one of the best.
Having cruise is better than not having it, but it ain’t all that. Having not had it for this long, Kawi should just wait until they can upstage the rest and put in radar cruise. THAT actually is very nice, at least in cars.
Ok, I need to chime in. On long trips, my right hand needs a break. It just cramps up or goes to sleep and that’s when cruise is really a lifesaver. Also helps when your forced to drone down some boring straight roads. It keeps me in the saddle longer which means more mileage.
I’d rather have a factory option instead of using a throttle lock.
Cruise is handy when a cop is behind you, too.
Lots of us old pharts have carpal tunnel from years of riding. I know mine is shredded … has been for more than 10 years. Can’t ride for more than 30 minutes without my right hand going numb. Cruise control is the only way to get relief. And believe me when I tell you I’ve tried everything else.
If it was not for the yards of tupperware and near 700 lbs I would be attracted to this bike. That is a lot of green plastic on the bike in the article. You would really have to be a huge fan of green to own one.
Maybe I’ll trade my K1300S in for one when I turn 75, but not the green one.
I rode a C14 a couple years ago and it seemed to resist turn-in. The thing was really wide across the bags. And they sat high which added to the top heavy feel, not to mention the extra effort needed to get ones foot over without marring the paint. The wind screen was a bit narrow allowing a lot of cold or rain on ones shoulders. And I felt the tank was too small for serious LD use. I didn’t like the “key” thing either. Nor the need for high test when the job can be done with 87 octane. The one I rode was a very pleasant blue, not the acid reflux-inducing green which Kawi seems to regal in. Today’s bikes intended for LD use should have electronic cruise which apparently the Kawi lacks. Many also have radios with Blue Tooth connectivity.
Otherwise, it has good storage capacity, apparently good comfort, a motorized wind screen, more than enough power and a comparatively low price. AS far as I know there are no significant reliability issues. I wonder how maintenance costs compare to other brands.
re: “I rode a C14 a couple years ago and it seemed to resist turn-in.”
new tyres…? old tyres…? shod with a set of crap Conti’s…?
re: “the acid reflux-inducing green which Kawi seems to regal in”
like the wisemen say “it’s not easy being green”. wait, that was a frog, my bad.
The bike was a provided by the regional sales rep to a bunch of motor cops for their evaluation and feedback. I was able to take advantage of the opportunity even though I’m not a cop but was potentially interested in buying a C14. The condition of the tires (tyres)… I don’t remember but have to think they were in decent condition given the purpose of the demo.
I’ve also ridden a C-14. Bike reminded me of a freight train. What a motor. Handled ok, but I didn’t care for it’s general hulkiness (made up word) maybe because I’m a little feller.. When I test rode a Suzuki Bandit a few years ago, I thought it resisted turning in as well, and passed on it, although others claimed they handled fine. Went thru an S turn and thought I wasn’t going to make it through the first curve. It seemed to just want to go straight. Was disconcerting to say the least.
Sometimes, for unknown reasons, bikes and riders just don’t click.
re: “It seemed to just want to go straight. Was disconcerting”
that my dear Mickey was Newton’s 1st…
the Law of INERTIA.
re: “The bike was a provided by the regional sales rep to a bunch of motor cops for their evaluation and feedback.”
oh that’s right, this is an RTP platform innit…? in fact, i took a pic years ago during my travels of a Connie mounted LEO. it wanna say it wasn’t CHP (Laguna Seca) it was an AMA event in the East…? thinking the Alabama “Staties” at Barber. i know on the very first visit i definitely remember the Bama’s having fully kitted 1800 Goldwings, but that was like ’03/’04 before anybody knew from the C14. pretty badass.
The stiffer rear spring this year balances the bike better for heavier riders. Adding preload to the shock was more often necessary in past years, but this was simple with the remote adjustment knob on the left side of the bike … a toolless, 30 second process.
Wow, 100 lbs heavier than the heaviest bike I owned, a ’00 BMW R1150GS. I was moderately surprised to see BMWs K1600GTL weighs 100 lbs more than the Kawi (thought it was just a tad heavier).
The GTL is a triple bagger with a larger tank and includes the bag weight unlike the kawi specs that subtract it. A better comparison might be the GT with the same fuel and no panniers is a bit under 40 pounds heavier.
re: “BMWs K1600GTL weighs 100 lbs more”
re: “The GTL is a triple bagger with a larger tank”
the GTL is a 6 cylinder with more displacement, a larger block, 2 more pistons, 2 more connecting rods, 8 more valves, longer “bumpsticks”, and a longer crank.
and has cruise !!
re: “and has cruise !!”
yup, both the BMW and the next instalment of Mission Impossible (#5), but where are we going with this…?
When are they going to put a decent size gas tank….at least 6.6 gal on this bike? And what about tuning it to run 87 octane? After all it’s a Sport Touring bike not a Sport bike. Instead of modernizing the very capable old Concours they turned it into an open class sport bike with bags. I’m sure this is fine with some riders, but not so much with those of us that put on many miles. On the ALCAN to Alaska there’s no premium fuel and sometimes no fuel for many miles. Is it a Sport Tourer or a Sport bike?
If they increase the fuel capacity tune it to run regular gas and simplify the maintenance they might have the perfect Sport Tourer….but wait wouldn’t that make it an FJR?
You don’t say anything about the new chrome bezels! WHAT ABOUT THE CHROME BEZELS?!? Does the added chroming affect performance?
Oh, wait–you did mention them, as I discovered on re-reading. Sorry.
Chromed Bezels? Are they chromed or brushed aluminum/metal?
Article says this: “We appreciated the fact that the new silver bezels surrounding the instrumentation had a brushed, non-reflective finish.”
If these are the same ones from the Kawasaki parts bins used on my 2013 Kawasaki ZX14R, no they don’t add speed but I love the fit and finish look of it.
Oh it was a joke? Sorry.
I’ll take a chromed bezel over a chromed bezoar anyday…
This is a Beautiful Machine in many minds. What really is the perfect touring motorcycle for two up riding ?
You might want to check my post above dated December 8, 2014 at 6:32 pm
I never know when my responses will be posted on MC Daily. It’s almost getting futile to visit the site when everything I type doesn’t get posted! When will this get fixed?
This one made it, speak!
BRING IT…!!!
We see you. My favorite is where’s the cruise control?
Year after year and new model after new model, I just can’t understand why we don’t have any liter bikes made for doing whatever you need to do on the pavement. We have these supertankers, the even bigger mega-supertankers, street legal track bikes, mega-“enduros” with beaks and stilts, cruisers, mega-supertanker cruisers, 1970’s era nostalgia fashioned cafe bikes, 1980’s era fashioned UJM’s, and entry level mid-sizers. We don’t have modern liter bikes with good ergonomics and available cases and wind protection. If you are an experienced rider, who just wants to enjoy riding a functional bike for the typical uses that range from running around town up to going a few hundred miles away, you have to make serious comprises to either fashion over function or an extremely narrow niche.
RE: “We don’t have modern liter bikes with good ergonomics and available cases and wind protection.”
Suzuki did make the GSX1250FA which met your criteria, unfortunately it was overpriced, not especially attractive in black, and bombed in the showroom, although it is available in Canada and other countries this year. At 570lb’s, it’s as heavy a bike as I’m willing to own. What I would really like to see is a middleweight, 800 to 1000cc’s sport-touring bike with shaft drive and (talking about you BMW) a smooth engine.
The few other attempts are also flawed by acres of plastic used more to make them look like faux sport bikes than for function. A sportbike that really isn’t a sportbike, carrying luggage, looks about as odd as a Porsche 911 would with a roof mounted trunk. The Triumph Sprint grew bigger and more plastic covered and ended up at 583 lbs without any fluids.
Bikes like the Multistrada and VStrom are closer to what I’d like. But the extra height and the cliche beaks and dirt bike styling detract. I’m tall enough to not be encumbered, but on the road the extra inches in the air do little but to give you a higher center of gravity and more area to catch the wind. The MV Agusta 800 Veloce Lusso is kind of close. Add 200cc’s, normal height suspension, and three inches of wheelbase and it would be pretty ideal in type (price, dealer rarity, and parts issues not withstanding). The Monster with frame mounted fairing and cases would be in the neighborhood, too. The Superduke with a touring package would also work.
There are actually a lot of choices in that genre. What about the Kawasaki Ninja 1000? BMW has the S1000XR, and the Multistrada 1200 fits your bill as well. It’s a Twin, but makes power like an I-4. I could say the same about the V-Strom.
though I believe they’re coming as M.Y. 2016…? let’s not short Suzuki.
http://tinyurl.com/oh6ajo2
as we see from their MotoGP programme (which you’ve only heard me speak about) they need all the help they can get.
I got to see the upcoming Suzuki GSX-S1000 at the IMS recently. It takes a lot to really impress me, and this bike did. Sitting on it it just felt so right. The position and location of everything just felt perfect for this type of bike. Also it was surprisingly compact and appeared well built. I wish the GSX-S1000F had been there too, which is the one I’d be most interested in myself. What I really don’t understand is that why it doesn’t really have proper passenger accommodations and why they didn’t include integrated luggage mounts on a what is being marketed as a “Sport Tourer”. It just makes no sense, and it will surely lose market share to other bikes that do have those features. I hope this features appear on the bike by the time it’s actually released for sale.
Next to this one at the Kawi dealer, sits a Ninja 1000. Hardbags, liter motor, comfortable seating, remote preload, abs, adjustable windshield….
The new 450lb Yamaha MT09X (FJR900?)
Triple would fit the bill I think..
Triumph Sprint GT, but you missed it, as did virtually everyone else in the motorcycling fraternity. There may still be a new 2012 sitting in the back of a dealer warehouse somewhere.
Wondering if any of the readers have ever ridden one of these. Like the GoldWing, the weight disappears once you are moving.
yup, and you’ll love every bit of that weight as you cruise down your interstates and your pikes in the “jet wash” of 100’s of tractor trailers.
In Dakota, you have to pass cattle trucks quickly or the inhabitant’s exhaust plume will leave you coated and stinking.
yeah, I hear/tell is tough for lorry drivers to maintain healthy diets. consuming all that junk food’ll do that.
not the drivers fumes to worry about, but the dozens of Mammals that are ‘venting’ their fears of being in a trailer, packed in like, well like cattle. sometimes more than fumes come out the back of those trucks (and it is doubtful that it is the washer fluid from the windsheild that is raining on you).
more power is always welcome at times like that!
The devil is in the details, but it’s also in the overall package. For my money– and my checkbook will back me up– the best bike in the category is the FJR because it is the only one that doesn’t look from the rider’s seat as though the designers wanted to fill your entire view with motorcycle. Weight aside, all the bikes in the class look HUGE atop them. The other factor for me is the sheer number of exposed fasteners for the body work and seemingly everything else. That look no longer flies for me; things were different in 2001 when I purchased my avatar namesake.
I’m encouraged by Kaw’s continued up-dating this bike. One bike for 25 years as with the previous generation of Concours wouldn’t work well in today’s market either, despite the KLR’s continued success. (I’m eagerly waiting to shed my KLR for the first offering that does a better job at approximately the same weight.)
I wish Kawasaki continued success. The Concours just gets better and better.
The weight is a big issue for this bike, a FJR or RT feel so much lighter. I think with the lower first and second gear they could delete the valve timing and save cost and weight, still needs cruise control!
re: “The weight is a big issue for this bike”
NOT for the Superleggera.
re: “a FJR or RT feel so much lighter.”
OMG the new R1 with it’s Ti rods/Mg wheels feels even lighter still…!?
Love that green!
Gentleriders: you want to do megamiles along a variety of highways? What else do you have on the market providing you this degree of reliability and performance without paying Eurobux for the privilege?
Forget colour and your perceived problems with styling: this is a serious transportation module. No naked chain flapping around in the breeze and guaranteed all-day comfort in the saddle at a level which allows you to finish your days ride without gnarles, groinks or limpish twitches.
And the price is right? Right?
Further little moans mean you haven’t really understood the product or the market.
re: “this is a serious transportation module”
NATO code… “SPEEDBIRD”.
Shucks. I thought they were going to make it an 1800cc. Because you need all that power to go touring…
And I thought my K75S was a little too powerful (75hp) and heavy (500lb) for a sport touring bike. Do people really head up to the mountains at 186mph?
I bought and still own a 2012 concours. If you’re happy w 75hp, great. Not me. 2 up, 3 hard bags loaded and i can still pass cars w ease.
So to answer your question I’d we need/want big hp, the answer is yes
re: “Do people really head up to the mountains at 186mph?”
don’t know about the mountains, but they sure seem to fancy MotoGP…?
2-up with pillion and gear, the shockwaves rock me hire car as they go by.
What characterizes a ride on a too-powerful 500 pound 75hp bike exactly? Did it wheelie uncontrollably, or spin the back tire at every corner exit? Maybe you prefer your acceleration to be only discernible by sophisticated instrumentation as opposed to, you know, feeling it? I honestly am curious as to what that statement means.
Don’t get me wrong, I am happy touring on all sorts of bikes that make less then C14-esque hp, but a K75 is too powerful? Too powerful for what exactly?
I’ve ridden, fully laden, two up, plenty of miles on the K75S. Acceleration on the highway is strong, not lacking at all. I believe it is because of its rather low gearing. At 75, the engine is spinning around 5500-ish so that puts the power output at those speeds in line with what a Motus would be putting out at the same speeds in top gear -and it’s lighter. Plus, not having such a monstrous motor, I can get 50mpg out of it when touring. I can also easily go over 100mph so I’ve never seen the point of adding more motor when no more is needed.
Todd, I think our definition of “strong and not lacking” acceleration is widely different.
More needed? Riding a motorcycle isn’t a need too me.
Have you ridden a late model fjr or concours?
I think the terms “squid” and “adrenaline junky” comes to mind. I never accelerate more than is necessary to get where I’m going or pass what I’m passing. Even there, there is still power left in the bike. I can’t remember the last time I held the throttle pinned at 8,000 rpm. Maybe that’s necessary for some people but if I never use it it’s unecessary for me.
re: “I’ve never seen the point of adding more motor”
fairplay. is it possible you have a medical condition…? no slate, you’re body may be lacking the physiology for “adrenaline response” the rest of us have.
re: “when no more is needed.”
not needed, WANTED.
I’ve ridden a k75. It needs way more.
Wait a minute… Aren’t you the same guy that is also smoking SV650’s and Ninja 650’s on an ’82 Seca? I see a pattern here: dementia!
All kidding aside, I’ve never ridden a K75, so I can’t attest to what its power output feels like. It may not need more power, but I bet more power would make it better!
No need to call names. I just happen to feel that the advancement of time does not necessarily suggest the advancement of motorcycles. There were guys lapping the Isle of Mann faster in the 60s, 70s, 80s on “inferior” bikes than many can today on the latest kit.
Case in point; I also own a Ducati Monster. It’s the most powerful bike I have (I’ve ridden much more powerful bikes though). The problem is, the Ducati is the worst handling bike I own inspite of it’s Ohlins suspension and massive tires – likely because of it. I can ride much faster on my Seca and my RT2 than the Ducati. Go figure.
Anyone want to buy a near perfect ’93 Monster?
I have a problem: when certain profiles become familiar enough to me, I start to interact with them as if they are friends rather than someone I don’t know. The dementia comment was just a friendly jest. I virtually slapped you on your virtual shoulder as I said that, but I guess you didn’t feel it. I hope I didn’t offend.
So, no pictures of the fancy new bezels?
Follow the link to the 2015 model preview: http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2014/11/kawasaki-refines-concours-14-abs-for-2015/
Heh, tasteful indeed. I also vastly prefer the “dated” real gauges to all the “we didn’t learn the lesson of the ‘door is ajar’ 80s” bar graph tachs etc.
I have nothing of value to add; I just needed to post inside the blue box.
Hahaha. That was awesome. I’m the blue box too. I hope.
I own a 2009 model since new. Used to ride sport bikes for a long time.and decided to go to for something more comfortable. This is by far the best bike I have owned, and the 09 doesn’t have all the bells and whistles of the 2010/2015.
BTW, for those complaining about the weight, it’s is typical for these type of bikes.
Weight isnt that far out of line for this class of motorcycle.. As a matter of fact it’s almost in the middle. They are all pretty heavy beasts, but no where near Goldwing or Harley Glide weights
K1600 GT 732
Honda ST 1300 717
Kaw Concours 688
Triumph Trophy SE 664
Yamaha FJR 644
R 1200RT 629
My god, this girl is heavy. Apparently, even the big ones look nice in a green dress. This thing is approaching Harleydom and Wingdom weights. “I can’t get it up” will apply to this beast when it tips over.
Dirck, when you get the long term test bike in the MD Garage, can you do a video as well as your regular written critique?
Dale
We are planning on it.
I hope Mr. Dirck is doing right… because someone missing testing this beauty and beast may need some major excuses…
Ugly is in the eye of the beholder! 🙂
That’s a whole lot of ugly right there.
And weight, too. 690 lbs.fully fueled? Where does the extra weight come from vs. the ZX14? Is ugly really that heavy?
I’ve been complaining about the size and weight of most of the bikes this industry wants to sell us, for quite a while actually.
Nobody seems to care. All they think is “horsepower” (because we ALL need 160+HP to cruise at the legal 65MPH limit) and gleefully swallow the hype.
What bike does meet the weight target? Is it possible that this is simply what a bike of this size & capability has to weigh?
re: “I’ve been complaining”
yup, we know.
re: “All they think is “horsepower”
http://tinyurl.com/nb265l2
Oh yes, while you people proclaim the perfection of these boats, out of the other side of your mouths you pretty much HATE everything HD, Indian, Victory et al come out with, and look down on Gold Wing riders too.
Hypocrites. You’ll put yourself, what you are riding, up on a pedestal as long as it has high HP.
“you pretty much HATE everything HD, Indian, Victory et al come out with”
“You’ll put yourself, what you are riding, up on a pedestal as long as it has high HP.”
I don’t think anyone would mind a 500lb Concours. But if a motorcycle this big and capable is going to tick in around the 700lbs mark, then by all means give it 160hp, not 80. There are smaller, lighter and less powerful options for those who do not want all of what the Concours is offering. And there are cruisers available for those who don’t care about performance at all.
I am not really sure why it is hypocritical to prefer a 690 lb. cruise missile like the Concours over an 835 lb boat anchor like an Indian Chief. There isn’t a light bike in this category. That doesn’t mean anyone thinks the Concours is a featherweight, we just accept that it isn’t out of line for its class.
Really? Like you don’t know where the extra weight comes from; hard bags, electric windscreen, shaft drive, bigger body work and larger fuel tank.
I own a 2012. I consider it a 10.9 1/4 mile light weight gold wing. I ride my ducati hypermotord 821sp (390 lbs) when i want a light weight 100 hp bike
Actually, I forgot about the shaft drive, and that is likely the heaviest adder of everything you listed – but what would it add, maybe thirty pounds? I looked on Kaw’s web site and saw the ZX14 at 590 lbs. “wet”. Assuming an apples-to-apples comparison, a hundred pounds additional still seems like a lot. Maybe 15 lbs. for the bags, 15 lbs. for fuel, 30 for the shaft, I just don’t see where the extra forty comes from. I actually like the ZX-14, and can see where its platform would make for an awesome tourer. Part of my misconception is that I thought the FJ9 would have weighed maybe 600 lbs. wet, Mickey’s numbers above start to make the Connie’s 690 more reasonable (but still shows the potential for a lighter package).
I haven’t ridden a ZX14 or a Concours: I have only sat on them at the dealerships. The Concours feels much bigger than the ZX14 to me. There is also just more of everything on the Concours; room, seat, fairing, windshield, pillion accommodation, etc. Add a shaft drive and stout subframe for supporting luggage, and I can easily accept that it weighs 100lbs more than a ZX14. It is just a different kind of bike.
I highly doubt that variable valve timing is needed on this class of bike. It just adds extra expense to the retail price and gives the dealer an opportunity to charge more for valve adjustments.
re: “It just adds extra expense to the retail price and gives the dealer an opportunity to charge more for valve adjustments…”
…and meet payroll, while making sure the lights are on when you return 6 months from now with expectations of free warranty work.
for some reason the MD software cut you off before you could complete your thought…?
there, I fixed it.
The variable valve timing on this bike does not affect the time. Getting to the valves. like most modern bikes on the other hand…………Being a Kawasaki, I would just not worry about them till the rubber gasket on the valve cover starts to leak and have it done then. Buy the extended warranty and listen to the tech cry when he sees what Kaw pays for replacing the gasket
Since you bought the extended warranty, you pre-paid for at least some of the service.
not to the flat-rate tech
ladies and gentlemen, this classic case of “Consumer Perception” Vs. “Business Reality” has been brought to you by…
wait for it…
Smokin’ Don Fraser.