Rider magazine mistake?

[rflnomad]

Hey everyone.
I am puzzled. The new comparison on the big inch cruiser tourers left me shaking my head.
The article said over & over that these bikes are big (even hinted they were TOO big) but they walked right past two of the better cruising tourers on the market. The Kawasaki VN1600 Nomad and the Yamaha Road Star Silverado. They tested the VN 2000 and the Stratoliner.
I am writing a email to the mag to further ask for explanations on this.
I was disappointed. ::)

[moenko]

Hi frl ... I have the feeling the Nomad was not in the class of bikes they were comparing. It was probably 100 cu.in. and up V-Twins. The Suzuki C109 should have made the list, in addition to the bikes you have already mentioned. I have read a lot about the VN2000 (I near bought one) and it got nowhere near the raving reviews that the 1500s and 1600s got.

[cactusjack]

I read that article as well, and was disappointed. I don't get it. Why is the Nomad constantly overlooked? Moenko may be right, maybe they were reviewing 100 cubes and bigger.

Originally Posted by rflnomad

...The new comparison on the big inch cruiser tourers left me shaking my head. ...they walked right past...Kawasaki VN1600 Nomad...

1600cc just isn't considered "big inch" anymore. When I was younger, a 650 was big and a 750 or 900 was really big inches and 1200 was tops.

Well, the world has changed, and now if more is good then too much must be better. 45's and 61's and 74's have given way to 90's and 100's and 125's: bikes we would have found unbelievable.

I guess my 90 is the new 45 and a 125 is the new 74. ;)

[rksaw]

Cadd,
You, Dan, CJ and others have seen a lot in your day. My question: "Where is the limit to size?" 125? 150? Somewhere there has to be a breakover point.
Rich

[cactusjack]

Originally Posted by rksaw

Cadd,
You, Dan, CJ and others have seen a lot in your day. My question: "Where is the limit to size?" 125? 150? Somewhere there has to be a breakover point.
Rich

Two words: Boss Hoss

Guys have stuffed some huge engines in motorcycles. Even 500 cubic inches and more!

What's really practical in a production bike, IMO, depends on how light the engine can be made. Weight is a bigger impediment than mere size. The location of that weight is important too. On a VN2000 (for instance) the crank is forced down between the frame rails, much closer to the ground. It's a heavier bike than a Vulcan 1500, but really is no more top heavy. Also the number of cylinders and their layout is a factor. V-twins are reaching a limit (they say) of what is practical to pass smog laws. They're very inefficient in operations demanding a broad power band, compared to multis.

The size of the rider is important too. At 5'-10" and 200 lbs, the Nomad is really the upper limit of practicality for me, because I commute on it across town.

In my mind, having ridden the Vulcan 2000, it's just a little big to be really practical for a guy my size to ride around town. I've done it. I can do it, but I think it's a lot more practical for someone that's 6'-4" and about 250 lbs. Control in an emergency situation sometimes depends on how fast you can toss the bike around and make a radical maneuver. I can get the Nomad all crossed up and still recover. I'm not as certain about the 2000. If I were to buy one (and I'm considering it) it would most likely be primarily a freeway bike for me.

[moenko]

I concur with Caddy. I sat and rode the beast for a little bit when I was considering to acquire one. At 6'6" and 250 lbs, the dimension were right, yet I didn't like several aspects in the looks department, plus for around town it's simply too bulky, like a Hummer in Manhattan. The exhaust note was teriffic, but the lusterless finish under the engine arrangement (some spray-on black guey robber coat) looks just plain old cheap. I for one am glad to have settled with a Nomad that comes with so much more luxury equipment and an engine that will do anything and anything reasonably well. It's also been the long-time favorite for the folks at motorcyclecruiser.com, who still have it on top of their list in the class and I kind of like their detailed test rides.
(If only I could finally pick her up - 48 more hours - tick, tick, tick ...)

[caddman11]

I think that the Nomad is overlooked, not because the bike is bad or limited, but because it's been around for 10 years and still pretty much looks the same. They probably feel they have said all they can about the machine and nothing more needs to be said.

[radco]

Originally Posted by caddman11

I think that the Nomad is overlooked, not because the bike is bad or limited, but because it's been around for 10 years and still pretty much looks the same. They probably feel they have said all they can about the machine and nothing more needs to be said.

Sort of like AMC and Dodge in the Day... GOOD car but the style was allmost the same for 10/15 years....ALL the bugs were out of the drive train etc,,but people wanted more change,in STYLE Etc...and goodies..

[Bdog]

Good point Radco..but its a bike thats craving to be personalised. Not many other bikes out there have this claim. Look around this site, don't think you'll find to many that look the same..close maybe but all the owners seem to have something different about their rides and that says a lot about the nomad. All the other big cruisers out there look the same as each other in there models except the Harleys. This could be why most die hard Harley riders have a shine for nomads but not for other makes...Bdog

[VulcanE]

I read an article once that said due to the bigger engines of today, that up to 1700cc's is considered "mid-size" and 1800cc's and over are considered the "big-bore" engines. Even though we ride an 800+ pound bike, we are in the mid-size class, go figure.

[oldbikers]

But the Harley is not over 1600 cc ether but I guess they have to pick it.

[phenrichs]

I like that it is overlooked. Keeps it under the radar. If it got too popular everything would go up in price. I can't imagine having to pay an extra $100 for tires because they decided to stamp Nomad on them. A friend just paid $7000 for an 82 HD. I know that at least $400 of it was tires cause it had brand new Dunlop HD emblem tires. Seems like whenever a bike gets really popular the major aftermarket companies start building model specific accessories and then everything goes up in price.

I had HD Dunlops on my Intruder, but they didn't cost me any more than the non-HD logo Dunlops. ????? Of course, that was about two years ago when I bought them. Things could have changed by now.