[iabob]

I’ll add a couple cents to the conversation. When it comes to gadgetry on a motorcycle, I generally favor the idea but hate the execution. I look at gadgetry like I look at horsepower, just because it’s there doesn’t mean you have to use it if you don’t want to. So when it comes to rider modes and leaning abs and traction control and infotainment I’m interested in the tech but not impressed with the level of sophistication of it on most motorcycles. Well infotainment mostly. It’s like Windows 95, lots of capabilities but if I have to scroll through menus after reading a thick owner’s manual to learn how to use it...pass. Let me know when I can plug in an earpiece and tell Siri to turn down the temp on my butt warmer by 3 degrees then I’m interested.

And speaking of horsepower...sorry Red but that thing doesn’t run like a scalded dog or a freight train. Maybe a scalded sloth or a Lionel train. 112 ft-lbs and 81 hp trying to move a 963 lb bike is just sad. You’d be better off running with the “ yeah it’s slow but if I wanted a Hyabusa I would have bought a Hyabusa...” line. Trying to convince us that one of the slowest bikes in its class is actually fast is never going to work.

 

[Chattanooga_Mark]

RedVic,

Thank you for your postings and the videos. I’ve learned 10 times more about the bike from you than I’ve ever gotten from a dealer. I was very interested in the bike when it was coming out. I heard a few rumblings about a valve train issue after its release but I never looked into the situation. Though it seems from the few Yamaha dealers I’ve visited, they have a diminished interest in the bikes now. They seem to be getting heavily discounted and, much like many Victory dealers in years past, the bikes are pushed towards a back corner of the showroom. I believe the bikes are much better than either Yamaha or the few dealers I’ve been to have presented them.

 

[Chattanooga_Mark]

Oh, and the horsepower and torque numbers? Yea, dynos don’t tell the whole story. For instance, the hp and tq numbers on my CCT are much higher than a Moto Guzzi 1400. The Guzzi and a CC are are similar in size and weight, But the ‘small’ Guzzi gets down the road far above what the dyno graph on one would make you think. They seem to punch well above their weight class.

 

[RedVic]

Chattanooga_Mark,

Most multi brand import dealers are lacking, go to our local Harley dealer in either Ft. Myers or Port Charlotte and they have a lot of motorcycles on display.

The Indian dealer they opened up in Ft. Myers that also sells Triumph they have a lot of Indians and Triumphs on display.

Our old Victory dealer was lucky to have one of each model bike on a good month.

The three multi brand import dealers don't have near the selection on display that Harley and Indian does. The dealer I bought from in Punta Gorda sells Yamaha, Kawasaki and Suzuki but inventory is lacking. The dealer in Ft. Myers sells Yamaha, Honda, Kawasaki, Suzuki and Can Am but again their inventory is lacking, the third dealer in Naples sells Yamaha, Honda, Kawasaki, Suzuki and Can Am but once again lacking in inventory.

Our local BMW dealer used to sell BMW, Ducati and Triumph, they dropped Triumph and the new Indian dealer picked them up. But even when the BMW dealer sold Triumph they were lacking inventory with little product for all three brands on hand, it has not improved now that they dropped down to just BMW and Ducati, there showroom does not have many bikes in it.

I have seen some multi brand dealers on the internet that have huge selections of inventory of each brand. One is out in the state of Washington.

Your comments on power is a valid point, it makes a huge difference on how that power was designed to come on which makes all the difference in the world. In Yamahas case they concentrated on torque, what gets any vehicle moving? Torque.

iabob,

You could not be more wrong on this Yamaha and how it puts its power down. When did 4.75 seconds 0-60 become slow by the way. I wonder if the site testing the Yamaha knew how to turn off the traction control and if they even had it in sport mode when they ran there tests on the Yamaha, but still a 4.75 seconds 0-60 time and a 13.8 second 1/4 mile time is hardly slow and that was on a new motorcycle too boot.

Yeah I get it you and half crazy spent thousands of dollars putting in big bore kits in your Victory's but you and half crazy are far from the normal as most people don't go out and purchase big bore kits, all the Harleys on the road around me are either stock or at most stage one and that is it.

I owned a 2013 Victory Cross Country Tour, a 2016 Harley Davidson Ultra Limited twin cam twin cool, and now I own this Yamaha Star Venture Transcontinental and have ridden each bike several thousand miles as their owner and this Yamaha is not lacking to either the Victory or the Harley in power.

 

[iabob]

Chattanooga_Mark,

Most multi brand import dealers are lacking, go to our local Harley dealer in either Ft. Myers or Port Charlotte and they have a lot of motorcycles on display.

The Indian dealer they opened up in Ft. Myers that also sells Triumph they have a lot of Indians and Triumphs on display.

Our old Victory dealer was lucky to have one of each model bike on a good month.

The three multi brand import dealers don't have near the selection on display that Harley and Indian does. The dealer I bought from in Punta Gorda sells Yamaha, Kawasaki and Suzuki but inventory is lacking. The dealer in Ft. Myers sells Yamaha, Honda, Kawasaki, Suzuki and Can Am but again their inventory is lacking, the third dealer in Naples sells Yamaha, Honda, Kawasaki, Suzuki and Can Am but once again lacking in inventory.

Our local BMW dealer used to sell BMW, Ducati and Triumph, they dropped Triumph and the new Indian dealer picked them up. But even when the BMW dealer sold Triumph they were lacking inventory with little product for all three brands on hand, it has not improved now that they dropped down to just BMW and Ducati, there showroom does not have many bikes in it.

I have seen some multi brand dealers on the internet that have huge selections of inventory of each brand. One is out in the state of Washington.

Your comments on power is a valid point, it makes a huge difference on how that power was designed to come on which makes all the difference in the world. In Yamahas case they concentrated on torque, what gets any vehicle moving? Torque.

iabob,

You could not be more wrong on this Yamaha and how it puts its power down. When did 4.75 seconds 0-60 become slow by the way. I wonder if the site testing the Yamaha knew how to turn off the traction control and if they even had it in sport mode when they ran there tests on the Yamaha, but still a 4.75 seconds 0-60 time and a 13.8 second 1/4 mile time is hardly slow and that was on a new motorcycle too boot.

Yeah I get it you and half crazy spent thousands of dollars putting in big bore kits in your Victory's but you and half crazy are far from the normal as most people don't go out and purchase big bore kits, all the Harleys on the road around me are either stock or at most stage one and that is it.

I owned a 2013 Victory Cross Country Tour, a 2016 Harley Davidson Ultra Limited twin cam twin cool, and now I own this Yamaha Star Venture Transcontinental and have ridden each bike several thousand miles as their owner and this Yamaha is not lacking to either the Victory or the Harley in power.

I agree that your stock Yamaha is not "lacking" in power in stock form compared to a 10-20 year old design from Polaris or Harley. What I'm saying is it's not fast. It's not a scalded dog or a freight train. It is slow. 963 lbs is 100-200lbs heavier than the competition, some of which is producing much more power in a much lighter frame.

Just for the record I don't have a big bore, I'm making my power out of 100 cubic inches. And in a bike that's 300 lbs lighter than yours, my bike is fun, not fast. It's not that I don't get where you're coming from. When I demo'd Victory touring bikes in stock form, they did suck. But after putting some decent miles, 2-up, on a Vision I came to the conclusion that a touring bike doesn't really need impressive power. 80 hp did suck, but 130 was overkill. I get that 110-120 ft-lbs of torque is sufficient for a touring bike, power that low would not stop me from buying one. I just wouldn't call it fast.

I accept that MAYBE I'm far from normal. But here's the thing, in my circles, and at places like a race track, I'm very normal. Sure there are lots of stock or S1 Harley riders. But there are literally thousands of riders of multiple brands, including Victory, that have gone far beyond that. This is just about conversation. For the sake of entering this conversation, gadgetry is not automatically a bad thing, and can be a very good thing. And a near 1000 lb bike that only has 80 hp is heavy and slow. It may very well still be a desirable and purchase worthy bike, but it is not light or fast.

 

[Poseidon]

When did 4.75 seconds 0-60 become slow by the way. I wonder if the site testing the Yamaha knew how to turn off the traction control and if they even had it in sport mode when they ran there tests on the Yamaha, but still a 4.75 seconds 0-60 time and a 13.8 second 1/4 mile time is hardly slow and that was on a new motorcycle too boot.

When did it become slow on 2 wheels or 4? After all, that is barely faster than a Chevy 1500 crew cab 4X4.

 

[RedVic]

I agree that your stock Yamaha is not "lacking" in power in stock form compared to a 10-20 year old design from Polaris or Harley. What I'm saying is it's not fast. It's not a scalded dog or a freight train. It is slow. 963 lbs is 100-200lbs heavier than the competition, some of which is producing much more power in a much lighter frame.

Just for the record I don't have a big bore, I'm making my power out of 100 cubic inches. And in a bike that's 300 lbs lighter than yours, my bike is fun, not fast. It's not that I don't get where you're coming from. When I demo'd Victory touring bikes in stock form, they did suck. But after putting some decent miles, 2-up, on a Vision I came to the conclusion that a touring bike doesn't really need impressive power. 80 hp did suck, but 130 was overkill. I get that 110-120 ft-lbs of torque is sufficient for a touring bike, power that low would not stop me from buying one. I just wouldn't call it fast.

I accept that MAYBE I'm far from normal. But here's the thing, in my circles, and at places like a race track, I'm very normal. Sure there are lots of stock or S1 Harley riders. But there are literally thousands of riders of multiple brands, including Victory, that have gone far beyond that. This is just about conversation. For the sake of entering this conversation, gadgetry is not automatically a bad thing, and can be a very good thing. And a near 1000 lb bike that only has 80 hp is heavy and slow. It may very well still be a desirable and purchase worthy bike, but it is not light or fast.

You have in the past: 110" Vision, 128 hp 130 tq (sold) it is in all your posts.

Look I am not going to argue with you and half crazy. You two can claim it is slow all you want. Those of us who own one know better.

 

[WHITE_VIC]

And a near 1000 lb bike that only has 80 hp is heavy and slow. It may very well still be a desirable and purchase worthy bike, but it is not light or fast.

my car weighs 4 times as much with probably only a little over twice the power. By people's standards on here, it shouldn't move and would be lugging the engine when its under 2000rpms on the highway. I wonder how I road my last bike with half the power of a victory.

 

[iabob]

You have in the past: 110" Vision, 128 hp 130 tq (sold) it is in all your posts.

Look I am not going to argue with you and half crazy. You two can claim it is slow all you want. Those of us who own one know better.

What exactly have I done in the past? I just agreed that 130 hp on a touring bike, like the one I sold, was overkill. So I really, honestly don't understand what you're accusing me of here.

 

[iabob]

my car weighs 4 times as much with probably only a little over twice the power. By people's standards on here, it shouldn't move and would be lugging the engine when its under 2000rpms on the highway. I wonder how I road my last bike with half the power of a victory.

Sorry, I'm not really sure what you're saying here. I have no idea what your car has to do with this conversation about motorcycles. I've ridden a Honda Grom with barely 10 hp and thought it was freaking awesome. Having half the power of a Victory was never part of this conversation. Perhaps you could clarify the point you're trying to make here?

 

[WHITE_VIC]

Sorry, I'm not really sure what you're saying here. I have no idea what your car has to do with this conversation about motorcycles. I've ridden a Honda Grom with barely 10 hp and thought it was freaking awesome. Having half the power of a Victory was never part of this conversation. Perhaps you could clarify the point you're trying to make here?

Let's see, you have people on here that think a stock victory, Harley, Indian, or even Yamaha doesn't have enough power. I was showing an example that has a poorer hp to weight ratio, yet I can still drive it and at lower rpms to boot. You know the people who think under 2500rpms is lugging it, yet have no idea what they're talking about. Those are the people this refers to. The only difference is engine size between a car and bike. The operation fundamentals are still the same and apply to both of them the same.

Then, you have the people who think modding the engine for more power actually believe the engine works easier to move you. Thus, they think the engine is more realiable and will last longer. It doesn't work like that. To make more power, you have to put more pressure on the Piston to move it down. That puts more pressure on everything else.

Some people don't understand that people can ride stock bikes and be perfectly fine with it

 

[WHITE_VIC]

Having half the power of a Victory was never part of this conversation

Talking about engine power was never part of the original post, yet here we are

 

[Half_Crazy]

Here we go again Half Crazy with his never ending bashing and trying to discredit things.

Wrong, and I'll tell you why... All I did was show the relationship between HP and Torque mathematically. I did so without making ANY sort of comparison between motorcycles or bashing of any sort. It was in response to your comment about not having to rev to make power. Mathematically, horsepower is absolutely RPM dependent.

Example: My truck. 6.7L Cummins diesel. It makes 800 ft-lbs but only 385 horsepower. Why? It only spins 2900 rpm.

Half Crazy the number of people who upgrade their engines is small as most motorcycles will remain stock, even Harley Davidson most of the people will stop at stage one which is nothing more than a new air intake and filter, slip on mufflers and maybe the header, and tuner, those that go farther in for the stage two, three and four are fewer and fewer for each one.

Who are you arguing with? I didn't say anything in disagreement with that and in fact made no comment at all on that topic.

I did the stage one routine on both my 2013 Victory Cross Country Tour and my 2016 Harley Davidson Ultra Limited and this stock Yamaha performs as well if not a little better than both my Victory and Harley Davidson did with stage one set ups on them and the Yamaha Star Venture is stock.

It would depend on what the contest was. There is a difference between perception and actual documented results.

All three of these motorcycles were/are not lacking for power. How a simple thread showing some of the features available is now turning into another half crazy bash fest and your claiming the Yamaha Star Venture is a slow motorcycle with no power really gets old.

Again, you are just making sh!t up. I said nothing of the sort.

I own the Yamaha Star Venture and it runs like a scalded dog and pulls like a freight train when you get on it. It gets me some great fuel mileage as well for being a 963 pound motorcycle.

That's great news.

Maybe you don't understand the design goals Yamaha had with this engine, and that was torque. At the crankshaft this engine is rated at 129 lbs ft of torque, yeah yeah I know you like to use the chassis dyno graph that shows the lowest output, I remember the other thread over a year ago where you did the same thing and I posted three other chassis dyno graphs that showed more power then the one you posted, every dyno is a different and will give a different result.

Again, you are arguing with a straw man here. I made NO COMPARISON AT ALL. I was only showing you the relationship between torque RPM and horsepower.

I doubt you have ever even rode a Yamaha Star Venture/Eluder so you would not know how they perform. If you did it was for a short test ride and I bet you did what most people do and tried to ride it like a bike with a 7,000 RPM redline and kept in on the rev limiter then got off and complained that it has no power when the truth is it would have been your own lack of knowledge and ability to adjust to the power/RPM curve of this engine package.

1) I really don't think you want to do a 'who is more knowledgeable' contest when it comes to this topic.
2) I think you have some sort of attitude when it comes to me. You always assume the worst and take a small statement, misunderstand it, and go off on a rant over it. You cannot take what I say at face value, everything I write is seen as a bash to you.

 

[Half_Crazy]

You have in the past: 110" Vision, 128 hp 130 tq (sold) it is in all your posts.

Look I am not going to argue with you and half crazy. You two can claim it is slow all you want. Those of us who own one know better.

Leave me out of it, I made no comment about that. Please HOLSTER YOUR WEAPON.

 

[Half_Crazy]

Let's see, you have people on here that think a stock victory, Harley, Indian, or even Yamaha doesn't have enough power. I was showing an example that has a poorer hp to weight ratio, yet I can still drive it and at lower rpms to boot.

Not enough power FOR ME. I can't speak for you.
What rpm an engine is comfortable with is dependent on the design of the engine. Multi cylinders helps too (firing several pistons per revolution).
More weight for each HP to move makes the vehicle slower. Period. No one is saying you can't drive it.

You know the people who think under 2500rpms is lugging it, yet have no idea what they're talking about. Those are the people this refers to. The only difference is engine size between a car and bike. The operation fundamentals are still the same and apply to both of them the same.

Again, it depends. Is engine size the ONLY difference between a car and a motorcycle? Are you sure? Look at all the room under a car hood for longer intake runners... what about VVT and DI? What about number of cylinders? How much more sophisticated is the FI?
Oh, and my engine pulls hard from 1800 rpm.

Then, you have the people who think modding the engine for more power actually believe the engine works easier to move you. Thus, they think the engine is more reliable and will last longer. It doesn't work like that. To make more power, you have to put more pressure on the Piston to move it down. That puts more pressure on everything else.

This is a very over-simplified outlook on the topic. So many variables you are ignoring here (like efficiency for one). All things being equal as far as compression ratio, cams, valve sizes, intake ports, throttle bodies... a larger bore gives more surface area to the top of the piston... more area for the combustion to push on... and will make more power without "putting more pressure on the piston".

Let's assume your theory is actually correct and I am dead wrong. Explain to me how, when riding in a group of bikes that make half the power I do, I take less fuel at gas stops than they do? I'll give you a hint, to maintain 60 mph they are holding say, 40% throttle and I am holding say, 20% throttle.
Given the above, explain how operating at 20% throttle vs 60% is causing more wear and is harder on parts.

Some people don't understand that people can ride stock bikes and be perfectly fine with it

And may even say things like, "Runs like a scalded dog" or "pulls like a freight train" too...

I do not think it's as much a matter of people who like power and do power mods disparaging the "happy with stock" crowd... as it is the "happy with stock" crowd trying a little too hard to justify their position and being a little hyper-sensitive. Like a conversation that happened over a year ago still being stuck in the craw.

 

[MagVic CCT]

 

[Poseidon]

So... how about them heated seats and grips? :rofl3:

 

[iabob]

Let's see, you have people on here that think a stock victory, Harley, Indian, or even Yamaha doesn't have enough power. I was showing an example that has a poorer hp to weight ratio, yet I can still drive it and at lower rpms to boot. You know the people who think under 2500rpms is lugging it, yet have no idea what they're talking about. Those are the people this refers to. The only difference is engine size between a car and bike. The operation fundamentals are still the same and apply to both of them the same.

Then, you have the people who think modding the engine for more power actually believe the engine works easier to move you. Thus, they think the engine is more realiable and will last longer. It doesn't work like that. To make more power, you have to put more pressure on the Piston to move it down. That puts more pressure on everything else.

Some people don't understand that people can ride stock bikes and be perfectly fine with it

So far in my life I have not met a single person who doesn't understand that some people are perfectly fine with stock bikes. I guess you have met some of these people, sorry to hear that, they sound pretty dense. I and many others like me do understand that many people are fine with stock bikes. And while conversing in an online discussion of what constitutes a fast bike we contribute our experiences and thoughts. Wether a bike is in stock form or not really doesn't come into play.

On your other comments, it's just not that black and white. You can have a stock motor set up too lean so as to pass epa emissions testing that it is not as reliable as one with a better tuned air fuel ratio. Or you could have one modded with 14-1 compression and a super charger that would turn a great 1/4 mile but be less reliable than the lean stocker. The truth of the matter is it just depends on what you're doing and what you started from.

As for what is lugging, that also depends. The engine in the last Peterbuilt I drove didn't rev much last 800 rpm. The last BMW Motorcycle I rode rev'd past 10k. The fundamentals of each and their operation are very different. What is lugging for one is not lugging for the other.

 

[Half_Crazy]

Almost 12 lbs/HP.

here is a graph showing a chassis dyno run on a 2018 Yamaha Star Venture that Motorcycle Consumer News did. The actual RPM redline is 4,750 when the rev limiter kicks in. Why they show such low fuel mileage I don't know but I am sure they were full throttle a lot and probably idled for a good amount of time as well. Most people are getting 40 plus MPG from this motorcycle that own it.

When they test a bike they are not shooting for 50 mpg, they are testing the bike. The economy numbers reflect that.
I would trust the tach on the dyno before the one on the bike.

4.75 seconds 0-60 time and a 13.8 second 1/4 mile

Not a comment about any particular bike or any particular owner... speaking in general...

People read too much into what they see in a magazine. Cycle World will test a bike and the owners of that bike will tell anyone who will listen "This bike runs 11.80s!". My response is always the same, "Not with you on it".
Most owners do not have the chops to ever see a 4.7 second 0-60 time. If the average owner heads to the dragstrip thinking he's going to click off a 13.8 he will be quite disappointed at his actual results. It's a specialized skillset... the average owner never practices for it.

That was not a bash or an argument starter or a trolling post... just inserting a little reality. No comment was made about any bike being slow or fast. No comparisons were made between any two bikes. No mention of modifying engines. This would apply to any motorcycle and almost any rider.

 

[jmstang302]

That was not a bash or an argument starter or a trolling post... just inserting a little reality. No comment was made about any bike being slow or fast. No comparisons were made between any two bikes. No mention of modifying engines. This would apply to any motorcycle and almost any rider.

:uplaugh: :huepfenicon111: :icon_thumleft: SHOULD BE YOUR SIGNATURE