The Perfect Bike
 

I don't wish to sound too cynical but looking around on this and other sites I'm beginning to get the impression that some potential overland travellers are choosing bikes on the grounds that they have a huge aftermarket back up offering all the parts you need to overcome the manufacturers shortcomings. Not only does it cost a small fortune to do the essentials such as a fuel tank that holds more than 10 litres and suspension that doesn't collapse but a second fortune can be spent on all the gismos that make it look like a dakar competitor.

It seems to me that just getting on it and riding it is a thing of the past where BMW and Honda (and probably others) made bikes that were virtually ready to go and you could even fix them at the roadside (no, I'm not talking about carbs vs. FI). Yes, I'm well aware that these ancient models now have a long list of essential mods. that you must fit before setting out, however, I know from my own experience that most of these are far from essential on a well maintained bike.

Money is usually the missing ingredient for anyone planning a RTW and it seems a shame that it's become more about the bike than the journey.

I am not sure what the exact point is with this post ... but it seems to be a criticism of anyone who wants to have a well thought out, built for purpose decent adventure bike. Is that correct?

Thre is nothing wrong with someone wanting to travel RTW on a 20 year old Africa Twin or a 25 year old BMW boxer. Just as there is nothing wrong with people who want to travel RTW with a bike that is 70 kgs lighter, 50% more economical, handles 20 times better at 3 times the speed off road. There is the opportunity in this day and age to build a bike that does the job many times better than factory bikes from 25 years ago. Whats wrong with someone doing just that?

Why would you choose to criticise people for wanting to have a bike which does the job better? It seems like a little bit of jealousy.

Some people, myself included, feel that yes I want the pleasure of travelling to remote places, I want the experience of mixing with people that have never seen westerners before, but I also get a huge kick out of actually RIDING THE BIKE. For some, the bike is not just a platform to convey you to these places. For some the riding (particularly the off road riding) is also allowed to be a huge pleasure. I dont "endure" the tough stretches, I actually LOVE them. Why cant I, or anyone else who builds a similar kind of bike, actually build a bike that is designed to handle travel in those kind of conditions? Instead of being a horrible pig i those conditions. Why is that bad? Not everyone likes adventuring on good roads.

That is allowed, isnt it?

Sadly, I have friends who have joined, and since left Horizons Unlimited, because they felt there was an overriding culture of "you must have a crap old bike or else you are a bad human being and dont belong here". It's a mentality I would very much like to see driven out of the site.

I think its a shame moto travellers who do enjoy the bike side as much as the journey side, are being driven away from the site.

If someone is into triumph scramblers and want to ride around the world in one, why not?

If someone is into Harleys and want to heavily modify one and ride it to Magadan, why not?

If someone is into old DR350s and want to ride one round the world because Austin did, then why not?

Why should we tell any of these people to stop focussing on the bike, and focus only on the journey?

Why cant people enjoy the bike side too? And why is an appreciation of the bike side, or a motorcycle modified for purpose, incompatible with Horizons Unlimited?

Moved thread
 

I moved the thread into the HU Bar area, because it seems to be more an expression of a personal opinion rather than a question.

Very well said. I often don't come here as my built up vtwin seems to discourage folks. Riding a very capable off road wild beast doesn't appeal to everyone, but to me it's a crazy wild ride while out exploring new places. Both parts are equally gratifying to me.

If that bike was built out of the box that would be great but it's not, so we build a bike that can handle aggressive off road riding and make it capable of long distance travel. Too me that's a part of the fun. Plan, build, ride and explore bier

Sorry if I implied criticism. If I am being critical of anyone it is the bike manufacturers. They obviously do their market research and from this they can see that the percentage of buyers of a given adventure model that are going on an extended overland trip is very small. That said, it seems to be big enough market for the likes of Touratech and other suppliers to make a business out of it.

I certainly don't advocate setting off on a long trip on a 20 year old bike, however, my point was that these bikes came from the factory much nearer 'ready to go' than the bikes that are being produced today. Manufacturers have, in my opinion, extended the 'Adventure' themed bikes to the point that they are so complex and heavy that they are not really viable for a trip with significant off road content (or very remote places without support). Bikes around 650cc seem to be much more suitable but apart from the Tenere there isn't anything available straight out of the crate.

So who cares? Well, my original point was that the need to modify even basic things on the bike makes the bike extremely expensive. Some of the wish lists I see on here and elsewhere just give me the impression that it's more about bolting on every conceivable part to make the bike perfect and then at the end of it all not having enough money left to travel - again, just my perception.

I have always enjoyed modifying bikes to make them 'fit for purpose'. We are generally much more demanding these days in terms of suspension, brakes, protection etc. so I can understand that the fit for purpose bar has been raised but my view is still that just because it's in the catalogue it doesn't make it essential.

I'm with you on this one. I've been looking for a Bonneville replacement. I can buy a Tenere and spend the first week of ownership stuffing bit of inner tube into the cush drive. I can get a Tiger and get someone to remap the FI. The thread about F800's is long. Consumable bikes for a consumer society.

Andy

Apologies for jumping on this one, but as I mentioned, the atmosphere that sometimes comes thru here of "old bike, do it cheap or you're a wanker" has become a real pet peeve of mine. I mentioned I knew several people who have abandoned the site because of that prevailing mentality and that feeling is also confirmed by deadly99 above.

I agree with you that the manufacturers have moved away from built for purpose bikes. But I disagree with you in the reference to Dakar bikes. The bikes were in the past a lot closer to purpose as long distance, off road capable travelling machines precisely because Honda, Yamaha, Cagiva, BMW and more recently KTM all based their adventure bikes in the 80s and 90s on Dakar bikes. The reason the modern bikes are less fit for purpose is because they have moved away from that Dakar / rallye bike capability. Building bikes that are strong enough, light enough, handle well enough and carry enough fuel to be rally worthy is also building bikes that are more adventure worthy. In my opinion there is a pretty close relationship between a good adventure bike and a rally bike, apart from the state of tune of the engine. That implies that to make a better off road capable, long distance capable adventure bike, you have to modify a standard bike in the direction of a rally bike. That goes for either if you start with a larger less off road capable bike, or a lighter off road bike that lacks durability.

I agree that its unfortunate that building a capable bike aftermarket is 20 times more expensive that if the OEM bike was specced with the same components. Then again, the manufacturers have the market research ... the segment is growing precisely because they are focussing on what the market wants. Big, heavy, bikes that are a real handful off-road and that dont really warrant good off-road capable suspension.

KTM keeps lowering the off road capabilities of its 990 model ... every second year it comes out with a more revvy engine, lower suspension travel, weaker rims ... and yet they keep selling them. Their 640 Adventure similarly was gradually diluted in terms its off road capabilities throughout its lifetime, and a replacement for it has been deemed not a priority for the last 4 years. I think there is just not a viable market for adventure bikes that are as capable off road as they are on road. You have to make them yourself.

I think I understand the OP's view. If money is no object, why not get the BMW or KTM... but for most folks that's just not affordable. There are plenty of posters here who have toured through Africa or South America on beater 250s and even 125s.

If I had the money, I would probably get the high end "super adventure tourer" bike - but I don't have 15-20 grand for a bike, so when I go touring, I make do with whatever I can afford.

Better a cheap tour on a cheap bike than no touring at all...

There are lots of different approaches to overland travel and individual ideas as to the ideal bike. I have my preference for a bike model that is no longer made over a modern bike which I also own but the reason's for my preference are hard to explain. I also automatically rule out most manufacturers as non starters for me, although there are many other makes out there working fine. I can't say I've noticed an anti modern bike phobia on here but I'm not very good at spotting these things.. I have seen a number of threads asking advice on a minimalist approach to to keep costs down usually involving a 125 or similar. These threads can come to abrupt end when the poster realises the alternator hasn't got enough power to charge the laptop, gps and Iphone at the same time - a sign of the times, I suppose.

I think for most people embarking on an overland adventure cost is a very important, if not the most important factor. If a suitable bike isn't already available then buying a fairly recent model is the only sensible approach as there is a better chance that major refurb. work won't be required. the only model that is vaguely ready to go is the Tenere but even so there are some serious weakpoints and shortcomings. The 20:1 aftermarket to OEM ratio is pretty scary plus virtually all models have some major shortcoming. For a first time traveller with no experience of what he may come across and no experience of riding or running a bike outside Europe, budget options are hard to find.

Ignoring cost, I agree that the modern rallye bike and ideal adventure bike have a lot in common although luggage carrying ability is also important on a travel bike which often conflicts with fuel tanks, exhausts etc.. But the rallye bike is designed for speed and mostly off road. A compromise has to be found in terms of road and off road ability and even then most overland trips are 80%+ on reasonable tarmac, a good percentage of the 'off-road' is easy going and you don't score more points for doing the tricky bits at speed. Howeevr, from my own experience, I would always opt for good off road handling over saving a few mpg through higher gearing (for example) because in many places you have the option of the unsurfaced route (through the moutains) or the tarmac road with all the trucks and saying we'll do all those dirt roads next time isn't an option - this is why you are travelling and why you're on a bike not in a Land Rover.

I'd be interested to see any tried and tested budget solutions based on something less than 10 years old or of anyone who has just bought it and ridden it (around the world)

I get it.
 

I understand what Magnon is saying and I have never got the impression that if you can't do it with and old hack then bugger off from this site.

As others have said, cost is probably in the "top 3" limiting factor for most travellers. The advise that I have always got and tried to pass on is that yes you can buy any new bike, accessorise it and off you go. What's necessary and what is bling is another question. The feedback I have always wanted from a question was how did someone else do it and what did they think about it. Did they buy a bit, make one or found that they didn't need it all. This is always what I have got from this site.

If you have the money to buy all the bits, cool go for it. If you don't, finding out what others have found useful and making do is great too.

I think jumping on some ones opinion because its different is what makes these us and them scenarios. People are different so are their opinions and choices.

Having your cake and eating it?
 

Clearly some people want older, less reliable (potentially more 'charming' I guess) bikes that you have to tinker with the whole time, and some people want more expensive, custom set ups that handle better - each to their own and more power to them!

But isn't it possible to combine the two?? By putting an old Triumph Engine in a custom competition off-road frame with some modern top-end suspension I hope to create the ultimate adventure bike, getting the best of both worlds - an expensive old unreliable bike that's good off road but still needs fixing all the time!!

The bike you ride is (or should be) chosen for a number of reasons. Budget,your own mechanical ability,purpose,your size,looks and feel. Personally i am lucky to be skilled mechanically but don't have a lot of spare money hanging about so i ride an older bike with mainly home-made mods and travel gear - indeed i get a lot of pleasure in the making of my bike.Some people have never even changed a spark plug before (and don't want to) so a new or very modern bike is the best choice for them (although it doesn't guarantee a hassle-free ride).A bike chosen for a road trip across the States would probably not be the same as you'd choose to ride across Africa.But whatever you ride it is important for you and the bike to be comfortable with each other as it'll be part of you for a considerable time. Only when you and the bike become one can you really relax and enjoy the trip for what it is.

Traveller's who want to build and ride a special for their adventure usually have some experience. They know what they want from the trip, whether it's hardcore off road, good comfort for road miles, lots of luggae for comfortable long term camping etc.. these guys usually have the mechanical skills and enjoy tinkering with their creation on the journey and are often proving a point if only to themselves that the correct mix of parts has made the best bike possible for them.

If you have no previous experience you have to rely on sites like this one to pick up some good information and a strong bank balance to put it into practice but I still think that the manufacturers are missing a trick or two by not making an adventurised version of some of their smaller models. I'm not suggesting a bike that is ready to go but at least something that is a good basis for long distance travel with a good fuel capacity, good quality supension. a touring seat and some luggage options. Obviously the aftermarket suppliers would still be there to supply the more specialist items and solutions for some of the weakpoints.

I think it's hardly surprising that airhead BM's and Africa Twins are still so popular when the only other 'off the peg' options are £15k behemoths with too much of everything you don't need (weight, height, gadgets, cost etc.) and not enough on anything you do (suspension quality and travel, reliability, easy servicing etc.)

And that shows the problem I think. The Adventure/touring riding group is not a big enough percentage of the motorcycling community for the manufactures to do it. I think that percentage would go up if more effort was put into new models like the Tenere and other purpose built bikes. But ultimately I am not sure it would make enough money for them. It's sad, well I am sad about it.

.

It is scary ... but I guess its the logistics of manufacturing wholesale and of retail distribution chains.

For example, my understanding is BMW pay at factory level, something like 27 EUR for a standard non ESA R1200GS rear shock from suppliers ... but it retails for 900 EUR at a BMW dealer.

I have heard BMW got the airshocks for the X-Challenges almost for free (I have even heard 'for free') because Continental made too many of them for the HP2 Enduro and just wanted to get rid of them since they didnt work that well and seemed to have no future ... yet they retail for something like 1200 EUR.

I am guessing BMW pay no more than 300-400 EUR to Loncin for an 650cc engine ... yet they are 7000 from a dealer if you want a replacement.

If you are a manufacturer, stuff costs next to nothing (by our retail standards) from suppliers. It costs so little at factory level to have good forks or a shock in the bike, but so much at the consumer end, especially if it is aftermarket. To have a good seat or good rims on the bike from the factory ... again a tiny increase, for us, it is hundreds.

The problem is us ... the buyers. We arent discerning enough to drive the manufacturers to include quality bits. The return on investment for manufacturers is to put 5 more hp on the bike ... cause people will pay thousands of pounds for 5 or 10 more horses or a flash new look. But in general, customers dont care enough about the quality or durability of components to make manufacturers use them.

The HP2 enduro is a prime example. When it came out it was about 5k more than the standard GS. Where does the 5k go? The bike had crap forks and a crap rear airshock ... but was sold as a HP (high performance) bike. When it came out the stock GS had 100 hp, the HP2 had 105. Basically the buyers were prepared to pay 5k for 5 extra hp. They sure as hell werent paying it for the suspension! Obviously the bike was a fair bit lighter with that suspension, and it had bigger wheels, but the wheels werent any better, just bigger. i.e. they wouldnt have cost BMW any more money.

So every year, the manufacturers respond to customers demands, and build bikes with slightly more power than the previous model. There is simply no driver to put better suspension on an adventure bike. And there is no driver in adventure bikes to make them lighter. Because the ones that sell the most, are the heaviest models. So that gives you an idea where adventure bikes are going from a manufacturers perspective ... more powerful, bigger and heavier. Cause that pays the bills. Thats why its more important for KTM to develop a 1200 Adventure model than to develop a 690 Adventure model. Its a pity, but thats the reality. And its a reality that we, the consumers, have created. I dont think we can blame the manufactures for this one.

I think the last bike that someone made that you could jump on in the showroom, ride it away from the dealer and head off round the world, was the 640 Adventure. And the sad reality is that it just didnt sell.

So why didn't it sell enough ? Small market ? We are all tight ? Wasn't advertised enough ? Too lean on the profit margins ?

combination of buyers too tight and market too small I imagine.

A lot of people complain about the cost of adventurising a bike ... but for a reality check, have a look at what it costs a 4WD average prep for a drive to Capetown or Mongolia or Magadan ... £50k is a typical 4WD prep budget ... even for someone who starts off with a cheap old landrover.

Yet bikers wont spent 5k to prep a bike. Only a few spend 2k, and everyone else wants something to go round the world on that costs 2-3k all up. Is that realistic?

On one hand, yes you can buy and prep a bike to go round the world on 2k worth of bike, on the other hand, to spend 4-5k adventurising a bike is hardly excessive either. Thats a key point. Bikes are so cheap to prepare anyway, that even doing it really well is still a bargain.

We complain that so many of the adventure bikes being built now are the 'starbucks' adventure bikes. But who is to blame for that? Thats the only section of the adventure market prepared to spend any money.

Even the guys who are prepared to spend 15k to buy an "adventure bike" find it hard to comprehend someone who buys a bike for 3k and spends 4k it making a very purpose focussed adventure bike.

On another forum, a year or two back, we were talking about a potential KTM 690 Adventure that everyone claims to want. I mentioned bearing in mind the cost of changes that would need to be made to the 690 Enduro to make it work, and the base cost of the 690 Enduro, the 690 Adventure would have to come in at around GBP 9000. Would people be prepared to spend that on a well sorted single cylinder adventure bike? Suddenly everyone baulked.

There is a mentality that if the bike is light and single cylinder it cant possibly be worth as much as a heavier bike. Even if it is better for the job! So the reality is, if KTM made a 690 Adventure and put it on the market for 9k, 95% of potential customers would change their mind in the showroom, spend a grand more and get the 990 Adventure. Again its back to buyers associating "value" with "size" and "horsepower".

I agree, but conversely, at the Enduro and Motocross end of the market the buyers are always looking for better equipment and, it seems, not too bothered about the cost. KTM have in the past fitted better equipment (White Power and Brembo competition stuff) to their adventure bikes but even they are supplying cheap replicas now and getting away with it.

Profit margins on the Starbucks tourers must be enormous

Here’s a thread with a similar title started back in 2003 and nibbled at once or twice over the years until 2009: http://www.horizonsunlimited.com/hub...ding-bike-5122

It’s interesting to see how opinions on “perfect bikes” are both varied, but positively differing during the growth of the “adventure bike” market niche in the past 5 or 10 years.

I believe the perfect bike is the one that actually fulfils your needs, whatever they are. The important thing is that you actually have an adventure. For some it’s solo light weight off road, for others it’s 2 up on-road with the kitchen sink. It’s what you can afford and that actually floats your boat. This week even the Starbucks tourers can have an “adventure” negotiating the mean streets to their local skinny latte serving establishment in the war zones that are England’s burnt out city centres!

I’m glad that late 1980s and 1990s, particularly Japanese, bikes are so well built. That way I can afford to spend a couple of £grand a piece (or less) and have my solo lightweight minimal luggage offroad adventures (Suzuki DRZ400: actually it’s a 2005 bike!), as well as 2 up or solo pavement/gravel touring adventures with lots of luggage (Honda A/T and T/A), where all 3 bikes combined cost about a third of the price of one new fat blinged up 1200gsa/ktm990/xtz1200.

The points made above about buying costs of certain inadequate “accessories” in comparison to their retail price are IMHO quite shocking. Then again the Starbucks crowd are happy and BMW/KTM shareholders are happy, so why not. Each to their own.


An aside: What mustn’t be forgotten also is the cost of a CdP. A 2 year old (new price £15k) bike will require a mortgage (at least for me) to afford a CdP. A CdP for an older bike will be a lot less.

Cheers
Chris

Who's to Blame ? Not sure.
 

The thing is that we all approach "bikes" from different viewpoints. Bike travel is supposed to be a cheaper form of transport, there are many countries around the world that show that. But quite realistically the cheaper the bike the less profit from sale. so you have to sell more, lots more or you sell a good number of the flavour of the month(s). It has already been said that when manufacturers put higher spec parts on the bike the price jumps massively. This would be to make up that profit margin, I would say. The people who can afford this jump in price and don't know if it is actually worth it in terms of return will always spend more that is not restricted to bikes. Have a look at the 4WD market, we have almost fully road based pretend 4WDs all over the place.

I think the reason we get what we do is because thats what the masses (in bike terms) are willing to pay for because they (the masses) don't know any better. Is a 15k heavy BMW worth it, I don't think so, will a 2-6k special do the same job, I think so. Will I look cooler on one rather than the other, more like an adventurer or like some famous person ? Do people buy it because they see others riding it, yes. Do manufactures take advantage of this, yes.

Do the manufactures have a responsibility to make a bike that is fit for purpose in a market that is a minority within a minority ?

No........ simple.


They serve the market, and the market suggests that most people don't do what the flyer shows what the scope of the design suggests in the first place. So if they can sell it without putting as much effort and testing into it. Put tried and tested simple parts on it and still have the 'adventure' brochure to cover all aspects of the larger bike market, wouldn't you?

As for the initial debate. I think you can split the group of people who mod the crap out of their bikes in 2 distinct groups. The catalogue bolt on people, and the swap parts for improvement people. Most probably start in the first and a percentage of that end in the second ending up with heaps of TT or similar crap worth nothing because it doesn't take much for it to fall apart.

Don't really understand the mentality on this site either often. A lot of threads start with how can I prepare for off road by first comers. Then often end up learning on a road orientated bike riding on the road (often because there isn't much off road around), than ask about gear and end up with heaps of recommendation for Altberg boots and often end up posting threads about the horrors of certain road conditions. :innocent::ban:bier Controversial views??? Just stirring...... or am I?

Cost is relative. Some spend heaps on smoking, drinking, gambling, collecting, or on art. In the end it's a hobby. What's wrong with spending money on a hobby? A trip doesn't have to be cheap, nor does it have to be expensive. But in reality, if you have patience and keep saving a percentage from your pay package you can make it whatever you want. If you don't have patience, just go cheap.

Well, ...is it fit "for purpose" or, ...fit "for YOUR purpose"? I had a real eye opening experience reading Edde Mendes ride report around the world on a Plain Jane K75...

...so, the definition of "fit for purpose", in my book, is a very individual thing. No right, no wrong :cool4:

I agree, I think what we get is a direct representation of what the majority want and buy. Which leaves the rest to modify to their needs.

I like your division of the "Mod" person types. I would fall into the latter due to the bike not having something I wanted like luggage racks, big enough screen, 12v socket, engine protection, oil temp gauge...hang on most of these bolt on am I in the first category ?

I agree that what makes a bike fit for purpose is very subjective but the basic idea of an adventure bike or overland travel bike was established years ago and models such as the BMW R100GS and Africa Twin pretty much hit the nail on the head. Sadly, in my opinion, these have evolved into what I now refer to as the Starbucks tourers whilst the manufacturers have been developing smaller capacity engines which are much more suited to long distance travel (BMW XC and KTM 690 for example) as well as being a good basis for a relatively lightweight off road capable machine. Whilst they've made a reasonable attempt at a trail/enduro bike using these engines they've not come up with a Tenere equivalent. Is this because the market is too small - I don't think so as -with the Starbucks model a lot of purchasers are buying into a style or image with no real intention of using the bike for an overalnd trip. This has a downside in that the manufacturer will fit cheap parts to keep the retail price down but at least we might have something that would form a good starting point for a travel bike without having to invest 25% of the cost of the bike just to increase it's fuel capacity.

I think the real reason that we're not seeing these bikes is, as has been said in the car industry for decades - small car (bike), small profit.

It's a real shame. I know the percentage of bike riders here in Aus would have to increase by a very large amount before you could even look at local businesses specialising in such an area to fill the gap. Then again there is a massive amount of bikes and a huge (comparably speaking) customer base in Europe and we are still not seeing the "baseline bike" change enough.

I'm sort of approaching this from the other end. I don't need a KTM that'll do Dakar stages at 60 mph after a ride from the UK, I need a bike that'll live all year in the UK, pootle across France and make it over a couple of days worth of trails a little faster than I can walk it. The R80GS as basically a road bike with a big tank and better wheels is IMHO the right approach. Where it went wrong is when damn fool journalists said an 80 mph wasn't quick enough and we got the 2 tonne R1100GS. The latest 800cc Starbucks tourers I actually have some hope for. I might trash the OE shocks, I wouldn't run to replace them (I buy loads of Bonneville silencers on e-bay to replace ones I bash on the lanes, plenty of fools out there selling so they can turn petrol into noise faster).

The industry (I was trucks not cars) has problems. It's run by old men who still read paper, they don't know this site exists and so long as Truck and Bus/MCN accepts whatever bribes they offer they are happy. They give away the vehicle and make money on parts, service and finance. It is better if you guys throw away your silencers and shocks and buy aftermarket, the brands are all interlinked so the cash spreads out. Crap like slotted, wavy, lumpy, made of cheese brake discs, made fashionable by their racers are better still. The slots wear the pads and there is a growing proportion of riders who will do to the dealer to get this stuff sorted. It's better still if the bike needs an Ashtray warning light reset every pad change.

Making a fuel tank bigger won't happen while the paper is still out there, MCN quote weight not range.

Andy

[QUOTE=Threewheelbonnie;345313]I buy loads of Bonneville silencers on e-bay to replace ones I bash on the lanes, plenty of fools out there selling so they can turn petrol into noise faster

How come they're the fools when you're the one that has to keep buying replacements?

[QUOTE=Starbeck;345343]I ride on mud and gravel tracks maybe six times a year when I get lost on some unclassified road. I could spend fifteen hundred quid and buy something too tall for carrying a pillion and too slow for the motorway that would get in the way everytime I wanted the outfit out of the garage and would annoy me by needing MOT's and insurance.

Instead, these really nice chaps buy Bonnevilles for their trips to wherever it is they go on a Sunday to drink coffee, decide they don't sound like they might possibly have done during the Napoleonic wars and go spend another grand on aftermarket silencers. Every three years or so I buy the standard silencers off them for thirty quid a pair (Loads is maybe the wrong word, I've bought three pairs now). The last pair came from a guy who'd had Goldstar silencers specially adapted for the price of a rideable XT600 (they were "chromed" by a five year old with kitchen foil and the "special" adapters are sold at QuickFit) and in the 1800 miles/2 years he'd had them had averaged 29 mpg (I get 55 plus). Still, he liked the noise so everyone is happy, I'm just glad I didn't live next door!

Andy

What we need is not always what we want. I think for the vast majority of motorcycle purchasers what they need and want is what the manufacturer specifies (taking Colebatch's point that we, collectively, are not discerning enough). I agree that everyone has their own ideas about what makes the ideal travel bike but there are certain basic parameters that are common to almost all lost distance multi-purpose bikes (I hate the term 'dual-sport'). My grievance is that there is no 'budget' or lightweight choice, the Tenere being the only vaguely suitable starting point. The F800GS and Tiger 800XC both have some potential but miss the mark in several areas especially as most serious users are looking for better off road performance and robustness these days. The X Challenge and 690 are both only available as trail bikes and Mega Trailies are so blinged out it makes them pretty much useless for anything other than road touring as well as being v. costly.

I shouldn't really moan about the cost of the bike and preparation as if you want to do a RTW it's going to cost a lot of money and the bike cost is probably only a small percentage of the overall cost. However, I still believe that there is a big market a 650cc rallye style machine without too much bling, top end suspension, wheels and brakes, good fuel capacity and well thought out luggage options - possibly a 690 engine, suspension and brakes, Excel wheels, conventional frame, subframe and fuel tank location, rallye type fairing with sensible but not OTT lighting and instrumentation and a seat for sitting on. This can't be too hard, doesn't need to cost vastly more than the 690 Enduro (which I know is not cheap) and would sell like hot cakes. And still plenty of scope for the aftermarket to sell all the poser bits and pieces.

Collusion between manufactures and aftermarket suppliers, especially those that are also OEM suppliers is a real problem. White Power supply rubbish forks and rear suspension for the factory and a range of better quality options as aftermarket parts. It's just a complete rip off getting the user to pay twice for the same parts

I am not understanding why it is a manufactures fault that they do not make a very specific bike for a very small number of customers. It has been said they did they would sell and all would be well in the world. The problem is that I don't think they would sell in the numbers at the required profit margin for the manufactures to do it.

The large number of people that buy those big heavy BMs now won't know the difference between good suspension and bad. So unless someone famous is seen riding one we have a great bike that doesn't sell and will not last long.

I just don't think there is a big enough market for it. It's not like the sports bike market which year in year out is the most popular despite most never seeing a track.

Sadly, you are probably right. Trouble is I only look at this site and Advrider so I tend to forget that sportsbikes still exist.

Ride magazine had a picture of a Ducati loaded with soft luggage and the comment that if you tour then it becomes a tourer. I agree.

I toured round Scotland with my L plated YBR 125. I will do the same and am off to Ireland in September with my KLE500. I would want something bigger and newer for going further afield again, the main reason for that is comfort and carrying ability.

If I could get comfortable on a Ducati, then that is what I would use.

I dont think the shareholders of any bike manufacturer are particularly happy. Again, just trying to be fair to the manufacturers, they aint making money. We slag them off when we get frustrated, or complain about the cost of spare parts. But they obviously are not pricing them too high because many of them are almost broke.

KTM was on the verge of bankruptcy 18 months ago, and while the situation is now stable, they dont have any money for expansion or R&D right now.

Aprilia is on the ropes.

Moto Morini went under recently.

Its pretty cut-throat out there for the manufacturers right now.

I suspect they sell the bikes as cheap as they can, due to too much competition, and have to make money on the parts and accessories due to significantly reduced competition in that area.

Maybe it's time to address the ideals of some of their customers. I'm more a sideline expert but it seems that a lot if not all of the key items of what's on the wish list are off the shelf products so R&D can be minimum. I'd be in the market for a proper bike instead of spending that money making one myself now. Happy to spend it, but until that happens I'm just not. No one's listening it seems so if that's resulting in going bust, tough cookies I reckon. A company like KTM has had plenty of opportunities and instead they spend a fair bit of coin developing something like a 690 with rubbish results.

Hi Walter

I don’t have a problem if bike companies or their dealers who build bags of sh!t or do shoddy work for too much money go to the wall. Being a potential customer for any bike I’ve never considered an Apillia, nor MM as a brand I’d like to own.

As far as KTM go, I think their 400/450exc models might make a good starting point for a travel bike, but the 640 was a whole load of dudu from the start (What about all those poor beta testers up until 2003 who only had grief with the motor (big end bearing? clutch master something or other?). I met a 640 overlanding Dane in Cairo in late 1999 who had problems with his front wheel bearings. KTM had put in the wrong size (“if it doesn’t fit properly, just hit it with a hammer”) from new from the factory! The 690 FI issues that have been bitched about in various forums and on Dave Lomax/ADV-Spec’s recent Morocco caper definitely scare me. If they ever wanted to sell big volumes of big “adventure” bikes they missed the biggest trick ever telling Ewen and Things to get lost when they came grovelling for bikes.

Or BMW dealerships: £85/hour (or more?) labour and “they all do that sir”. My "exploits" on an old Airhead won't be mentioned here: The list is tool long.


Or Sid Moram’s Honda in Slough (circa mid 1990s) who failed my 250 Honda dirt bike MOT because of a bush on the shock being a bit soft so he could sell me a new shock… I went to a different testing station and it passed no problem. Or their mechanic who put a front sprocket on the wrong way round on my A/T (during a C and S change: in the days when I didn’t know how to do stuff like that) and didn’t notice. I did. He’s also “forgotten” to put the grill back on to protect one of the 2 radiators.

Maybe there is a niche for bikes that are fit for purpose (that the glossy brochures/websites portray; that quite a few people on this forum and on sites like advrider do or aspire to do) and work, where salesmen don’t B/S you and where you don’t feel a rip off heading your way the minute you enter their dealership/website.

Slag off/Rant over…

Cheers
Chris

Manufacturers going to the wall is a double edged sword. KTM is probably the one manufacturer that might produce the high spec bike some of you guys are looking for. However, to say a shock absorber manufacturer they aren't a customer, they are a PITA. If KTM go bust, the shock manufacturer will breath a sigh of relief that they won't have to keep fending off requests for weird parts and chasing payment (I stopped supply of a part to TVR in another life, they though their name was too important for them to pay their bills or stay within the terms of the parts warranty. My employer was fine that I'd dumped a loss making account).

How will say BMW react though? They can get together with HPN or Touratech and produce a factory variant at a higher price than their standard offering and try to get more KTM's old customers. As I believe has been pointed out above though, they'll basicaly expect their suppliers to give away the fancy bits to keep the standard business. The alternative is to say to KTM's old customers, "there's the G650, F800 and R1200, take 'em or leave 'em". They'd take 25% of KTM's business for no effort at all.

We are of course own own worst enemies. We buy BMW's that aren't properly tested. We buy a Triumph because it has a Union Jack on the side panel. We buy sportsbikes because one with the same name on the tank won something. The manufacturers provide the sub-£10000, new styled plastic, space-invaders-game-built-into-the-dash we demand. They cut corners on the suspension because 10 guys will buy because it's the new shape to one that notices the shocks.

Did anyone realise Triumph are using Excel rims on the Tiger BTW? No idea if these are better or just their old rims rebranded, but maybe they do listen sometimes?

Andy

This is the result of the buyers not being sufficiently discerning or demanding. It's easy and cheap for the manufacturers to bling up a bike with electronic wizardry and, as you say, a lot of buyers buy style over substance. The overland adventure market is only a small percentage of those that would buy a rallye styled bike and supplying worthy suspension as original equipment just eats into the margin but doesn't generate many sales.

BMW have been criticised for supplying substandard suspension components but they just go to the cheapest supplier and at least you know it's going to be rubbish. KTM on the other hand either own or have shares in White Power and therefore fit what is basically a reputable make but are in some cases fitting low grade substitutes for the real thing (still made by WP but to a much lower spec.).

You've got to remember that these days the majority of bikers are not actually buying their bikes. The finance scheme makes it effectively a HP deal with a 2 or 3 year term. BMW has really got this sorted so you effectively cover the cost of the bike and then give it back in return for the next model. That's a great reason to change minor details and colours and call it improvements.
Most things sell on creating want and that's simple branding and not exclusive to motorcycling. "The GS is the Bike Ewan McGregor rode" is exactly the image they've created for this reason. (I'd be very surprised if we don't see another "Long way" series next year roughly in line with the launch of the new water-cooled GS which has to be a scary thing for BMW, changing the formula of their biggest seller.) How many R1s sold ever see a track?
KTM, I'm not a fan but let's be fair, is a very small company. In terms of Honda or BMW most of them are and that's let some of these manufacturers try doing things a little different and going after a more elite slice of the market that the big boys, selling in bulk just aren't interested in. I think KTM do well here. They don't have the buying power of a huge company but that buying power is not turning out better machines but more mundane designs that capture a wider and wider market share.
We are in a global recession which is heading for a depression, it's pushing prices up on everything and companies are vanishing every day. Scary times for all of us.
Personally I would pay slightly more for the right machine if it really was the right machine, not what a company wanted to sell me because it was an easier thing for them to make.
There was a company building "the perfect ADV machine" I found somewhere. It was powered by a Kawasaki parallel twin 500 engine. Interesting choice, I thought. Custom frame and heavily enduro biased styling. It was ok. It didn't speak to me but it was nice enough. The thing is they wanted £35k for it. That sounds like a silly amount but for an independent company sourcing good parts and competent engineering they're probably making less than 10% per bike. Who here would pay that for a bike powered by an old 500cc engine?
I guess that means we have to take what we can get to a degree and make the changes we can afford to make as we need to but I seriously doubt we'll ever see an ideal ADV bike from a mainstream manufacturer because there's not a big enough market for it. GS's, Fireblades and Street-triples sell all day because there just enough of the right thing to appeal to most people and they can make them for the right price.

As a (very) little experienced rider, I may refer back to the initial comment raised by Magnon at the beginning of this thread (not trying to change the direction it took :innocent:).

Summarizing: “some potential (young and/or with little resources) overlanders may be discouraged by the cost of prepping a bike for the trip after seeing those “Dakar Rally looking bikes” stuffed with TT and the like”. It is praiseworthy to raise that concern and I agree that this could happen… but IMHO only when those guys were not really into the idea of the overland trip. It shouldn’t take too long to find out how any bike (or car) can take you anywhere and see that C90s and 125/250cc also cross continents and therefore adapt your budget accordingly. I'd say anyone at an initial stage tends to "overprepare" everything related to a big trip (as packing too much) in order to be face the unexpected, and that may indeed look like "confused by those deeply modified bikes".

I cannot afford those preparations and I guess they wouldn’t be fit me, nor I would be able at all to get even 40% -less, actually- of their potential. Nonetheless, I think it is great to see them, understand the reasons for their improvements and be amazed on how a non-professional rider may get to “cook” such bikes, as many of you. Anyhow, I still like better the old XTs/DRs with sheepskin and rundown saddlebags (maybe till I win the lottery?), although they may not be that suitable for certain situations.

Indeed, I feel there is more than enough space in here for both approaches which seem totally complementary to me. It would be a pity if someone feels out of place because he/she loves to prep/upgrade his bike a lot (it is true that sometimes people answer "I can't see the point of getting that 1000€ tank when you can carry a 10€ jerrycan?", but it usually responds to a thread started with "I have a great experience over the years with all kind of bikes, so I already know, bla, bla").

Esteban

PS: What I don’t like are T-Max with Akrapovics pushing the rest to get out of their way… :thumbdown: (virtually everyday I have one idiot behind bothering. In T-MAX forums they may hate guys riding quietly their singles).doh

Hi Esteban,

You've obviously seen the point of my original post. Not wishing to prejudice anyone I think that the first time overland adventurer can benefit from the information on this site and others in terms of forming a view on how they would like to tackle their trip. However, I fear that many see the information as a definitive guide on how to do it or how to prep. a particular bike and maybe then take the view that it can't be done on a budget. I don't believe you can adapt or improve a bike to meet your specific needs until you have found out what those needs are but there are some essential elements for a long distance, multi purpose travel bike and (ignoring the great big expensive ones) the only production model currently available that vaguely fits the bill is the Tenere. There are numerous older models which were much closer to the mark (including XTs and DRs) which are a good option for many travellers as these bikes have great aftermarket support and a proven track record. For someone who is not mechanically minded and would really rather just buy a new bike for a trip and reasonably expect it to be reliable and well supported by a worldwide dealer network, the choice is very limited.

My main gripe though goes back to Colebatch's remark that buyers are not discerning enough which is so true. Trouble is this allows the marketing men to create bikes which they tell you are suitable for all types of adventure riding and you could set off tomorrow on that RTW you've always dreamt about, when in fact what thery have sold you is a heap of sub-standard junk. In extreme cases the marketing departments send a couple of actors round the world on their bikes, produce a television show which shows the bikes with broken frames and many other failures but they still manage to sell thousands of bikes on the back of it.

I reckon the cost of prep is overstated and ignores the money earned from selling the parts that you upgraded. Obviously this assumes that you can stay away from the TT catalogue. All the bling in there is pointless, and with a bit of cleverness you can avoid having to go there. After selling my BM OEM suspension parts I ended up with the upgraded suspension for nearly free. Most of the other mods for my bike I normally suggest would end in a similar result.

Learn to do everything yourself, and you'll save heaps. The knowledge you gain will save you heaps on the road as well.

Just chiming in to point out that a couple of DR's along with the KLR are still available new in North America. Neither is "perfect," of course, but both qualify on budget grounds at less than US$7000 out the door.

Mark

Hi Magnon,

Thank you, your point is very honest -and generous- and I initially:oops2: agreed with it. However, after some thought, I got to the conclusion that No, I don’t think it would actually happen.

Starting from the wrong premise “Prepping your bike for an overland trip will definitely imply lots of modifications and a huge investment” inferred from those mentioned threads/posts, I see 3 possible scenarios:

1) the guy (=future overlander) keeps on searching and finds out it can be done on the cheap with fewer/no modifications, whether a) asking in HUBB/elsewehere “I have quite a tight budget, can it be done cheaper?” and getting tons of answers saying yes, even from owners of those thoroughly modified bikes; b) he finds by himself people crossing Canada in a 50cc Mobylette Caddy or Africa on a 125/250cc.:clap:

2) he/she doesn’t keep on any further and changes his mind: plain backpacking on public transport; cheap car; cycling; hitchhiking. This one looks to me quite improbable, because the idea of the trip is deeply rooted in his mind, so he would keep on searching.

3) the guy just quits plainly his “overland dream”, since bike modifications are too expensive. I would not worry about this case: he/she was just not going to do it anyway. You may call an “I was going to” attitude. An exaggerated example: “I was going to paddle around the Mediterranean but found a leak in my kayak and finally could not go on” (why didn’t you just fix it and kept on?). It is closely tied to the “I would have loved to… but” attitude, which means it is always jut too late for any of those dreams to be achieved (I kind of borrow the DVD title!). :thumbup1:


What you mean about bikes may happen with anything related with the big trip, as gear: an expensive MSR tent, instead of a cheap Decathlon-Quechua; the ultimate therm-a-rest instead of a cheap foam mattress; Touratech Compañero jacket instead of your brother’s old one, etc. So, if he(/she) knows his budget, time limit and preferences, he may always reach a solution on the cheap; if he doesn’t, he wasn’t going to do the trip anyway.

By contrast, I’d be much more concerned/worried about the case of people who may be put off by comments just because they like to prepare a lot their bikes to be -not just suitable, but- perfect for the task. This pre-trip stage is part of the fun (and big fun) for them, as for others is roadside breakdown fixing with gaffer tape/chewing gum/shoelace. Nothing wrong with that.:thumbup1:

In other words, I find a shame to blame someone because he, for instance, points out that BMW suspension is crap when it actually seems to be just crap –I just read it, I don’t know it-, particularly if comments get harsh and/or may seem somehow jealous. Sure, advice should always be balanced by the conditions/aims of the trip for the guy to understand the real need. But polite, honest, constructive opinions do not harm anyone, furthermore they help a lot.

Summarizing, although I get your point, I would take much more care of (current) hubbers who might feel blamed/out of place/quit (as it was mentioned in a previous post) than worry about discouraged/disappointed prospect overlanders lacking the interest/tenacity to look any further about bike needs and costs.

Esteban

PS: Yes, shame on manufacturers who sell adventure bikes not ready for that "adventure". The viewer of the documentary perceives trip take as an odyssey they have to endure with broken/frames and shocks, needing a support team, and bearly thinks it may be feasible… and he may the next BM GSA customer and doesn’t need frame/suspension to be so durable. But, apart these thoughts I do share, may I stick up for those actors? I guess many people discovered their passion for motorcycle overland travel thanks to them (nothing to be ashamed of).

PS2: I guess I am just too newbie/inexperienced to write that much… New post resolution: read more, write less :blushing::blushing::blushing:

Firstly, I think you need a passion for bikes and motorcycling if you are going to get involved in an extended overland trip. That said there are a lot of motorcyclists who have no idea how their bike works and have no intention of finding out so for them, if they want to enlarge their motorcycling experience by travelling to isolated places then they will rely on someone else to prepare their bike.

I've known numerous travellers (mostly sucessful) who have started out with the attitude of 'how hard can it be' and set off with a bike straight from the shop with absolutely no preparation at all. Obviously, once away from civilisation it can be a fairly steep learning curve but, as I say, most were sucessful in that they completed the trip as planned and enjoyed themselves so much they went back for more. They may get more out of the second trip as the bike is adapted for the purpose but they may also miss something by having a bike that is too capable.

My first trip was on a nearly new bike bought for the purpose but I always took the view that the manufacturer wouldn't have made it like that if it wasn't the best way and therefore modified very little. I was a bit disappointed when the dealer told me the standard shock probably wouldn't get me to Dover (but he did have a better one available at £400) and apart from that and homemade luggage everything was as it came from the shop.

There a dozens of ways to approach the whole thing. Riding overland or around the world is a personal challenge. What you want to get from it is entirely up to the individual. Going back to my original points which were in effect criticism of the manufacturers for not producing a good starting point for an overland adventure travel bike (apart from perhaps the Tenere) but instead fobbing us off with sub standard tatt, and also a comment that whilst some people on here start with a budget and just get on with it, there are a lot of wish listers whose budget rapidly gets out of control. Half the items on the wish list would be standard fitment on my hypothetical 'perfect bike' and the rest are just unnecessary gadgets.