To the best of my knowledge and taken from the best sources I could find those weights are wet weights with full tank. I may have misinterpreted the weight issue but new bikes for sale in the Eurozone have to be described as wet weight with oil, coolants and fuel. AKA kerbweight. I may be wrong about this but I am sure some one will let me know if I am? PS I got the weights from each individual manufacturers own web pages. I really was amazed at the Guzzi. The Transalp because it is so top heavy and such a tall bike feels much heavier than an old 865 Bonnie I test rode a couple of years ago.

__________________
www.frothandflames.com
2012 Kawasaki W800
1997 NX 650 Dominator

Yep, I think you are right with the kerbside weight business; I just couldn't quite remember which way it is done nowadays, although I suspect that the manufacturers can still be economical with their own brand of truth.
It also makes a lot more sense of the figures which are mainly north of 200 Kg.
Weight low down does tend to feel better than when the same weight provides a higher overall CofG, so long as other factors are even.

I've highlighted, in red text, an anomoly with the inch-metric conversion of the seat heights; no big deal.

I didn't realise how heavy the 650 Transalp is either!
It will be interesting to hear from those who have owned these bikes about how they got on with them (or present tense as and when that applies).

I did try to chat up a V7 owner on the side of the road a couple of weeks ago, but with his helmet on and the engine running he was more interested in
Not that I blame him for that!

__________________
Dave

I started putting thoughts together here:


https://sites.google.com/site/threew...zzi/home/intro


There is naff all difference in real world performance. The Bonneville feels bigger, so if you are 2m tall it might fit better. What I can't live with is the Bonnevilles peanut sized petrol tank. The chain and valve shims are a minor pain. Triumph are awful to deal with (Think BMW without the success!).


The Kawasaki still looks good to me but still seems to lack sufficient following to have any sort of support. Search for a luggage rack and see how much choice you get, then imagine sourcing a fuel pump. My local dealer is still sportsbikes only.


I would also throw the SR400 in the mix. 30 HP is usable, it's small and as a Thumper has power where you want it.


How do you plan to use the bike? What are your mechanical aspirations?


I don't think you can wrong with any of these unless you really want a different type of ride. Many ADVrider clowns will call them training bikes or boring.


Andy

We have the air cooled twin and shaft drive of a BMW, V-twin of a Harley and Italian badge. I don't acknowledge myself on the road some days. If you don't look like a young Sofia Loren the Gucci glasses stay firmly pointed ahead. ROFL


I'd talk to you though Dave :-)


Andy

Hi Andy I have a Transalp 650 great bike great engine, love it but..... Most of my riding is done on road, I consider a gravel car park with a speed bump to be off road bike riding. For context my idea of green laning is a tarmacadam'd country road with hedges on either side, blue birds and swallows flying over head set against the clear blue sky with good street lights to show up them thar pesky tractors and combine harvesters when the light fades. You get the picture?

Anyway as good as the Transalp is, on a wet campsite where the grass becomes a skating rink the TA is damn heavy for an old fart like me to pick up. The other downside is my partner only has a 24" inside leg and needs a step ladder or a bucket to climb aboard the pillion seat. So I bought a Honda NX 650 for my camping expeditions and only go solo and now need something my bird can clamber onto without the use of said step ladders and bucket. The bike will be used for eating up tarmac only and touring with B&B accommodation.

My needs for this new steed? 2 up, ability to cruise all day at 70 ish MPH with minimum throw over luggage and not outrageous MPG or servicing costs. In a nutshell: low, some power and speed but not outrageously so, simple and easyish to maintain. In short a very modern air cooled 650 ish twin with a low seat. They do not seem to make them anymore (think Norton Commando, BSA rocket, Triumph Bonneville and yes I know all about the oil leaks and faults etc lol), hence the choice between said 3 machines. On paper the Guzzi seems to win hands down but there is nothing like gleaning info from some one who is able to compare from hands on experience on at least two of the machines and possibly all three. I saw this Guzzi thread a few weeks ago and recalled you have owned Bonnevilles in the past so who better to ask?

Hopefully I have explained why I am looking at these 3 particular models? Walkabout, yes I got some of the measurements slightly wrong but I think out of the 3 bikes there is something like an inch and quarter difference between the lowest and the highest? The most surprising thing was the weight difference.

Thanks for reading

GM

__________________
www.frothandflames.com
2012 Kawasaki W800
1997 NX 650 Dominator

Andy just read your blog about the Guzzi. It's a work of art and clearly a labour of love. I have bookmarked it for future reference. Based upon your waxings it's 80% certain so far that I will end up at a Guzzi dealers when my house is sold. (No idea when but I live in hope). Thanks for putting up the link.

GM

__________________
www.frothandflames.com
2012 Kawasaki W800
1997 NX 650 Dominator

Glad you like it. Wish I could ride more than write, but the write-ups can be done a few minutes at a time.
I think your reasoning is spot on. The low height, low weight, medium power option will work well two up and will honestly do anything that can be considered a road, be it farm track in Wales or 50 mile stretches of part finished road works in Norway. I loved my Weestrom but the tall heavy design is unhelpful more often than not the way I use a bike. I didn’t use the off road capability and the pillion set height was a pain.
I think you need to go ride a Bonneville and a V7 (and the Kawasaki if you can find a real live one). The differences are all in the feel. The V7 feels smaller and more agile but at the same time might feel cramped. I’ve toured 30 HP bikes but would probably discount the SR400 for two up much as I’m determined to own one eventually. The V7 does sometimes have that weird airhead/ural/Guzzi shimmy in the wet, but mild compared to a big block . I’m not convinced it’s the shaft set up alone, the back brake is powerful, but I have met at least one rider who swore he’d never ride anything except a chain drive inline four again after experiencing the Guzzi weave. Both Guzzi dealers I’ve been to have been generous with test rides.
You might have picked a bad time to do this if you are thinking of a new one. The 6-speed gearbox on the V7-II makes perfect sense, it can stand a higher cruising gear so 70 mph will be 4000 rpm rather than 5, but much as I think Piaggio are doing great things I wouldn’t buy a Honda from the first years production never mind a Guzzi. I even doubt you will land a good deal on a new-old stock V7 “I” as the feeling that you never buy a first year is going to hold the prices up and they were selling like hot things. The Bonneville replacement is showing in sneak paparazzi photos from the road between Hinckley and MIRA and is probably 18 months away and water cooled. The current offering is stable but still missing nice bits like the clock and tubeless tyres.
My head says try and ride two or three and pick what feels best in terms of bike, dealer and deal. I’ve never done this myself though, I’d be down the dealers ordering a V7-II!
You do know that Starbucks will be out though, only proper cappuccino for Guzzisti!
Andy

Moi aussi.

__________________
Dave