MotorcycleDaily.com – Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Further Thoughts on Honda’s Production Crosstourer

Now that Honda’s production Crosstourer has been fully revealed in Milan, we can bring you the final specifications (below) direct from the Honda UK web site.

There are a couple of ways to look at this bike. It is certainly heavy for its class (adventure tourer) at 605 pounds wet (full tank of gas), but it is only slightly heavier than the bike it shares its drivetrain with, the VFR1200F.

Despite a somewhat soft mid-range, we were really impressed with the engine performance of the V4, shaft drive equipped VFR1200F when we tested it. So the Crosstourer is just a few pounds (roughly 15) heavier than a bike Honda classifies as “Sport”. At the same time, it is 300 pounds, or so, lighter than a dedicated touring machine like the Honda Gold Wing. In our minds, the Crosstourer is really a touring bike much more than it is an adventure bike.

As you can see from the photos, Honda has plenty of touring accessories ready to go for the Crosstourer, including luggage, crash bar and auxiliary lights. The bolt upright, dirt bike-like seating position should be extremely comfortable. We have found some “adventurer tourers”, such as Yamaha’s Super Ténéré, to have a more comfortable seating position than sport tourers and even luxury tourers. The Crosstourer has a center stand and a relatively large fuel tank, also useful on a touring machine.

The rub is that the Crosstourer is not expected in the United States market for 2012, although I doubt Honda will keep it from us much longer than that.

ENGINE

Type      Liquid-cooled 4-stroke Unicam 16-valve 76° V4

Displacement      1,237cc

Bore x Stroke      81mm x 60mm

Compression Ratio      12:1

Max. Power Output      95kW / 7,750min-1 (95/1/EC)

Max. Torque      126Nm / 6,500min-1 (95/1/EC)

FUEL SYSTEM

Carburation        PGM-FI electronic fuel injection

Throttle Bore      44 mm

Air-cleaner type      Oil-permeated, viscous-type paper filter

Fuel Tank Capacity      21,5 litres

Fuel Consumption      16.3 km/l (Tested in D-Mode WMTC mode*)

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

Ignition System      Computer-controlled digital transistorised with electronic advance

Ignition Timing      8.4° BTDC (idle speed)

Sparkplug Type      NGK : IMR8E-9HES

DENSO :  VUH24ES           DENSO : VUH24ES

Starter      Electric

Battery Capacity      12V/11.2AH (YTZ14S)

Headlights      Hi 55W / Low 55W

DRIVETRAIN

Clutch      Wet,  multiplate

*Wet, multiplate, hydraulic 2-clutch

Clutch Operation      * D mode/S mode/Manual mode

Transmission Type           6-speed

Primary Reduction           1.738 (73T / 42T)

Gear Ratios         1  2.600 (39T / 15T)  *2.250 (36T / 16T)

2  1.600 (32T / 20T)  *1.700 (34T / 20T)

3   1.260 (29T / 28T)  *1.304 (30T / 23T)

4   1.076 (28T / 26T)  *1.107 (31T / 28T)

5 0.961 (25T / 26T)    *0.967 (29T / 30T)

6 0.897 (35T / 39T)    *0.886 (31T / 35T)

Final Reduction 2.699 (37/39 x 19/17 x 28/11)   * 2.706 (39/41 x 19/17 x 28/11)

Final Drive           Enclosed shaft

FRAME

Type      Diamond; aluminium twin-spar

CHASSIS

Dimensions (LxWxH)      2,285mm x 915mm x 1,335mm (w/ std screen and std position)

Wheelbase         1,595 mm

Caster Angle      28°

Trail        107 mm

Turning Radius  2.7 m

Head turning angle          40°

Seat Height         850mm

Ground Clearance           180mm

Kerb Weight       275kg (F: 132kg; R: 143kg)

* 285kg (F: 138kg; R: 147kg)

SUSPENSION

Type      Front : 43mm inverted telescopic forks with hydraulic damping, preload and rebound damping adjustment

Rear : Pro-Link with gas-charged damper, preload and stepless rebound damping adjustment

WHEELS

Type      Front : tubeless spoked

Rear : tubeless spoked

Rim Size               Front : 19M/C x MT2.50

Rear: 17M/C x MT4.00

Tyre Size              Front : 110/80-R19

Rear : 150/70-R17

Tyre Pressure    Front : 250kPa

Rear : 290kPa

BRAKES

Type      Front : Dual 310mm disks, Combined ABS

Rear : Single 276mm disk, Combined ABS *DCT version

71 Comments

  1. Rondyke says:

    I think the Crosstour “might” be a step in the right direction as far as concept and styling is concerned, and I’m guessing it’ll be a good sport-touring machine for European buyers. But significantly lighter weight, less complexity and more off-road capability would be nice.

    (For the record, I’m a former AHM employee; before that I did PR for Kawasaki.)

  2. Morris Bethoven says:

    With all the comments about what a great TOURING bike this is, you would think that HONDA would just go ahead and equip it with the same wheel/tire combo that comes stock on the ST1300. After all, it’s only a few pounds lighter than many touring bikes and is only fit for straight and level fire roads (as stated by so many posters in this thread). Heck, I venture off onto fire roads all the time on my Sport Touring bike (but it does weigh a lot less than this newest “Adventure” bike from HONDA.

  3. Mike says:

    Honda is too arrogant to actually do any pre-production design market testing…….you know good artwork showing the design and providing the specs.

    If they had done this with the VFR1200 and this loser variant the results would have been the same as most stated here……..and this might have been a small clue……but no ……Honda is counting on all those that must buy a Honda nomatter what to justify all these loser bikes that they do no pre-production design market testing.

    Maybe look at it this way …….look at the bikes introduced when Mr. Honda was still alive and those he influenced …………compare this to the bikes since then.

    My feeling is there is no other manufacturer that has introduced more bikes that did not sell over the past 15 or so years……arrogance is all it is.

    I think we went through this on another thread…….do either one of us work for Honda?

  4. Norm G. says:

    in regards to the weight, ratlanta below is actually the only one who gets it. he just reminded me of a surprisingly counter-intuitive observation i made back when the GS12 first came out. while i liked it’s power and updated styling, i found i actually prefered the ride of the older/heavier 1150GS. keep in mind, there was NEVER anything light about the originator nor subsequent models that begat this segment (ie. GS80, GS100, GS1100, etc). tall bikes combined with lighter weight (much like supermotos and enduros) while a boon when pushing them around the garage (only 2%), actually makes them feel skittish when ridden in the open. out on the highways and byways (where these bikes will spend 98% of their time), they can and do turn into “windsails”. with that in mind, this honda will be the “cadillac” of the segment. i would hope it’d be pretty obvious by now adventure bikes are simply the way “sport touring” is defined in the 21st century. there’s no intent, it’s just a styling exercise to sell product. i say good on ‘em. around here, those into off-roading (which is actually a large population) don’t touch these things with 10ft spanners. never seen one off-highway, ANYWHERE. the real off-roaders (those riding BEFORE adventure bikes became “cool”) still buy and ride the purpose built singles all made by these same companies.

  5. Nick Papagiorgio says:

    There is no question that BMW created the market for this sort of bike, with the R1200GS, and that if it weren’t for that bike, the other similar bikes that we see today would almost certainly not exist. But notwithstanding that the displacement of these other bikes is similar, it doesn’t seem to me that they are quite the same. Much as the R1200GS is so often criticized for lacking off-road capabilities, the competitors that have emerged are much heavier. This bike is heavier than the R1200GS, by 100 lbs. The seat height and the substantial heft just do not go well together. No doubt these bikes make for excellent touring bikes, but should the seat on a touring bike be this high? Maybe, maybe not. Of course it depends on how tall the rider is. If you can deal with it, you get better ergonomics.

    I couldn’t resist comparing some specs, between the Crosstourer and the 2012 Triumph Tiger 1200 Explorer, and also the Yamaha Super Tenere. The Triumph uses the same sort of rear swingarm that the R1200GS uses (based on looking at the pictures). It is lighter than the Crosstourer by about about 30 – 35 lbs. And it is more powerful, but not by enough to make any real difference. And the seat height is just a little bit lower, but probably not by enough to make any real difference. Perhaps there will be a difference in the amount of engine vibration, or in other subjective areas, but I suspect that for most people considering a bike of this sort, the choice will come down largely to the difference in price, if that difference turns out to be significant.

    The big Yamaha Tenere is also no doubt an excellent bike. I like it, but it all depends on how well that “two axis primary balancer” works. Cause without balancing, that big parallel twin with 270 degree crank is not all that different from a great big single, in terms of balance and vibration at least. And the Tenere has the least power of those three similar bikes, although the difference is not great. It and the Tiger 1200 Explorer weight about the same, roughly 30 – 35 lbs less than the Crosstourer, and roughly 65 – 70 lbs more than the R1200GS.

    But as I pondered all this, something seemed incongruous about it all. Even though the engine in the Crosstourer is “detuned” compared to the VFR1200, the power-to-weight ratio is still comparable to the power-to-weight ratio in that old Honda V65 Magna that I rode back in ’83. That bike was wickedly fast, and these bikes as well are wickedly fast, except for the R1200GS, which is still very fast, just not so wicked. The question that begs to be asked is whether, in a bike of this sort, that sort of extra performance justifies the extra weight that goes with it. I started thinking again about BMW’s F 800 GS, and when looking up data and pics for the Tiger Explorer, I was reminded of the Tiger 800. It weighs less than the Crosstourer by nearly 150 lbs. The power-to-weight ratio is only about 5% less for the Tiger 800 than for the Crosstourer. The difference is probably more like 15% through most of the rpm range, which is enough to be significant, but it is not an overwhelming difference. The Tiger 800 uses an in-line triple, like the Tiger Explorer, just smaller. It uses chain drive whereas the Crosstourer, the Tiger Explorer, and the Yamaha Super Tenere all use shaft drive. But it costs right around $10,000, whereas the others all cost more like $15,000. And did I mention that it weighs nearly 150 lbs less than the Crosstourer? I like all of these bikes, but before buying any of them, I would sure take a close look at that Tiger 800.

  6. XXrider says:

    I have to agree with most of the negative comments posted- but you know what? I strongly suspect that this will be a wonderful motorcycle to actually ride in the real world.

  7. Morris Bethoven says:

    Ya got yer shaft drive, ya got yer V4, ya got yer 600# plus dry weight, ya got yer technically advanced transmission…..yup, sounds like a good recipe fer an “adventure” off road.

    • Mike says:

      Honda design and marketing did two lists before the design started on the VFR1200 and this variant the Crossover.

      Top ten List 1 ……what must be done to win all the comparision tests

      Top ten List 2 ……what must be done to not finish at the bottom of all the comparision tests

      Andddddddddd….they have been using the wrong top ten list ever since

  8. Jerrylee says:

    I wonder if Honda has to pay royalty rights for the cross-spoke wheels on their Crossdresser?

  9. Andrew R says:

    Wow. Looks like a BMW, has a mono-sided swing arm, weighs almost as much as a single Texas woman in her 50′s..

    the black/grey is OK, but that red is just horrible.

  10. T. Rollie says:

    looks like another bike for old, wealthy, careful riders. Someone with a stiff back and sore joints. Needs an upright riding position. Young people have no money, no jobs, so all the bike manufacturers are targeting the only demographic with any money at all — old credit card touring guys.

    • mickey says:

      Hey…I resemble that remark LOL

    • Morris Bethoven says:

      This class of bikes is designed to give older, affluent riders the appearance of being tough adventurers that will ride their bike anywhere. Only their going to need help picking up their bike the first they encounter an obstacle or even sand on their off-highway excursions. Oh well, at least the luggage will hit the ground first and will actually make it easier for them to pick up their 700# loaded machine as it keeps the bike from lying completely flat on the ground!

  11. Patrick Connelly says:

    Has any one else noticed that once again BMW seems to be all over the fact that competition has finally caught up to them in their understanding of the “Adventure” market?Having read through everyones comments on all the other offerings( Super Tener’e,V Strom,Tiger,and even the exotics like the Stelvio, the Multistrada)it would seem the New “Wasserkopf” boxer was exactly the right move at the right time! All of the big Adventure bikes are a handfull off road, but most of us old dudes who might be able to afford one know better than to get in over our heads in Adventure situations anyway! Big Gas tanks,Stable yet quick steering, and the ability to handle an occasional dirt road…..and now “Liquid Cooling” to help control heat and increase Horsepower….you got to admit that it appears that BMW has been very patient in developing their new Boxer and seems to know exactly what they’re doing…..

  12. Todd says:

    Love this segment, love Honda, but will not consider this fat pig. Too bad. V4 is answer to question nobody is asking. Weight and complexity for no value add.

  13. Irv says:

    What’s with the spoke setup?

    • Dave says:

      The wheels are spoked but designed to take tubeless tyres (immediate deflation in the event of a puncture is no fun!) therefore necessatiting a slightly different design.

    • Mike says:

      Old news BMW has had tubeless spoked rims years and the Aprilia Caponord had the feature, but a somewhat differnet design way back in 2002.

  14. Brian says:

    The reason GS’s have been so successful as adventure bikes is because they are SIMPLE, RELIABLE machines. You can fix anything on them with a rock and a stick! That is exactly what you want when you are in the middle of nowhere. Honda has gone overboard with the techno-gadgetry on this bike and the VFR1200. Just more stuff to break that the average person can’t work on. The bike does look good, however. I guess the GS front fender will forever be the the copied identifier for an adventure bike? Can’t someone create an original design? The V-4 engine seems like much overkill for this type of bike. Just the weight of it alone should have disqualified it as a choice for this bike. A twin works just fine in this bike class, where torque is prefered over big horsepower. As a road bike this may work just fine but I don’t see it catching on with the heavy on adventure crowd. They tend to stick with bikes that are tried and true for their purpose.

  15. George Krpan says:

    The BMW R 1200 GS weighs 150lbs less. Nonetheless, this Honda looks great and it is most likely far better on the road.

    • Tom R says:

      In what specific ways might this be so?

      • Mike says:

        One and only reason…..manufacturer badge would make it better on the road ….only for riders that must buy a Honda

        I never owned a BMWGS, but my son did and it is a great bike on the road

  16. Chirapodist says:

    Let us not forget that this bike has an automatic transmission! That feature alone puts it into the touring bike category. How can you ride off-pavement if you cannot manually slip the clutch? Parking lots alone leave me wondering how anyone could put an auto-clutch on a motorcycle. That dual-clutch thingy is techno overkill that nobody asked for. It drives up the price, weight, and complexity, without solving any problems or improving performance.

    Also, the overall weight is a bit beefy, but it’s what, 50 lbs more than an FZ1? If the bike handles, 105 hp will be plenty for the real world.

    I suspect that the aftermarket is already hard at work on a lowered seat.

    Can I get a 17″ front while we’re at it?

    • ObiJohn says:

      Rekluse automatic clutches are very popular among offroad riders, and you can slip the clutch on the VFR1200 by riding the brake slightly as you give the bike some gas. These transmissions enhance maneuverability at low speeds and under loose traction conditions. The price you pay is extra mechanical complexity.

      These bikes are really meant for touring on paved or decently-groomed dirt roads. They’re not meant for rough dual-track or single-track riding, although some riders have taken such bikes on these types of roads… and gotten quite a workout from picking up a very heavy bike repeatedly. But the other bikes in this niche, the BMW R1200GS and -A models, are pretty heavy also… and heaviness leads to stability on the highway at faster speeds, in high winds.

      Certainly not the bikes to pick for agility, but for long distance riding they are very well suited. Honda’s bike is really a more comfortable, upright version of the VFR1200… and as a result it’s a pretty appealing bike, to me at least.

  17. ziggy says:

    It’s folly to think this thing could be much lighter at anywhere near the price point. Believe me, the engineers want to rip and tear at weight as much as they can–it’s the single biggest determinant of all other performance factors! They’ve made a fat road biased ADV tourer with nimble handling, that’s all, and this is what it’s going to weigh. All the weight it is in the engine, carried as low as you can get for this type of bike. Only think you can really do is just be satisfied with a twin of some type or be prepared to spend double the dollars for more magnesium (fragile) and carbon fibre. Sorry guys, but dollars are dollars and physics is physics. With today’s materials and price point, this is as good as it gets. If Honda can be faulted, it’s that there’s a very small target market for this kind of bike in North America. Which suits me fine as I can’t imagine what good this bike would do me.

  18. Morris Bethoven says:

    Buy an old ST1100 and spoon on some dirt tires and achieve 80% of what this bike offers. You’ll end up with a slightly heavier but much more affordable “adventure” bike.

    • Mike says:

      Good idea….

      Another option would be to modify a Honda Pacific Coast for Crosstour.

      Weighs less than this new loser, auto tip over protection with huge side case bulge, driveshaft, unique look.

      VIP as you said….. the Pacific Coast Crosstour will keep another bike that did not sell for Honda in the past on the road……and maitain this the tradition of most new Honda models including every variant of the DOA new VFR1200.

      Honda Crosstour……time for yet big promotions and salary increases for the marketing and design team again……same team that surely did the DN-01

      20+ years ago pick slips would have been Mr. Hondas response to all these bikes in the design stage…..certainly none would have made it to production.

  19. Ratlanta says:

    When viewed as a touring bike, the weight isn’t as much of a negative. While it does affect gas milage and tire wear it will pay dividends on the highway around semis or in places out west where cross-winds are severe.

  20. Vroooom says:

    If it was 50 lbs. lighter you call it fat, c’mon Honda we know you can do better. It’s not the excessively large fuel tank that’s doing it, 5.7 gals is acceptable but not earthshattering. Too bad, I love this segment, but this one won’t be in my garage without at least a 75 lbs. diet. The weight may melt away when riding, but it won’t when trying to cross a tank trap style ditch or ride over a log.

    • Neil says:

      I would not want to take a GS1200 thru a ditch or over a log, nor many other “adventure” bikes. That is not their target. Clearly they knew that it is not a trials bike! :-) More riders want to sit upright these days. It is an upright VFR with an adventure look. Smooth. Functional. It will do a dirt road if need be but it is not a KLR650 nor a BMW GS800. It WILL do more than an ST1300. More than a Harley Road King. More than a CBR1000RR. That is the point. We have so many choices. I don’t get why we pick every new bike apart. It’s a nice bike. If we want the new Triumph 800 or whatever, we are free to go buy it. But if we test ride this, I think we would be pleasantly surprised.

  21. ilikefood says:

    It seems that VFR is clearly a better tourer than this bike, and a Yamaha Super Tenere is clearly a better “adventure” bike. I’m not sure who would buy this thing…

    • Dave says:

      Same guy who would buy a BMW X5 over a Toyota FJ Cruiser or BMW 5 series sedan.

    • Mike says:

      No one will buy it……yet another in a a long line of new Hondas that never sold.

      Sorry …it will sell to those that will only buy Honda Motorcycles and we will be hearing the same well worn and tired justifications for a new Honda bike that fits in no market place, never wins any comparison tests and again….did I mention this….does not sell

  22. superduckz says:

    It’s starting to look like this segment is going to belong to Triumph and BMW. Honda and Yamaha are just sucking the life out of their designs with too much origami design cues and unnecessary “gee-wizardry” technology.

  23. Tommy says:

    Does the 605 lbs wet include the bags and trunk? If not, what would they add in wt and capacity?

    My ST13 is getting long of tooth but it’s still good for 300+ miles per tankfull (vs about 200 for the Crosstourer). It’s relatively narrow for the luggage capacity (compared to bikes like the C14, GS’s, etc). It has the electrically adjustable windscreen – what a pleasure – and very good protection from the elements. And it get’s around corners plenty fast enough. Yeah, it’s not perfect. But so far, no one’s come out with anything better for my needs – which are LD touring with a good helping of spirited cornering.

  24. Neil says:

    They are ALL pretty ugly, these adventure tourers, but, they are comfortable. I got off my 96 VFR after an hour to stretch. I like the red one. I like the fact that it says Honda on the tank, since what they make functions smoothly and well. I buy this instead of the Harley, after my sport bike, to ride two states away instead of just one. Cruisers are REALLY heavy. I like this bike better than those boat anchors. Shaft drive is heavier but better than taking care of a chain. If they wanted it lighter, they would have made it lighter. What does the average Japanese engineer weigh? Yeah, they thought of it. Engine and transmission are smooth. Ride. Enjoy. The Honda part, IS, the point. They know they are not the other guys. I like it. Smiling on the road while other guys are at the cafe saying, “Look!” or getting covered in mud somewhere. Nah. “Whirrrrr.” “Nahh, I’ll get gas later…”. :-)

  25. Tom R says:

    Seating position looks quite appealing. Unfortunately, the overall weight of 600+ pounds, the high center of gravity of the v-four motor, and the tall seat will probably conspire to make this a bike only for NFL linemen.

  26. MGNorge says:

    Every time I hear that Honda has lost touch I’m reminded that their world-wide sales are actually quite good considering the economy. Exactly what would Honda learn from a blog such as this? The responses, plus and minus, are all over the map. Some want this type of bike to be as dirt worthy as any dirk bike. Some criticize tank range when in fact it’s most likely just fine for the majority of riders. Some like the long legs but not the seat height while others feel it’s just fine. Some cite the weight as a no-go but reports are that it melts away, as is the case with many bikes, when underway. And, they want it all for $10k!

    Fickle comes to mind.

    • Rokster says:

      Yeah I think some people love complaining while others think they always know better.

    • Pablo says:

      Very true statement MGNorge. A lot of people also forget that Honda are a global brand and this bike is being built primarily for the Euro market and not so much the USA. Head over to Italy or Greece or a dozen other Euro Countrys and this type of bike will be a big seller. The VFR1200 was in the top ten selling motorcycles in the UK at one stage! Just goes to show different Countrys have different tastes and different needs.

    • Mike says:

      Honda Sales Worldwide and USA ….2009

      “Honda motorcycle sales and production figures show steady numbers for global operations, with significant drops in North America. The North American figure, which includes Mexico, shows a 48% decline, from 391,000 to 204,000.”

      Yupppp….big pat on the back for those worldwide sales staying steady…mostly third world small bikes btw.

      USA sales…….another promotion for the DN-01 and this Honda Crossover design and marketing teams.

      >>>>>>

      Honda Crossover and VFR1200 getting panned here and mostly everywhere else: Honda is too arrogant to actually do any pre-production design market testing…….you know good artwork showing the design and providing the specs.

      If they had done this with the VFR1200 and this loser variant the results would have been the same as most stated here……..and this might have been a small clue to rethink things……but no ……Honda is counting on all those that must buy a Honda nomatter what to justify all these loser bikes that they do no pre-production design market testing.

      Maybe look at it this way …….look at the bikes introduced when Mr. Honda was still alive and those he influenced …………compare this to the bikes since then.

      My feeling is there is no other manufacturer that has introduced more bikes that did not sell over the past 15 or so years……arrogance is all it is.

      I think we went through this on another thread…….do either one of us work for Honda?

  27. Cowboy says:

    Looks pretty good to me! But SIX HUNDRED POUNDS???? Ouch. Cut 150 lbs off of it, and I might come callin’.

    Cheers,
    Cowboy

  28. Boscoe says:

    This is absurd. Honda knows how to make lightweight bikes (think CBR600RR), but continues to turn out bloated beasts. On top of it, the 33 inch seat height is simply silly.
    Honda clearly has lost its way producing one loser after another.

  29. tron says:

    After seeing it head on I can only quote Arnold from Predator.
    “You’re one ugly motherf***er.”

  30. Steven S says:

    Why don’t we call an adventure bike (gs1200 etc) what it really is, a comfortable motorcycle plain and simple.

  31. S Calwell says:

    I had a VFR800 and loved it. The V4 was so sweet. On the other hand a 600 pound gorilla with 33 1/2 inch seat height is going the wrong direction. If the engine/transmission/driveline is heavy, it requires a heavier frame, suspension, wheels, brakes, and everything else that is affected by weight. The inertia of all that mass does not help handling under way or struggling to push it around. Way too heavy for me.

  32. Ozzie Mike says:

    Nice looking bike. Shame about the paltry fuel tank. Even Moto Guzzi has upped the fuel capacity of their Stelvio to 32 litres. The same criticism applies to the standard VFR1200 – lack of fuel capacity. Here in Oz (ie Australia) there can be hundreds of kilometres between petrol stations.
    Ozzie Mike

  33. Davis says:

    Nice bike.

  34. Jerrylee says:

    Everyone seems to be on the GS bandwagon. I’ll keep the original thank you:)

  35. Bob says:

    This is actually the only appealing Honda street bike, IMO. I’m a big fan of utilitarian designs. I had an R1100GS once upon a time and loved it, ugly as it was to many people. I did the Charlie/Ewan thing before they did and became part of the advrider.com clan. Maybe this won’t go off-road becuase the suspension travel looks “street bike” short. In that case, they should nix the spoked wheels until they add a few more inches. Nevertheless, this looks like a capable, comfortable and enjoyable steed…for a Honda.

  36. Bob Smith says:

    33 1/2 inch seat height. OUCH !!!!

  37. Asterix says:

    The VFR1200 is obnoxiously overweight for what’s supposed to be on the sportier end of sport touring, so saying it’s just a little heavier than the VFR is damning with faint praise.

  38. mickey says:

    Well, compared to a standard VFR1200F this bike appears to be more comfortable, have better range and more storage capacity. In that vein it would probably be a better tour-sport than the 1200 Viffer. Heck it’s over 100 pounds lighter than my ST 1300 and that would certainly be welcomed. Another 50 pounds lighter would be even better.I don’t find it unattractive, other than that little beak on the fairing, but I could certainly live with that. My inseam is even shorter than Carls so I have the same complaint about these “new standard’s” seat heights. 31″ is about my limit and if I convert right the Cross Tours is about 34″. Way too tall for me.

    These big ADV bikes are growing on me, but I’m not quite there yet.
    Wonder what the price would be fully equipped? If it’s $16-$17.5K like the standard VFR 1200F, that would be a real deal killer IMO.

  39. kentucky red says:

    95 KW is the mechanical equivalent of 127 HP, so expect 105 to 110 at the rear wheel.

  40. Superhawk says:

    Woops… they did it again. Another heavy bike that does not win in it’s class because… I’m not sure there is one. Touring bike? Go with a full tourer. Offroad – Onroad… there are many better from Suzuki to Triumph and beyond.

    603 lbs? OUCH!! Really?

  41. harry says:

    I LIKE.

  42. carl says:

    Can any of the manufactures make these adventures with a lower seat?? How much suspension travel do you need for paved roads where most of these bikes will spend there time. Like these bikes but with 30 inch inseam there are just to tall.

    • Fred M. says:

      If you want a bike for paved roads only, then look to a sport touring bike rather than an adventure touring bike.

      Adventure touring bikes are often bought by guys imagining themselves on a Long-Way-Round type of adventure through foreign lands where there are often no paved roads. Lose the suspension travel and ground clearance and the bike loses all of its cred for that market.

      Many riders buy bikes designed to do things that the rider won’t do and that they lack the skill to do even if they tried to. Just look at the sport bike market, where you’ve got guys riding around in a racing tuck at 65mph with an inch of tread on each side of their tires that has never touched pavement. Look at all of the full-dress touring bikes that have never been more than 100 miles from the rider’s home. Adventure touring bikes are just the same: Dilute the capabilities of the bike in order to make it more accessible and you lose market share.

      • carl says:

        Are you going to be jumping with an adventure tourer?? If I’m correct these are meant for gravel or fire road type riding at best but still mostly paved. I live out in the country where there are many gravel roads which would make the bike more suitable than either my wing or ZX14 which sometimes get squirrely on gravel. I have yet to bottom out my wing or ZX14 with alot less suspension travel. Good luck riding a 600lb bike fully loaded on a motocross type trail which is what you are implying.

        • huh says:

          Well, I jump my 100-hp adventure bike on every ride and have ridden it around MX track and on trails and thousands of miles from home (and on trails, thousands of miles away from home). It doesn’t weight 600 lbs, though – or have damper rod forks.

    • Mtrhead says:

      I actually like this seat height (33″ inseam) and find most other bikes I initially like do not fit me due to the seat being too low. Hey Honda – how about making your bikes with adjustable seats so that people from 26″-35″ inseams can be comfortable? You know, like on your Civics (and every other 4-wheel vehicle you make).

  43. kentucky red says:

    Utility and reliability eclipsed by ugliness and blandness.

    • kentucky red says:

      Oops. I see that this is a 1200, not an 800. Never mind, its awesome. Still ugly though.

      • Fred M. says:

        Yeah, you can’t limit yourself to the same puny engine size that MotoGP riders use. That may be fine for someone like Valentino Rossi or Dani Pedrosa, but someone with your level of skill clearly needs something a lot bigger. ;-)

        • Davis says:

          Tee, hee…

        • kentucky red says:

          Finally, someone recognizes me for my riding virtuosity. Thanks Fred, I really needed a boost today. Of course I can’t ride today though because the road is still wet in a few places, plus it is a little bit too cold, and it is a little windy, and just ate lunch – i never like to ride on a full stomach. But one of these days when it is seventy degrees, and the roads are dry, and the humidity is above 50% but below 80%, I’ll get out on the bike and show the world how great of a rider I really am.

  44. Joey Wilson says:

    I was disappointed that IF the VFR1200 was NOT the successor to the Super Blackbird. I was disappointed that the Interceptor in some form is no longer aroound in the US (even though it exists in its Crosstourer version elsewhere). I’m really disappointed that Honda is on this kick to make every new bike look like a Waverunner.

    The Adventure Tour segment is huge most places, and so this, the Super Tene, the Multistrada are the answer to that combined with the need to a) spread out development costs on these megamotors over more platforms and b) the performance/price equation for the big sportbikes is at a practical limit for most buyers, so you hope you can make new revenue in AT instead of the dwindling race-ready market.

    http://www.world.honda.com/Crossrunner/

    I’ve read conjecture that Honda is at war with itself internally. I’m beginning to believe it. On one hand, the motorcycle arm turns out these Cross-whatevers, DN-01′s, etc., while on the other hand gems slip through like the new CB250R and the Far East-only CB1100, and they do what it takes to win in MotoGP.

    I’m sure over time I’ll understand where they’re going with this. It’s just not that time yet.

    • carl says:

      Agree honda has lost touch, no idea who they are building bikes for. You would think with the internet wouldn’t take much to do a rider survey what customers are looking for. Looks like BMW is hitting them out of park on first tries, S1000RR and the new K1600GTL come to mind. Whether you like them or not got give them credit for really going full steam ahead at BMW.

    • Tom says:

      I was the owner of 5 Honda’s back when I first started riding. The CM400T, V65 Magna, Interceptor, HawkGT 650, along with an XR500 were bikes I owned. I have a strong bond with Honda. Yet I agree with your statement that Honda lost touch. Even with my strong bond with Honda I wouldn’t buy one of their current bikes. Nothing appeals to me. They are ugly ugly ugly. I had a 2000 Ducati 996 and when the 999 came out I tried to squint and see the beauty, but alas it was ugly compared to the earlier product. Sorry sometimes the designers go off target. I don’t get it. The emperor needs new clothes.

      • carl says:

        Same, I still have a goldwing, but also had a 2001 blackbird, 954RR, 800VfR and cbr600. But like I said seems they just built bland bikes, they use to be the leader and cutting edge bikes always from honda. I now have a ZX14 and reading all the hype on bikeland.org about the beast that the new 2012 ZX14 is, time to trade for a new one. Where is honda?? Yes I know there is limited market for some bikes but nice to see.