Comments on: Honda Bouncing Back With Value Priced Product (News)

By: todd

todd — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 23:54:48 +0000

I imagine the CRF is equally “budget”. These are not MX’rs, these are entry level 50/50 trail bikes. The maintenance costs on these low revving singles is going to amount to $50 Cheng Shins every 15,000 miles.

-todd

Report this comment

By: soi cowboy

soi cowboy — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 11:26:29 +0000

The wrr has crap suspension. The shock is not kyb. It is made by another subcontractor. The damping is nonexistant even with the adjusters all the way in. Check a few wrr forums.
One aspect of the 4 stroke mx’rs is the high maintenance costs. That along with green sticker regs mean that many serious riders must have a second bike.

Report this comment

By: Joe Bar

Joe Bar — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 12:40:31 +0000

I’d be there with you!

Report this comment

By: MGNorge

MGNorge — Sun, 14 Oct 2012 13:56:44 +0000

What you say is true in some respects but let’s look at the extremes to better illustrate the issue. A full on, taken to the max MotoGP bike will produce a much greater maximum horsepower peak, somewhat higher torque peak (torque output generally follows displacement) but in comparison to a road going liter bike those numbers come at much higher rpm and at the expense of power generated lowered. Tuning the Yamaha WR for a higher peak horsepower level will usually mean something’s given up down below. Simply not wicking it up and short-shifting it at the same rpm level as the CRF will not likely give you similar results, just as a MotoGP bike on the road would be a disappointment at less than race levels.

Simply put, what we’re talking about here, is torque spread throughout the rpm range is usually sacrificed when tuning for higher peak power. What you’ve find in the CRF is a very broad power delivery, perfect for trail riding and newer riders. High level experienced riders might find it boring if they were expecting more.

Report this comment

By: MGNorge

MGNorge — Sun, 14 Oct 2012 13:42:50 +0000

I have a friend who never, well almost never, buys a vehicle new. There’s no way for him to rationalize the expense and depreciation of a new model when there are so many good used vehicles at a fraction of new prices. I have not always bought new but have on a number of occasions. I simply remind him when he gets going enough on the subject that someone has to buy new or else there wouldn’t be used!

Report this comment

By: todd

todd — Sun, 14 Oct 2012 01:34:03 +0000

Don’t kid yourself. The WR250R is more powerful than the CRF250L. It seems oxymoronic to suggest that a bike with less power has more power when you’re in the act of using less power…

You only really go up through the RPM once, in first gear. When you shift there is a fairly small drop in RPM to each gear as you go up.

If you want less power like the CRF has to offer, just use less throttle on the WR and shift early for that “grunt” you’re looking for. Since torque is largely dependent on engine size the bikes will be terribly similar at the same RPM – it’s just that the CRF starts tapering off at 7,000 whereas the WR is able to keep pulling a while beyond. Having that extra RPM range allows you to stay in the lower gears longer for more pulling power. If you never run above 7k then the extra cost of the WR would be a waste for you.

From what I’ve heard, most people have been able to purchase the WR for less than MSRP whereas I doubt the Honda will be discounted. In the end Yamaha may still need to discount the WR more and then dumb it up a little on the future versions to better compete on cost.

-todd

Report this comment

By: Provalogna

Provalogna — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 17:55:06 +0000

There is a new bike market.

There is a used bike market.

The group defined as “all motorcycles” trade first in the former group, then the later group. This sequence is never inverted.

The larger is the magnitude of the former group the larger is the potential magnitude of the latter group. To dampen enthusiasm for the former group is to minimize choice in the latter group. To grow the size of the former group is to enlarge choice in the latter group.

It’s always in the interest of members of the latter group to only maximize size and success of the former group. It’s always counter to the interest of members of the latter group to minimize potential size and success of the former group.

IOW, maintaining honesty, members of the latter group serve their interest best with silence. Any statement of perceived benefit of membership in their group is self-defeating because it potentially minimizes choices.

Report this comment

By: soi cowboy

soi cowboy — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 17:39:58 +0000

Our local honda dealer just closed their doors. I guess that is an example of the customer not adapting to the product.

Report this comment

By: MGNorge

MGNorge — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 09:30:21 +0000

You make a good point but people don’t always act rationally. If one has a need, or at least a bad itch, to buy a new bike one that is cheaper will often suffice. May not be their dream bike but that’s the way it is now, hopefully not later.

Report this comment

By: Dan

Dan — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 02:19:38 +0000

90% of my riding is commuting, also. My bike is also uncomfortable, not particularly fuel efficient, and extremely expensive to maintain. And I’m not about to trade it for anything sensible any time soon. I grew up riding in the ’70′s and admired Honda’s for their fit & finish and stolid reliability, but they tended to be dead boring to ride. If this is the trend Honda is returning to, well, all the best to them. The world seems like it needs functional commuter bikes, and I applaud Honda for it’s forward thinking to that end. I’m just not that kind of rider. Different strokes, as you say.

Report this comment