What is right/What is wrong...

[Bones]

What is right and what is wrong with each of the major motorcycle manufacturers (MMM) in terms of:
1. Product
2. How they present product to the market (that's you and me, folks)
3. How they support the product
4. How they support the consumer (that's you and me, folks)

How do you think it affects your:

1. Enjoyment of the product
2. Your likelihood of promoting the product
3. Your "loyalty" to the brand

Here is where I am going with this, guys and gals:

I have been fortunate to own and ride bikes from most MMM in the past several years except two and have enjoyed each bike a lot, and found certain aspects of the overall experiece wanting in one way or another with each. HOWEVER, I found the areas of criticism to be distinctly different for each MMM, in my experience.

Who makes the "best bike?" It is a ridiculous question because there are so many bikes out there and most modern bikes do what they do reasonably well. BUT, the market is broad and market shares within each area are fought for by each MMM.

I am curious to find what you feel are the high points and low points for any given bike you consider your primary or secondary bike and the MMM that goes along with that bike.

I will start, using one bike I owned about two seasons ago, beginning with the response found below, as an example.

Hope this sheds some light on a few things that I have been ruminating about this past year, especially the past 4 months.

Jeff

[Bones]

Honda CBR600RR

That class of bike sees serious competition. All the Japanese MMM produce bikes that are outrageous in performance and the specs within the class are almost the same. They differ by splitting hairs. BUT, they all feel different.

The flavor of the CBR600RR was totally "HONDA" in nature. Completely stable, composed, precise and strong. The fit and finish were excellent. The stock components fine. Some complain the bike lacks personality. I think that is a ridiculous statement, as the nature of the feel IS the personality. What the bike lacked was roughness. Everything was smooth, and that is what some folks don't like. You can decide you like or don't like that , but that DEFINES Honda. Neutrality is part of the Honda ethos.

Honda (as seen through my experience with the Honda dealer) was solid and strong. But I never needed to test them, because their products are so reliable and managable. The dealer was excellent in all ways.

I had the bike a short time because I convinced myself (erroneously) that what I "needed" was a sport bike for the street, not the track. I did, however, get to ride the 600RR on different tracks for more laps than I can count. So I traded for a VFR800. It was a fantastic bike once I ditched the stock exhaust. Honda characteristics were there in spades, again.

The one really unique thing Honda makes is that V4 engine, which is a jewel. Let's not talk about Vtech now. I loved the bike, but then correctly realized that I "needed" a dedicated track day bike. I would have LOVED to run the hell out of that V4 on the track, but that bike really would hold you back on the track due to weight, so I traded for an R6........next part of the thread (more on that later).

What is right about Honda? Everything, if you are after neutrality. Strong, even keeled, reliable. Good dealer network. Not hard to get parts, but you will only need them if you drop the bike.

What is wrong with Honda? Nothing, really. But the bikes are not particularly esthetically appealing, except for maybe the VFR. No sex appeal if you compare to any non Japanese MMM.

How do they go after market share? Advertisements on TV and print. Word of mouth? I guess. But we all know that Japanese MMM are solid and reliable. So they compete not only on spec sheets and the race track, but in magazines and on TV, splitting that section of the pie with a microtome, it seems.

What COULD a Japanese MMM do that would get exciting? Hire an Italian designer and not tell anyone. Listen to him and do what he says in terms of design. Make and use some parts that aren't plastic and that have a feel to them that evokes some "ahhhhh." Who cares if that bike is 6 lbs heavier than the competition? Most folks don't ride them on the track anyway.

Nothing controversial to discuss with my Honda experience, because they don't do anything I can think of that is controversial.


Jeff

[TorqueMonsterMT-01]

Jeff;
Excellent assessment of Honda. During my Motocross days I owned and raced 7 different Honda MX bikes over a 15 year period. Everything you said is spot on. Even in the 70s and 80s the only thing I had to do with my Honda's was to peel some stickers from wierd places because I didn't like the appearance. Of course having a constant desire to add hp, I always bought aftermarket stuff, but I really didn't have to.

Fast forward....fast forward a little more...OK, stop.

Yamaha MT-01.
Over the years, Yamaha has proven to be an innovative company. Some unique bikes were produced and several good Yamaha ideas became the standard in MC design. (Does the Monoshock ring a bell?).

In 1999 Yamaha introduced a concept bike called the MT-01 at the Tokyo motor show. It was so popular with the people and especially the press, that Yamaha decided to go forward with a production model. I waited with baited breath (I eat a lot of Sushi over here).

Finally, they introduce the production model but offer it to the European market only. Luckily, I could buy a re-import model in Japan, but if I were living in the US, I would be extremely frustrated. Add to the frustration that Yamaha apparently considers Canada, South Africa and Australia as Europe because they sell the bike in those places too.

Here is what I see wrong with Yamaha. Marketing stupidity.
The #1 selling bike type in the US is a cruiser. the vast majority of these bikes have a big torquey V-twin motor. The #2 selling models are great handling sport bikes.
Why in the world would Yamaha think that Americans wouldn't like a big torquey V-Twin that handles like a sport bike? Have they ever heard of a Reece's peanut butter cup?

They were already proven wrong with their FJR that was originally sold to the European market.

I think Yamaha has their finger on the pulse of the repli-racer crowd, but unfortunately, it appears they only have one finger.

Cheers,
Jeff

[Bones]

Jeff (torquemonster),
Oh, you are so right! I currently have two Yamahas (see classifieds...y'all, hint, hint) and have studied that MMM closely, too.

Yamaha HAS been willing to try some more interesting things over the years, but seems not to have the knack for following through with some of those things. I haven't ridden one of their twins, but know a bit about their inline 4's. Here is my take.

Yamaha is the only Japanese MMM that can make a semi sexy looking bike. The R1's have been quite nice for race bike platform models. The fit and finish these past few years have been top notch. Their hardware is the closest to "real" that the Japanese MMM have approached, but like all the Japanese MMM's, there are some places they just lose any sense of finish.

The Yamaha engines have a bit of nastiness that is quite nice, even in the inline 4's. That is not to say they run rough, just that they have a bit of an edge. Nice.

Like Honda, all the new ones are unflinching in reliablility and you can beat the hell out of them.

All of the Japanese MMM's realize that the US market seems to like cruisers, but damned if one of them can build a cruiser that inspires (IMHO). That is not to say that they aren't reliable and finished well, but I don't think they "get it" when it comes to what having a cruiser is all about. That is where Harley gets it right....that is another post within this thread.

It is fascinating that they will fight for 1/2 % of market share in a given class, but can't figure out how to go for say, 3-5% more market share in a sector where they might be able to grow. Meanwhile, they have to fight hard to push the limits of engineerign capability for next season's 3 hp gain and 6 lbs wt loss in the ultra competitive sport bike classes.

Indeed, why in the world DON'T they built a knarly sounding torque oriented twin that is relatively light and handles correctly and has standard style seating and ship it stateside? Because I don't think they really understand US culture. I think they would sell within a year or two.

Say it only sold a few percent of the market? That might be the first year, but it would grow if they created a new market sector.

How about this idea? Build a torquey twin and put it on a comfortable and performance oriented touring platform? Harley does it with engines that don't make as much torque or hp and are heavier than COULD be built, and look at how they sell.

There are a million reasons why one could sit at some corporate meeting and say that a large, heavy bike that looks like a dirt bike would never sell. But look at the numbers for the GS bikes of the past 8-10 years. Hell, even I own one! So why haven't the Japanese MMM tried some of these ideas?

Then again, they do build the best racing bikes on the planet, don't they?

Jeff