New Goldwings
- Thread starter Fate
- Start date
I dig both of those
I just now read they are putting active cruise on the new 'Wing......
Or as I call them "a 2 wheeled Honda Accord"
I was 40 when I brought my new 03 wing still have it today its been a terrific bike the wing is the bike you want for all day mile munching comfort one of the best touring bikes on the market I think 
RedBull
Registered
Goldwing! Can you do this on your busa? | General Bike Related Topics
This is my friend GregBob. I had no idea the Goldwing was such an agile boat. Greg definately has skills. Greg actually did his first track day on this Goldwing. Do you suppose the guys who were passed by Greg were thinking "I must still be sleeping? I swear that was a Goldwing" :bowdown...
The new wing is a really special bike. I bought the BMW 1600 because of the stigma attached to the wing. But after riding the wing it is superior to the BMW in almost every way. The BMW had more power but it didn't matter on the street - it still felt like a whale. The Honda is the most evolved grand touring motorcycle I have ever experienced. It is much more agile than you think and it is so refined for mile-munching it is cray. Had I bought the wing instead of that BMW, I would have ridden across the country by now and done a lot more distance trips. I tried to switch to a wing when I decided to ditch the BMW but they just laughed when I wanted to trade it into the Honda dealer.
Anyway, the BMW 16 fiasco led me to the BMW 1250, so I guess I'm happy but I do like those Wings.
Anyway, the BMW 16 fiasco led me to the BMW 1250, so I guess I'm happy but I do like those Wings.
Last summer while killing some time, I went into a Honda dealership and they had the two generations sitting beside each other....there sure are a lot of differences, the new one looks svelte and sleek compared to the old "Accord on two wheels."
Later that summer, I ran into an acquaintance who has a new 'Wing and he loves it even after coming off an ST1300....
RedBull
Registered
You too, can look this good! | General Bike Related Topics
This is a photo of my friend Greg whom I met last year at the track. When I met Greg, he was the typical busa rider, as slow as molasses, early on the brakes and late on the throttle with terrible form. This summer Greg attended two school days with "Sullivanraceschool.com" and I worked with him...
scotty - 12
Registered
The new wings look nice and have good tech. But, the power isnt there still! A 10 year old designed k1600 will eat its lunch in speed, handling and braking. Plus the new wing wind management is not close to the last version's very quiet cockpit. I hear there is even a lower speed governor? At least they fixed the ridiculously small trunk in the last year or so.
Long distance rider?
Zerks
Registered
To bad you never test drove the 1400 Concours. Even my old 2010 model with some nice upgrades has done nothing except amaze me for just about 2 years and about 19,000 miles. It is a blast to ride... it handles well, it has great power, stops like a sport bike and simply looks good. Its like a well kept secret in my opinion. With Michelin GT 5s on it you can't go wrong. As far as Honda goes... Honda is a superior engineering company... I sold many Hondas and other asian motorcycles back in the 80s and have owned several of them myself. A well sorted out 1400 with decently low miles can be found anytime you want to look for one. Like the Gold Wing, the Concours has a large following club here in the USA... a real classy operation with quarterly magazine issues to keep up with the clubs planned activities. The price on these Concours is pretty soft in comparison to what you are buying... aka... best value for the buck that I have seen. I did own a 05 Valkerie for a while... I liked it, but, had to go back to the Busa... and then for commuting I got the Connie.... life is good!
I forgot to mention... outstanding clutch operation and plenty of low end torque... the trans ratios are well spread out. I do have an after market CP exhaust muffler and the header is the factory stock unit. You can't go wrong with VVT in a ZX-14 motor.
Last edited:
The ZX-14 is a great bike.
scotty - 12
Registered
I have exact opposite opinion than you. The wing is a boring old man cruiser. It’s heavier and handles like crap compared to the k1600. And yes, the extra power on the street at anything over 30 miles per hour is absolutely shaming of the Goldwing. Now, this is comin from a guy who had 2 k1600s and is on his 2nd goldwing.
Zerks
Registered
When are you going to test ride a 1400 Concours? Heres mine... I am biased I will admit... I still think it out performs and is better looking than the BMW or the Gold Wing.
This friend of mine says his new 'Wing is leaps and bounds better than his previous one...it is lighter, handles better and has a few less buttons to try and figure out...
I've seen Gold Wings with crazy amounts of kms on them....most of the BMW K bikes (and now the R bikes) could never match those numbers as they are seemingly problematic.
At the last BMW rally I went to with my brother, there were 3 people getting a million mile pin and there were a few million mile pin holders at the ceremony...none of them were on K bikes.
I've seen Gold Wings with crazy amounts of kms on them....most of the BMW K bikes (and now the R bikes) could never match those numbers as they are seemingly problematic.
At the last BMW rally I went to with my brother, there were 3 people getting a million mile pin and there were a few million mile pin holders at the ceremony...none of them were on K bikes.
The ZX-14 is a great bike.
A more important and fundamental flaw was that BMW made the bike unstable so it seemed "frisky". That made for the most annoying touring bike ever. You had to watch the thing constantly or it would veer off the road. There was the left pull under power that BMW refused to admit to and finally said "that's a consequence of the design, get over it".
Then there are the huge parts failures that go way beyond minor quality control failures. Like the transmission fiasco. BMW's response? "Your transmission could explode, so we are telling you so it's your fault if you decide to ride it while you're waiting 6 months + for us to figure out a fix".
What about the throttle? It felt more like a ride-by-string system. You are in a low-speed maneuver and you call for power to help counter the bike's designed-in instability and it's not there - over you go. So after spending $30K+ on a bike, I had to spend another $1K on a tune to fix the throttle and get the power usable. You had to get the flashing kit too because you had to return the bike to stock each time you had it serviced so the mother ship wouldn't find out you fixed their mess when they hooked the bike to the network.
Or the reverse that worked exactly once. After that it just chunked. BMW's answer: "We're working on a fix for that but don't keep trying to use it or it will void the warranty". My dealer said I was a big boy and what do I need a reverse for.
Then there was the power. Was the K1600 the fastest bike in its class? Absolutely. But do you get a prize for being the fastest turtle? In my opinion, the K1600's speed only impressed people used to Harleys and other extremely slow bikes. A very fast K1600 would get smoked by a ZX-14 in the first 3 gears and then the Kawasaki would disappear into the sunset. Further, the Kawasaki would do it with 2 fewer cylinders, a fraction of the complexity, 150 lbs less weight, better handling, and 1/2 the cost. On top of all that, the K1600 was so unstable that they had to electronically limit the top speed to 110 mph on some models. What's all the fuss about?
Technically, the K1600 was a marvel of a bike. As you would expect from BMW, it was mechanical art - a technical tour de force. But the intent of the bike was never clear. It was fast, but not really fast. By the time that 160 hp got to the ground, there was only 110 HP left (if you want a fire-spitting touring bike, opt for the Ducati Multistrada's 160 real HP). The BMW was not boring, but nothing special either. The handling was quick, but it sacrificed stability which is the priority on a touring bike. I could never understand how BMW could make these fundamental design errors. Then I got the 1250 GS and I realized the bar for the K1600 was set by the 1250. The 1250 is fast, fun, flickable, yet rock-solid. It's pretty close to the perfect do it all bike. I think BMW's goal was to make an 850 lb touring bike that compromised nothing. The perfect bike for the aging hooligan. They failed.
I got my bike in 2018. At this point it was clear BMW was not putting any more effort into the K1600 platform and focused on the K1800 as their touring platform. They just hot-wired the starter motor to get the reverse, and it failed so miserably they didn't even try to fix it. The bike didn't progress much past its introduction, and it turns out the 2012 model was clearly the best iteration as patchwork adds worsened an already suspect dependability.
In the end, I realized I had been taken. The bike was so bad I couldn't even trade it in on a GoldWing (or a Triumph, or even a Suzuki). The Honda dealer said he couldn't even get $10K for a 1-1/2-year-old $30K bike with 6K miles. I even considered crushing the bike on YouTube and eating the loss. The only reason that didn't happen is that the guy at the junk yard wouldn't let me video it.
I got to ride the new generation Goldwing. It puts the BMW to shame in almost every way. The K1600 is faster and turns better, but it can't hold a straight line or cruise at 100+ speeds safely (according to BMW themselves, BTW). What the heck is a touring bike supposed to be for anyway?
The K1600 was so flawed it was incredible. First, it was impossible to get comfortable on. You can say that's a personal issue but I talked to so many K1600 owners who felt the same way. Turns out BMW had a very weird take on the rider's body triangle that fits a very specific body.
A more important and fundamental flaw was that BMW made the bike unstable so it seemed "frisky". That made for the most annoying touring bike ever. You had to watch the thing constantly or it would veer off the road. There was the left pull under power that BMW refused to admit to and finally said "that's a consequence of the design, get over it".
Then there are the huge parts failures that go way beyond minor quality control failures. Like the transmission fiasco. BMW's response? "Your transmission could explode, so we are telling you so it's your fault if you decide to ride it while you're waiting 6 months + for us to figure out a fix".
What about the throttle? It felt more like a ride-by-string system. You are in a low-speed maneuver and you call for power to help counter the bike's designed-in instability and it's not there - over you go. So after spending $30K+ on a bike, I had to spend another $1K on a tune to fix the throttle and get the power usable. You had to get the flashing kit too because you had to return the bike to stock each time you had it serviced so the mother ship wouldn't find out you fixed their mess when they hooked the bike to the network.
Or the reverse that worked exactly once. After that it just chunked. BMW's answer: "We're working on a fix for that but don't keep trying to use it or it will void the warranty". My dealer said I was a big boy and what do I need a reverse for.
Then there was the power. Was the K1600 the fastest bike in its class? Absolutely. But do you get a prize for being the fastest turtle? In my opinion, the K1600's speed only impressed people used to Harleys and other extremely slow bikes. A very fast K1600 would get smoked by a ZX-14 in the first 3 gears and then the Kawasaki would disappear into the sunset. Further, the Kawasaki would do it with 2 fewer cylinders, a fraction of the complexity, 150 lbs less weight, better handling, and 1/2 the cost. On top of all that, the K1600 was so unstable that they had to electronically limit the top speed to 110 mph on some models. What's all the fuss about?
Technically, the K1600 was a marvel of a bike. As you would expect from BMW, it was mechanical art - a technical tour de force. But the intent of the bike was never clear. It was fast, but not really fast. By the time that 160 hp got to the ground, there was only 110 HP left (if you want a fire-spitting touring bike, opt for the Ducati Multistrada's 160 real HP). The BMW was not boring, but nothing special either. The handling was quick, but it sacrificed stability which is the priority on a touring bike. I could never understand how BMW could make these fundamental design errors. Then I got the 1250 GS and I realized the bar for the K1600 was set by the 1250. The 1250 is fast, fun, flickable, yet rock-solid. It's pretty close to the perfect do it all bike. I think BMW's goal was to make an 850 lb touring bike that compromised nothing. The perfect bike for the aging hooligan. They failed.
I got my bike in 2018. At this point it was clear BMW was not putting any more effort into the K1600 platform and focused on the K1800 as their touring platform. They just hot-wired the starter motor to get the reverse, and it failed so miserably they didn't even try to fix it. The bike didn't progress much past its introduction, and it turns out the 2012 model was clearly the best iteration as patchwork adds worsened an already suspect dependability.
In the end, I realized I had been taken. The bike was so bad I couldn't even trade it in on a GoldWing (or a Triumph, or even a Suzuki). The Honda dealer said he couldn't even get $10K for a 1-1/2-year-old $30K bike with 6K miles. I even considered crushing the bike on YouTube and eating the loss. The only reason that didn't happen is that the guy at the junk yard wouldn't let me video it.
I got to ride the new generation Goldwing. It puts the BMW to shame in almost every way. The K1600 is faster and turns better, but it can't hold a straight line or cruise at 100+ speeds safely (according to BMW themselves, BTW). What the heck is a touring bike supposed to be for anyway?
Last edited:
Zerks
Registered
I am totally impressed by the honesty displayed in your personal evaluation of the BMW you experienced. I had no idea the basic engineering was so flawed from the start and it couldn't be remedied in some way by BMW.
As far as triple digit cruising goes... I wish you lived close by. I would happily let you take out my 1400 for a triple digit cruise to see how easily it accomplishes that aspect of comfortable cruising. According to some people the stock Concours is capable of a 173 mph top speed. If a 1400 owner contacted Steve at Shouldabeen engineering and got one of his optimized flash tunes, added a ZX-14 hi performance exhaust the top speed would likely increase a bit. Some Concours owners claim as much as 165 hp at the rear wheel when the proper mods and tuning are in place. I think high 10s might be possible for the skilled rider that doesn't weigh nearly as much as some of us here. I have heard a Concours owner turned an 11.09 1/4 mile at the track in Fontana a while back here in Socal... but I wasn't there to see it.
As far as triple digit cruising goes... I wish you lived close by. I would happily let you take out my 1400 for a triple digit cruise to see how easily it accomplishes that aspect of comfortable cruising. According to some people the stock Concours is capable of a 173 mph top speed. If a 1400 owner contacted Steve at Shouldabeen engineering and got one of his optimized flash tunes, added a ZX-14 hi performance exhaust the top speed would likely increase a bit. Some Concours owners claim as much as 165 hp at the rear wheel when the proper mods and tuning are in place. I think high 10s might be possible for the skilled rider that doesn't weigh nearly as much as some of us here. I have heard a Concours owner turned an 11.09 1/4 mile at the track in Fontana a while back here in Socal... but I wasn't there to see it.
Similar threads
