CRF1000L vs VFR1200X

[zebulon]

Crash bar discution have been splitted . In the CRF part, but can discuss about Varadero, CT & AT. 
http://www.vci-forum.com/index.php?topic=1265.0

[zebulon]

Some others informations after some more kilometers: (still google traduction... )

"Now 1200 kms in the saddle of the AT, the revision of 1000 was done, I feel that the engine is released gradually. I continue nonetheless to rev up gradually, still exceeded 5500 rev / min. In all honesty, acceleration obtained up to this regime are on the road, already sufficient in the context of use "rapid wound." I modified hydraulic adjustments before taking the bike on roads "white" of Michelin maps, ie, in my case, some dirty ardéchoises potholed roads and copiously, especially at this time of year. I opened the water on the fork and the shock absorber (compression and rebound) will be felt changing, the response of suspensions, already calibrated in standard settings, then becomes very "padded" the agreement AV / AR running gear is exemplary, the fripures bitumen and other bumps and holes are digested very effective way, in excellent comfort. However, the stability of the bike is not affected at higher speed, it remains imperturbable, we simply note a larger fork dive under braking in these conditions. On these small roads badly damaged that I know and fond, CT did not display the same behavior, less serene, it shook much (even touching the water); I spent less strong and less confidence in the same places with the AF. The frame of the CT is more rigid and less clearly adapted to rough terrain suspensions. The behavior difference is marked on this type of road, so it is not very obvious every day on more roads "civilized".
Twin AF is easier in most cases it will probably be less sharpened on large high speed attacks on bitumen very catchy, but it is not (over) my use.
Next up, the duo ..."

hope it is understandable

[Gandalf]

Today I was able to test both the VFR1200X DCT and the CRF1000L manual, back to back, so the comparison between the two could be experienced immediately. As previously noted in this forum, the two bikes cannot be directly compared because they have different vocations and they are obvious when you ride them. CT DCT is way easier to adapt than expected and I love the feel of that 4 cylinder power and smoothness that takes me back to my appreciation of my previous ST1100's amazing engine. Still getting a hard time getting used to the V Twin. Since I'm planning on replacing my 08 Vara with the AT, I was anxious to see if it would live up to the hype. It does... A very comfortable and linear predictable power delivery, nimble handling, you feel totally in control. The engine strangely felt like that 4 cylinder I had just ridden minutes ago..., exactly the appropriate amount power and torque for the purpose of the bike and a totally different feel to the twin on the Dero.  I knew I was making the right choice with the AT.
Then I hopped back on the Dero to head back to the office and it suddenly hit me... man, this 08 Varadero, is silky smooth, gear shifting is also smooth and wind protection is not even close, suspension was taking the road bumps as well as the AT and better than the CT. It has nothing to be ashamed about. The only thing that is showing it's age is with the engine. But I did not mind because it is still very smooth and powerful enough. I don't know if it's the "old comfortable slippers syndrome", but instead of being anxious and exited to replace my Vara, I was thinking, why do I really want to replace this bike anyway...., oh yes...  I want to go off roads.
Honda really knew what they were doing when they built these 3 bikes, they have different aims and it is not fair to compare them as they do extremely well, what Honda designed them to do.

[MrKiwi]

I agree to an extent. I think the CT and Varadero are more similar design intent, ie soft off roaders. However, the CT is such a nice road touring bike. The AT on the other hand is not startling on the road, but off road it comes together. It is a truer adventure bike.

Enjoy your AT, you'll love it.

[zebulon]

suspension was taking the road bumps as well as the AT

Not agree on this point , AT take the road bumps , much better then the vara; surely due to the high suspension level (and better damper) ; all as train crossing , and holes on the road are easier to ride. 

[MrKiwi]

suspension was taking the road bumps as well as the AT

Not agree on this point , AT take the road bumps , much better then the vara; surely due to the high suspension level (and better damper) ; all as train crossing , and holes on the road are easier to ride. 

Zebulon, good point.

[zebulon]

Zebulon, good point.

Just my humble opinion on these last 8000 Kms done on the AT ... 

[Gandalf]

I agree with your point as well, but I was expecting a big difference between the Varadero and the AT (suspension wise). Wondered if the suspension are set to stiffer settings on these demo rides to make it a sportier ride for the rider. My Dero was also fully loaded with saddle bags and top box, so maybe it affected the immediate comparison. I will take your word for it as I only did about 40 km on the ride, had a wide smile all along, and wishing I was taking it home.

Hopefully it will be in my garage soon.. 

[MrKiwi]

The AT has longer travel suspension. Also the 21 inch front wheel is slower to turn in on tight corners. Both bikes will feel similar on straightish roads but there differences show up more on rough terrain.

Like the Varadero, the AT two up with gear is a very good tarmac road touring bike. However, try riding two up with gear on gravel and the differences become more apparent. Cheers from downunder...

[MrKiwi]

One looks better suited to gravel than the other, even though the dirty one managed the trip (just)...

[Hägar]

.......Then I hopped back on the Dero to head back to the office and it suddenly hit me... man, this 08 Varadero, is silky smooth, gear shifting is also smooth and wind protection is not even close, suspension was taking the road bumps as well as the AT and better than the CT. It has nothing to be ashamed about. The only thing that is showing it's age is with the engine. But I did not mind because it is still very smooth and powerful enough. I don't know if it's the "old comfortable slippers syndrome", but instead of being anxious and exited to replace my Vara, I was thinking, why do I really want to replace this bike anyway....

Yes, yes, yes....perfectly described.  Just as it is me after a test drive with another motorcycle.


Arne

[Allroadtoad]

After several (technically challenged) GSses, I had been riding the CT (DCT) since september `12 as an instructor, over 85000 km`s without serious problems (if you forget about the  broken shaft drive in oktober `15, which led to a double full warranty). I changed jobs/started my own thing and had to buy a new bike. From the first time I saw the Africa Twin I knew it had to be it and the first testride made sure about that. It has been a long time since I had so much fun in riding, it`s nimble, torque, the engine is fun in every aspect. Now, after 9000 kms I struggle to find flaws. At no point I linger for the CT, which was more business-like, it did what it was supposed to do but I never had my heart into it, really. The AT does tick all the right boxes for me and it added something, I really love the thing and riding it. ...

[zebulon]

  and nice picture with the AT  Scottish place ( under sun!!!  )

[Maritimer]

My decision maker between the AT and the CT will be the leg room / knee bending angle. Can someone comment on the riding position on both bikes for tall riders / long inseam riders.  I find the Varadero  a bit uncomfortable for long haul because of the knee bending angle, even after dropping the foot pegs. I manage on the Varadero but I could use I use improvement on the sitting position.

[Jyrays]

If you look bike for long haul it is definitely CT. I have now AT and previously CT, AT is great machine as it is but cannot beat CT on long haul!