TL1000 v VTR1000

[leevtr]

Theres been a lot of instances over the years where Honda's have been slagged off by journo's for being boring and lacking character. I think they just aim to make bikes that are user friendly, and do what they say on the tin. I remember when the CBR1000RR came out in 2004, they said it was boring and didn't wheely enough. Then I got one in 2006. THe think was the absolute dogs, great out of the box, handled like it was on rails, just a great, well designed bike. But because it was easy to ride and live with, it got tagged ' boring ', and I think the storm suffered the same treatment, because it wasn't chucking people off down the road, and was user friendly.

Back to the performance, a mate of mine who had a storm for 7 years, took his bike to Almeria for a trackday. Out dragged a Ducati 916 down the start/finish straight, yet only one of those bikes would generally be regarded a performance bike. The fact that he's 19 stone makes it even funnier.

SP1's got cained for the fuel injection being snatchy in traffic. FFS it's a race bike with lights, and wasn't designed to sit in traffic.
VFR's get slagged off, as did blackbirds, yet you try finding a low miler cheap, they hold their money like nothing else. Because they last.

Mechanic who used to work at Riverbank M/C's in Bow, told me that he'd always been a Suzuki fan. Then he came here from South Africa, and dealt loads with courier bikes and commuter hacks. Even he said that Hondas are head and shoulders above.

[StormingHonda]

The sv1000 has engine problems (the knock) and Suzuki don't want to know about it

Isnt it just a noise issue and not an actual problem that could get te engine smashed.

[lloydie]

Most guy's on the sv forum say stay away from one that has it .
I did read up about it a while ago but as my brain it like a civ I forgot .

[Stratman]

Theres been a lot of instances over the years where Honda's have been slagged off by journo's for being boring and lacking character. I think they just aim to make bikes that are user friendly, and do what they say on the tin. I remember when the CBR1000RR came out in 2004, they said it was boring and didn't wheely enough. Then I got one in 2006. THe think was the absolute dogs, great out of the box, handled like it was on rails, just a great, well designed bike. But because it was easy to ride and live with, it got tagged ' boring ', and I think the storm suffered the same treatment, because it wasn't chucking people off down the road, and was user friendly.

Back to the performance, a mate of mine who had a storm for 7 years, took his bike to Almeria for a trackday. Out dragged a Ducati 916 down the start/finish straight, yet only one of those bikes would generally be regarded a performance bike. The fact that he's 19 stone makes it even funnier.

SP1's got cained for the fuel injection being snatchy in traffic. FFS it's a race bike with lights, and wasn't designed to sit in traffic.
VFR's get slagged off, as did blackbirds, yet you try finding a low miler cheap, they hold their money like nothing else. Because they last.

Mechanic who used to work at Riverbank M/C's in Bow, told me that he'd always been a Suzuki fan. Then he came here from South Africa, and dealt loads with courier bikes and commuter hacks. Even he said that Hondas are head and shoulders above.

The early MCN report, where they tested the FireStorm against the 916 came out in praise of the VTR. I never understood why my bike was "boring" because it was reliable and, as you say, didn't spit me off when it had mind to.

[pinkyfloyd]

The MCN review for the storm rates it highly.

http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/biker ... 997--2005/

The Honda VTR1000F Firestorm is a brilliant all-rounder with few foibles: you’d be hard pushed not to have a ball on it.


Handling is sharp yet forgiving, the brakes are great, it’s pretty comfortable (somewhere between sporty and relaxed) and the grunt provides huge fun. The Honda VTR1000F Firestorm is very stable at higher speeds yet easy to manoeuvre nearer a standstill, too.

Only down side they mention really is the looks, Even us owners have to admit, as far as pretty bikes go its not a stunner. And fuel range.

We own these bikes and we keep them for years because of what we know. Those that dismiss them out of hand have not experienced them. No they are not as fast as a supersport IL4 of todays market and they cannot play with the 1000cc IL4's of today but when the Storm was made it outclassed the Ducati of the times without meaning too. Great little bikes, completely understated and underestimated.

[firestorm996]

I looked at SV1000's before getting the storm this time round, good luck finding one without crank problems already or looming unless you're going for a recent model year. Build quality did not seem good either. I wanted to like them but couldn't get past these issues. At least with a VTR if you sort the CCTs you're usually ok.

My last vtr was on oe cct's, traded it at 44,000, even then no probs. RR was ok as well. No one makes them like Honda.

My first storm also had about 45k on it, on original CCTs and RR with no probs. Second VTR I had suffered from CCT failure though. This one has manuals and I fitted a scooter RR as soon as I got it ;-)

[Rob]

Not sure if it's actually true, but I remember reading not long after it came out that the VTR was at the time the fastest production bike 0-60.

[vtrjames]

I've not ridden many Suzuki's, but the ones I have, IMHO, have been crap. Build quality was rotten on them to. Went out on Sat, one of the fella's was on a very late GSXR1000, and even he slagged off the build quality, and said that after he rode a late blade, he didn't want to get back on his Gixer.

Don't think I'd be buying a Suzuki in any hurry.

i have a sv650 for winter time and i use it about 3 to 4 months a year. in that time i unsieze the brakes front and back about 3 times(whilst using everyday),the carbs suffer badly from freezing as they have little electric heaters instead of water heated. anything under minus 8 and it cuts out all the time at junctions. as said poor build quality. however it a nice little light bike with good comfort and about 150miles to fuel light (16l tank) but that said i will not buy another suzuki.just dont want to ditch my vtr in the snow so i keep the sv for that.

vtr all the way

[pinkyfloyd]

Oddly enough I was sitting at the lights last night when a TLR pulled up beside me. Dude on the thing shouted over. "That was my fist ever twin!"

He then informed me that he loved the thing while he had it and I should get some decent cans on it. Then pulled away from the lights beside me.

[954luca]

Having owned both bikes, would never buy another tl1000s again, if people think the storm suspension is crap think again, the tl is only good in a straight line, forget cornering, alot of tl owners end up putting gsxr1000 forks on, and spending £500+ sorting out the dodgy rear rotary damper. Same with the brakes, only 90 miles till reserve no better than a storm, and jerky fuel injection. I owned the tl for a grand total of 3 weeks, could not wait to get rid of it, some people love them, but it's not for me. The only decent thing on them is the engine, more grunt and power than the storm, If I had to chose the TLR is a better buy than the TLS.