|
|
Post by JonW on Dec 1, 2020 12:43:56 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by veg on Dec 1, 2020 14:03:25 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by midlifecrisisrd on Dec 1, 2020 17:01:45 GMT 1
🤣🤣🤣
We were all new to it once 🙂
Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by wwwRD350LCnet on Dec 1, 2020 21:11:08 GMT 1
Excellent and agreed !
Xavier
|
|
|
|
Post by wonkywheel on Dec 1, 2020 22:44:31 GMT 1
Not surprised, the R is just about affordable, the rest of the LCs are untouchable 🤣
|
|
|
|
Post by jon on Dec 1, 2020 22:46:38 GMT 1
It’s been said before, and I’ll say it again (briefly) the R was considered poor by journos due to the competition at the time of sales.
Not really surprising from a country considered ‘third world’ at the time.
Paint finish is the only downfall IMO.
I have one as a current hybrid build.
Marmite fairing though. I don’t like it much as it seems far to big for the rest of the bike.
Jon
|
|
|
|
Post by JonW on Dec 2, 2020 0:54:42 GMT 1
Like Jon Ive said a lot about these bikes before too and my opinion is well known on this here. The problem with the contemporary reviews for the R was one of context. It was an obsolete product that had been given a make over and brought back into the country by a UK sales and marketing department who had listened to their customers who had said for 3 years since the death of the F2, 'we want another RD...'. The big mistake was either on act on what they heard or to do it on the cheap with the R rather than a brand new modern RD. You decide. For me, Ive learnt a bit about customers over my working life and Im sad to say that those who actively mourn the death of a product are often not those who buy them new anyway. I could talk for hours about the Aussies whinging of how unfair it was that Holden was allowed to die, yet when questioned when they last bought a brand new Holden they become rather quiet. Customers, gotta love em... Anyway... IMHO Yam should have not listened to their customers and defo not have brought in the R from Brazil if they wanted good press. To get good press they needed to either have made a brand new RD, which was pretty much a waste of time by then, or just smiled and said 'weve got this other bike you'll like just as much, let me show it to you...' Back to the R. Yam did what they did and imported it. It happened. So... This covers a lot of what ive said previously, but with some extra thoughts.... IMHO The R was not really poor quality compared to the F2, it was just in 1995 that motorcycle quality had come on in leaps and bounds and mid 80s build quality didnt cut it any more. The Rs were well enough built if you lived in the 1980s, but not the 1990s, which was when the articles were written. Maybe the paint on one (some?) of the test bikes wasnt quite as good or the engine just that bit soft compared to the F2 (did the testers even remember or just look at the specs?), but considering these were budget bikes at the time and sold for massive discounts in the end it was moot point. List was £3800, I paid just £2750 for mine with Datatag and a generous gear allowance. The 1995 mag articles were Yams big effort to get shot of the last of the crates and it worked for me as Id forgotten you could even get an RD, and didnt go to dealers as I didnt have a lot of money so no way i could buy a new bike... that changed when i spotted the R. Ive also said (and Im in this industry so know it all too well) Journos are just humans and so are inherently lazy if they can get away with it. So, once the word gets out that its not great quality, and other things people didnt like, before you know it they all repeat it some trying to be confrontational or on the pretext of offering a 'balanced article'. Bikes are often tested on the same 'Press Day' so journos hang around together and chat to each other as well. No suprise the story is often the same, especially on bikes like this that werent features for the mags, as old models rehashed are really just filler as few will buy the mag for them. The myths are kept strong by even lazier modern journos just quoting the old press when doing articles today... yes, even modern journos can be lazy... who knew!? The R's fairing is divisive. Its basically an FZR400 top fairing and uses the pretty useless twin lights with a new bit of bracket on the birdcage where it mates to the frame. The mid panels and belly all had to be different to accomodate the top fairing as the lines are different. This was done with a view to make it a bit more modern looking (lots if bikes had those twin lights and they were a Yam staple then) and I reckon the shape and the infills made it more akin to the 'jelly mould' CBR600 than its predecessor. Like the CBR is looked big and fat in pics, but it wasnt really. I think the 500 looks fat as well in pics but IRL its not. Anyway the new fairing kept the wind off you fine, so it worked for that. As for the soft nature of the bikes. Yes the forks were weak, but its a Yamaha so as they say in Lotus circles, TADTS. They All Do That Sir. 1980s thin forks and a bendy tube frame ridden in the 90s... eeek. no wonder jounros werent blown away. My R went to my other half when I moved onwards with bikes and when she later wanted a newer bike, she had mine and I traded the R for an R1. I hadnt ridden it for years and its 'floppiness' scared me a bit on the way to the dealer. Everything was moving about under me... But thats how most of the 80s bikes were; the lack of alloy beam frames and rigid forks will do that. As for the 'set up for cheap brazilian fuel' comments; all these bikes were PDI'd and had the 'poor fuel mods' taken out of exhausts and carbs. So were these bikes down on power? I mean... really? Perhaps they did have not the best spec cylinders / heads or squish setup... which loses what, about 2-4bhp? The bum-dyno will likely not notice that. And lets face it, Yamaha didnt always pay great attention to the squish or PV setup (or if they were even level!) on their mass produced models, so many of our bikes never made the power claimed in the brochure anyway. My R was a lot of fun. Nothing peeled off it. Nothing fell off. The only issue i had was a split in the belly pan from a factory rivet that was obviously done too tight and warranty took care of it. The bike toured and ranted the country lanes and reminded me of what i loved about these bikes in 1985. It would power wheelie in 1st and always put a smile on my face when i rode it. But it was a 1980s smile, not a 1990s one... bikes had moved on. In 1997 so did I, I replaced it with a new ZX6R and didnt look back until the late 2000s... now I enjoy and appreciate the bendy frame, skinny forks and crap brakes and having fun an sensible speeds.  I'd like to think if i was reviewing the R for a mag back in 1995 I'd have done something better than what was done. After all I was a huge fan of the old RDs... but hold on, so were plenty of the other journos at the time who reviewed it. Looking back I think it would have been better (certainly 'kinder') to compare it to the F2 and even the LC and give it the right (historical) context. But... well, sadly I can only conclude that I would also have fallen into the trap of also reviewing it as if it was a brand new product as thats what people did back then when new stuff sold mags and there was something new weekly it seemed. Lets face it in 1995 the R (or any RD) wasnt cutting it as a new bike, the once mighty LC line had been relegated to a cheap tourer / commuter that wasnt too fast or sporty for those buyers who were willing to suffer kick starting and could also remember to put oil in the under-seat tank now and then so that it could end up as misted all over your clothes later. Hardly the modern era. So it got panned in the mags in 1995. Of course it did! Yet what made it 'crap' (ok, not to me back then but hey i was weird... just like you lot!) was what makes it great today. Its the last of the RD line and as such we should embrace it and be thankful to Yam that they made it and brought it to the UK at all. It was a poor decision for whoever made it and I know for sure that they didnt get a pat on the back for their efforts as sales were so slow, but its given us more of 'our' bikes to enjoy today. |
|
|
|
Post by 4l04ever on Dec 2, 2020 22:17:22 GMT 1
As the pirate said....RRRRRRRRR
|
|
|
|
Post by wonkywheel on Dec 2, 2020 22:37:51 GMT 1
Well said and well written. 👌
|
|
|
|
Post by earthman on Dec 3, 2020 9:01:01 GMT 1
"FZR400 top fairing and uses the pretty useless twin lights"
I'm wondering, what's the reason for them being useless then? What's the wattage of the bulbs??
|
|
|
|
Post by JonW on Dec 3, 2020 13:18:54 GMT 1
"FZR400 top fairing and uses the pretty useless twin lights" I'm wondering, what's the reason for them being useless then? What's the wattage of the bulbs?? My opinion I guess. I never found them much good on my bike, but yes they are low wattage bulbs and a strange shaped fitting so limited in what you can fit. Small light units too so I doubt higher wattage would do them much good to be honest. There are hacks online where people unsolder the holders on the bulbs and resolder on bigger wattage units, but I would not do that. |
|
|
|
Post by earthman on Dec 3, 2020 14:49:53 GMT 1
It's a shame cause the twin headlight look is something that I like the look of and thought were a practical thing too.
|
|
|
|
Post by midlifecrisisrd on Dec 3, 2020 19:40:27 GMT 1
I may be wrong as it was a long time ago but think it was 2 x 25w bulbs as the electrics were not upgraded for the current draw
Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by Tobyjugs on Dec 3, 2020 21:44:34 GMT 1
Is it possible to improve with LEDs?
|
|
|
|
Post by JonW on Dec 3, 2020 22:52:13 GMT 1
Dunno Toby, they are a funny shaped bulb. Im sure you could do something if you put your mind to it of course. I did find online info about unsoldering/welding the plate (its like the plate with the 3 sticky out parts round the back of an H4 but just round and quite large) and then retro fitting that onto a different bulb's body, but it looked a lot of hassle unless you had the time and really needed to do this work because of where you lived etc.
Sadly pumping more lumen isnt always the fix as we know from HID/LED conversions that blind us, the bulb has to be right for the reflector etc. I guess that most people on an R (and FZR lol) probably live with the old setup and dont ride that much at night these days anyway. Of course these lights are not helped that all halogens now seem to be like holding a candle while riding compared to modern HID and LED setups we have now.
|
|
|
|
Post by earthman on Dec 4, 2020 10:55:15 GMT 1
Aye jonw, we are talking about a different era & technology here after all. I wonder if a pair of FZR600 lights could fit, I'm assuming that they had a couple of 55W bulbs in them.
My modern bike runs two 55W and they are still pretty good, this bike does run a cluster of LED's for the tail/brake lights though.
I have thought about trying to fit in LED replacements up front but will the beam pattern be right and the MOT man be happy, I don't know.
|
|
|
|
Post by JonW on Dec 4, 2020 12:49:13 GMT 1
Thats the hurdle really, the reflectors are not usually happy with modern tech and the pattern will be much worse if not directed the same as the OEM bulbs.
Id think the 600 lights are much the same as the 400/R, but Im out of my depth at this point. Long time since I owned an R and unless my mate Mark (he'll read this for sure at some point, haha!) feels like 'gifting' me his to play with then I doubt I'll be enjoying another one anytime soon. Its not like I dont have enough projects already lol.
|
|
