[scarabsport]

Check it out. Motorcyclenews.com

 

[EliminatorR1]

Wait a minute... it's not even the end of 2004, how can they name it bike of the year?

 

[Mickey_D100]

because the 2004 sportbike models are all released or real close to it I guess? :dunno

 

[Limited R1]

Well how about that.:rock

 

[ImagineParadise]

Welcome to 2 days ago

 

[Juerg]

it's not even the end of 2004, how can they name it bike of the year?

Well, at least they tested all the relevant bikes for 04.
If you want an example of "ridiculous selection of the bike of the year": Some Swiss bike mag hat their readers elect the bike of the year in February. How should they be able to make a reasonable judgement?

 

[Big Daddy]

Wait a minute... it's not even the end of 2004, how can they name it bike of the year?

I suppose they can state or print whatever (without integrity) and feel Ok about it. Suffice to say Motorrad had ALL 4 bikes in their test last week so its not the first........

BD

 

[archer]

because out of the 4 new 1000 cc sportbikes that we have all been waiting for r1 has come out the best in testing on road and track, against honda , suzuki , and zx10,so i reckon that may be the reason m.c.n has named it sportbike of the year. and i just got one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[archer]

I suppose they can state or print whatever (without integrity) and feel Ok about it. Suffice to say Motorrad had ALL 4 bikes in their test last week so its not the first........

BD

what do you mean without integrity,maybe you should read the article,i think all bikes got good write up,just that the r1 come out better than the others

 

[Juerg]

Who cares... at the end of the year we will possibly have seen tests won by the cbr, g1k, r1 and zx10, we will have about 20 different and sometimes contradictory dyno curves and still will not know what bike ist the best (what probably is ok because they are all good, except for the R1 that is better of course ).
For me it is getting clearer and clearer that mag tests are not even worth the paper they are written on in general. I have never cared what bike won, but obviously even track times and dyno curves are subject to "personal taste".

 

[contender23]

Too bad that alot of what is written about performance products, in magazines, is driven by $$$$ generated by advertising....most mags sill not say a bad word about any product....however....the R1 is the "bike of the year"...in my book....but Im swayed by ownership...grin

 

[1700warrior]

Hey Limited, your sig pic :rock !!!

 

[RedRider0151]

Sounds more to me like Yamaha has won "Advertiser of the Year". I mean what happens if 2 months from now there are 10 factory recalls on the thing?? It just makes it even more apperant how something other than the bikes actually drives magazine reviews. It shows a complete lack of integrity to name a Bike of the Year when there is still 9 months left in the year. I am not saying that the R1 isn't the best bike because in all probability it is, but I would rather have it announced in november - december so the claim actually has some validity!

 

[archer]

what it means is that out of the 4 major manufacturers that brought out new models for 2004 yamaha r1 is the best bike that motorcycle news tested,therefore it makes it the best superbike (in thier opinion) of 2004( that is unless another factory brings out something better later on in the year) it dont matter wot month we are in, cos there are no more new models due to come out .

 

[cranky1]

Sounds more to me like Yamaha has won "Advertiser of the Year". I mean what happens if 2 months from now there are 10 factory recalls on the thing?? It just makes it even more apperant how something other than the bikes actually drives magazine reviews. It shows a complete lack of integrity to name a Bike of the Year when there is still 9 months left in the year. I am not saying that the R1 isn't the best bike because in all probability it is, but I would rather have it announced in november - december so the claim actually has some validity!

They based their judgement on the performance handling and packaging of the product. This is not Consumer Reports most reliable washing machine of the year. I would say that all the bike manufacturer's previous offerings have enough of a track record of reliability to safely assume that the products will not experience major failures. They have a basic development formula, and they stick to it, and any major issues should have already been wrung out during testing. Not that other smaller issues can't arise, but that's not the criteria.

 

[RedRider0151]

So this should have been called a liter bike shootout, not the Bike of the Year. I completely understand why they nominated it with such a title...thanks for pointing that out guys..LOL. I just remember years ago when Sportrider or whatever magazine it was, would list probably the best 15 bikes made in a particular model year, all kinds of bikes, the cruisers, sport cruisers, 600, 750, big bore, sport cruiser, and it would explain why it nominated each bike, then after all of that they would nominate one of those the actual Bike of the Year. This Bike of the Year crap in March just makes it a BS award. IMHO of course. (along with any other non Yamaha rider!! LOL)

 

[Juerg]

This Bike of the Year crap in March just makes it a BS award.

Have you ever tried to switch off your disapointment that the CBR was not elected in this specific case (there will be others nominating the CBR, no worry) and instead tried some clear thinking?
When do products of the year get elected normally? Early or late in the year? Car of the year as a valid comparison? It's pure nonsense what you are telling. Product of the year awards allways are early in the year. What would the consumer benefit of a "this is what you should have bought this year" award at the end of the year? :bs

 

[thedave]

Also, Shouldn't bike of the year include all the sportbikes? What about Aprilia? Ducati? Is this Japanese bike of the year or sportbike of the year?

 

[Big Daddy]

what do you mean without integrity,maybe you should read the article,i think all bikes got good write up,just that the r1 come out better than the others

I read parts of the article so no need to reread it again.....

If you haven't read the rider impressions of the zx10r i'll be glad to send it to ya, (it was horrific in a bad way) but this was their findings.

This is the first test were the R1 finished first overall, so please explain to me how this equates to 'bike of the year' and of the other mags to date it has been down in the pecking order.

Towards the end of a production year is when such a claim should be stated! not in very early March.:2bitchsla :bash

BD

 

[RedRider0151]

Have you ever tried to switch off your disapointment that the CBR was not elected in this specific case (there will be others nominating the CBR, no worry) and instead tried some clear thinking?
When do products of the year get elected normally? Early or late in the year? Car of the year as a valid comparison? It's pure nonsense what you are telling. Product of the year awards allways are early in the year. What would the consumer benefit of a "this is what you should have bought this year" award at the end of the year? :bs

Dude, you have no idea what you are talking about here....I have no Brand Bias whatsoever. I am actually a huge fan of the styling of the R1 but I like the seating position of the GSXR better and I happen to have ridden an RC51 for the last 3 years. If you think I am just being a die hard Honda fan then go look in the marketplace and you will see I had my RC51 up for trade for an R1 and was within a breath of buying one out of the marketplace but pulled out at the last second so you can just get off the whole "This is a Honda Guy" routine. I ride whatever bike feels the best for me, period, dont care who's sticker is on the side of it

Motorcycle of the Year should be just that...an award for the Best All Around Motorcycle that year. If you are shopping for a liter bike you should read a liter bike comparison, a 600 then read a 600 shootout. I mean if you are buying a bike just becuase of what some review says about it, then you need to go get checked out anyhow. How about trust your own instincts about how a bike should feel instead of some magazine or website. I read the comparisons as a hint to what to look for when going in and buying a bike. I think the most important part of all these articles is the rider impressions at the end of the articles instead of all the hard data they try and throw at you.

I am not trying to start a pissing war over which bike is best...I think the Yamaha is probably one of the top 2 of the liter bikes anyhow. (the kawi being the other). But as far as being Bike of the Year...I dont know, I think the Aprillia Mille is really sweet this year and I also think some of the 600's are really sweet this year also. The new MV Augusta is going to be off the hook! It is all in what you are looking at. Hell for that case I actually think the Yamaha Warrior is a badass bike too! (In this day of American Chopper) So exactly what criteria is used when deciding the Bike of the year??? This is all I am saying...The Bike of the Year shouldn't be the bike that won the liter bike shootout...it should be the best bike produced this year...whatever style bike that happens to be, and for MCN to just immediately declare the R1 the bike of the year since it won the comparison I assume, just makes that declaration less valid. In 2001 did they nominate the gixxer the bike of the year immediately after the comparison?? (because that bike was head and shoulders above every other bike out that year performance wise, and if you dont think so you are just lying to yourself) I think that the majority of the motorcycle public just wants someone else besides Suzuki to get some great press and are sick of heairng aobut the gsxr1000 as being the crown prince of performance motorcycles.

Hell did they have out the Best Picture Award to LOTR 3 weeks after it came out...cuz they probably should have!!!:finger