R3T--Fastest Production Touring Bike On Earth?

[IMFASTTOO]

O

yeah, baby!

HELL YEAH thats the right way to do it LOL

 

[IMFASTTOO]

Most powerful touring bike, sure - or at least, it has easy potential to hit 240+ horses with just a moderate infusion of cash, comparatively speaking. But as others have said, for Touring purposes raw power means very little. It's hard to beat the Gold Wing in that segment, and the bike is even fast as hell when you ride it to the hilt. I'd like to think it wouldn't outrun an R3T if the latter was in capable hands, but Honda have really created a great bike that's made to haul all that plastic as a matter of course. Even though they put footpegs on the Gold Wing which would suck for any kind of distance, I love having the ability to move my feet around.

THE GOLD WING only makes 100 hp and weighs 950+ lbs and that means its not the fastest touring

 

[Tank]

This is me on my old "sport touring" Honda F4i

How in the heck is this a "touring" bike. Its not much like most of the bikes the deem a "touring" bike. Im convinced its to ensure the insurance companies dont price the bike of the table.

 

[IMFASTTOO]

Define TOURING bike.

Things like the ST1300 - Triumph Sprint and Trophy - Guzzi Norge are also touring bikes. So are several beemers. These are full blown tourers - Not Sports Tourers. Just not bagger/cruiser style. It still annoys me BIG TIME that there is no faired Rocket. (I really must do something about that). Also I'd be quite happy to tour on a Sports Tourer if I was riding solo. I have. If there are serious bends - they're far easier to push hard. It's almost certain that when the time comes to change bike - it'll be a Trophy/Norge type.

As for FAST - In touring mode this is time point A to point B. So it will depend 100% on the road. A lot of the adventure style bikes would leave an R3 WAAAAAY behind in the Alps. It's chassis simply is not nimble enough. It's NO surprise (to me) that lots of the guys in the EU who do serious mileage (off motorway) use adventure bikes. We have these things called bends.

And add that the R3 has to stop every 220k's or so probably more often if you REALLY hit the gas. Think you'll find that a bike that's slightly "slower" on paper but with greater tank range will take it. Why, because you can simply maintain a constant speed - one you are comfy at - mine happens to be about 80-90mph. Back in the '80's I did a trip with others (I generally travel alone). Took a good 20% longer to get to places I'd already done (and planned accordingly) because they kept having to stop for fuel. I was on an OLD Guzzi - they were on more modern bikes - Kawa750turbos etc.

The R3 is QUICK (acceleration), FAST (top speed) - but if you have to do say 2000miles I think it'd eventually lose out to bikes with greater range. A bike with say a 500mile range and top speed of say 100mph - would lose just about anything on a Loooong run.

Actually I've seen this - one year on a trip from here to the ferry port in Santander. Filling up there was a guy on a GB plated bike next to us also filling. We set off in a little 2.0Tdi car at max 140kph (mostly 125ish - kph) - He shot past us - but we still made it to the ferry in front of him. He'd stopped twice for fuel - we still had 1/2 tank. The look on his face was priceless - he walked over and having established we spoke English asked if we'd taken a short cut - we'd used exactly the same roads.

With passenger - Well I bought the R3 simply because it's spacious for two - And most of our trips are under 200kms each way. i.e. one tank. That or the boss wants a ciggie stop anyway.

An example - My ex-Buell S3T was comfy - was fast enough to ride at comfort over the speed limit all day - had great handling and a 300km range tank - but only solo - too small for two. Barely 90bhp. But only 207kgs.

WHAT are you comparing speed over a 2000 mile course thats funny

 

[El Toro Rosso]

From what I've heard the K1600 runs low 11's and sub 3 second 0-60. With 160 crank horsepower and 750 lbs it will run away and hide from the R3T I'd suspect. Remember a stock R3T dynos at around 90-100 horsepower while the BMW puts something like 130 to the rear wheel.

I had to have the K1600 when it first came out. I traded my R3T and my K1300S for it. On paper it looked like a great compromise. Lots of sport. Very comfortable.
In reality, it was a great disappointment.
By the end of the first week of ownership, I knew I'd screwed up. I'd traded a really hot sporty bike (the K1300S) that was reasonably comfortable, and the king of the torquers (the R3T) that was VERY comfortable, for a limp wristers ST1100 on Steroids.
My K1600 was NOT comfortable. It was NOT quick. It was not super in the twisties. I would come back from rides and think to myself "Man, those are the best saddlebags any man has ever loaded. My what great weather protection. These are the coolest gadgets that have ever been put on a motorcycle." I never came back thinking "Wow, what a great visceral thrill I got when my bellybutton came out on the back side."
I bought in December of the year they came out. I went through three different seats, including a Russell, trying to get comfortable. And by the end of the Summer, I'd traded it back to a BMW dealer for a new K1300S and cash back to me. I was happy immediately.
But I still missed the R3T, and by Mid Fall, I'd found another one like the one I'd traded away, and I was truly happy at an even higher level.
The R3T is the kind of bike that either calls your name, or it doesn't. If you get the call, it is persistent and won't let you go. I'm on my third one now. There's nothing this side of a Brough Superior or Vincent Black Prince that will come close.
As for the Gold Wings, I can't get comfortable on those suckers either. Gold Wings are like cars with crappy safety and weather protection. They're not like bikes.
There is no doubt that the R3T beats it for torque. As torquey as the Wing is, the Rocket is torquier.
I suppose your mileage may vary ... but I've owned a heck of a lot of these so called touring and sport touring bikes. If you want a Rocket, there's nothing else out there that comes close.

 

[IMFASTTOO]

I had to have the K1600 when it first came out. I traded my R3T and my K1300S for it. On paper it looked like a great compromise. Lots of sport. Very comfortable.
In reality, it was a great disappointment.
By the end of the first week of ownership, I knew I'd screwed up. I'd traded a really hot sporty bike (the K1300S) that was reasonably comfortable, and the king of the torquers (the R3T) that was VERY comfortable, for a limp wristers ST1100 on Steroids.
My K1600 was NOT comfortable. It was NOT quick. It was not super in the twisties. I would come back from rides and think to myself "Man, those are the best saddlebags any man has ever loaded. My what great weather protection. These are the coolest gadgets that have ever been put on a motorcycle." I never came back thinking "Wow, what a great visceral thrill I got when my bellybutton came out on the back side."
I bought in December of the year they came out. I went through three different seats, including a Russell, trying to get comfortable. And by the end of the Summer, I'd traded it back to a BMW dealer for a new K1300S and cash back to me. I was happy immediately.
But I still missed the R3T, and by Mid Fall, I'd found another one like the one I'd traded away, and I was truly happy at an even higher level.
The R3T is the kind of bike that either calls your name, or it doesn't. If you get the call, it is persistent and won't let you go. I'm on my third one now. There's nothing this side of a Brough Superior or Vincent Black Prince that will come close.
As for the Gold Wings, I can't get comfortable on those suckers either. Gold Wings are like cars with crappy safety and weather protection. They're not like bikes.
There is no doubt that the R3T beats it for torque. As torquey as the Wing is, the Rocket is torquier.
I suppose your mileage may vary ... but I've owned a heck of a lot of these so called touring and sport touring bikes. If you want a Rocket, there's nothing else out there that comes close.

I agree exactly Ive ridden both the BMW the WING and dont like either

 

[cr0ft]

If you want a Rocket, there's nothing else out there that comes close.

Yep, the R3T is the first bike I've known I'm going to keep no matter what. I just can't see any other bike on the market checking all the boxes the way it does for me. The fact that you can do a lot of upgrading and power it up even further with relative ease is just icing on the cake - it may not be the fastest out of the box, not sure, but you sure can make it into a beast quite easily and still retain great comfort and utility for long hauls.

 

[cusso ken]

Yep, the R3T is the first bike I've known I'm going to keep no matter what. I just can't see any other bike on the market checking all the boxes the way it does for me. The fact that you can do a lot of upgrading and power it up even further with relative ease is just icing on the cake - it may not be the fastest out of the box, not sure, but you sure can make it into a beast quite easily and still retain great comfort and utility for long hauls.

You are preaching to the converted as far as R3Ts and I go , I often get asked if I have the restricted Rocket from people who look for something to demean the big Touring ,its like Mike Tyson in a tuxedo no matter how it's dressed its still the got biggest guns in town.

 

[cusso ken]

You are preaching to the converted as far as R3Ts and I go , I often get asked if I have the restricted Rocket from people who look for something to demean the big Touring ,its like Mike Tyson in a tuxedo no matter how it's dressed its still the got biggest guns in town.

 

[zimtuff]

One advantage of the Rocket is the value you get. Smaller bikes with 40% less power cost the same or more at an R3T. I think the Moto Guzzi Californian is $2500 more for 1400cc in oz. Harleys? Wont even go there on a price comparo.