Modern Motorcycle most like a real 80's UJM ?

[Wingsconsin]

The Honda Goldwing gets a total revamp this year because the demographic that currently own and rides is dying off (no offence).

They need to appeal to Millennials and you can definitely see it in their new commercial (which my fiance showed me immediately and asked if we could look at one to purchase).

It's about the experience, I can honestly attest to that...
https://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/05/millennials-are-prioritizing-experiences-over-stuff.html
Less is more... Motorcycles are a great tool for experience. I don't just buy bikes I RIDE THEM for the experiences I gather from them...

No offense taken - us OLD Wingers are dying off -
Many have gone to mega-trikes as well -
For me - the lean is the thrill as well as everything else about a motorcycle - so I do not see me on a Trike -- probably never..

BUT --
IF you ride a 2018 Goldwing and 'she who will be obeyed' likes it...
Welcome to the Goldwing club !
And Honda will be proven correct...The new Wing is not for me and my contemporaries -- it is for YOUR age group -
Upwardly mobile (financially) Gen X and Millennials -- That will carry the badge forward ..not us old scrooges who long for our youth once again.

PS: My offer to let you ride my Wing still stands - but it is a Gen 1 GL1800 from 2002 - So very old by 2017 standards

 

[Jedz123]

No offense taken - us OLD Wingers are dying off -
Many have gone to mega-trikes as well -
For me - the lean is the thrill as well as everything else about a motorcycle - so I do not see me on a Trike -- probably never..

BUT --
IF you ride a 2018 Goldwing and 'she who will be obeyed' likes it...
Welcome to the Goldwing club !
And Honda will be proven correct...The new Wing is not for me and my contemporaries -- it is for YOUR age group -
Upwardly mobile (financially) Gen X and Millennials -- That will carry the badge forward ..not us old scrooges who long for our youth once again.

PS: My offer to let you ride my Wing still stands - but it is a Gen 1 GL1800 from 2002 - So very old by 2017 standards

The likelihood of me getting a new lighter Wing like this 18 is pretty good. It will likely be in a couple of years though, I plan to run the old HD for the time being (old as in 9 years old this January). Shannon wants to do big touring trips and go on long vacations together. We are looking hard at big motorcycles that will work for us. All depends on how much we can save and how much I get from the flips this spring... We bought an inexpensive house/property and our living expenses dropped from renting considerably (more money to spend on experiences or bank for those days).

I will definitely take you up on that Carl. I'm sure our paths will cross at least once next season!

 

[salty_monk]

My Mrs says... "I'll go bike touring with you when you get one of those ones with the sofa on the back" - By that I take it she means a Goldwing

She's done some 150- 200 mile days on my 1000G years back (Pre kids) but is scared of the LA freeways (who can blame her) so that inhibits mileage a bit!

 

[Gorminrider]

first, What IS a "UJM"?
Is it the look? derived from 1930's streamlining copied from the British twins.....plus the layout? = ALWAYS aircooled parallel cylinders, upright, unfaired, chain drive, simple disc brake (on the front only) in a tube frame ......

Some say those parallel cylinders need be 4, but being there at the time, I'd say 4 isn't a requisite. Ujms in smaller sizes were twins... exceptions would be the Yamaha 650 that sold a ton and was really a bike for people that really wanted a Triumph...likewise the Kawasaki 750 twin that nobody bought. smaller yet, single cylinder. Honda Cub etc, but nobody can call these ujms. They were really pretty rare in North America.

A Honda CL350 scrambler would be the "Dual Sport" of the day- It would get you just about anywhere....especially when Hwy speeds were limited to 55mph!
None of the ujms were known for handling!
EVERYBODY got tickets and the national debts were not so high then....

so...the Honda 4 here is technically a UJM albeit it'd be a monster in 1975 and very few would own it then.
Philosophically, today, it might extend to the Honda CB500F and that ilk. Simple,versatile and cheap not doing anything perfectly but most things well. Maybe a Ducati Scrambler.or some kind a dual sport but these wander from UJM per looks,engine,ignition,carburetion,suspension...everything.

I guess there's no going back.

 

[earlfor]

first, What IS a "UJM"?

Universal Japanese Motorcycle.
Its the looks. usually straight seat, upright seating any number of cylinders, just a general purpose, all around go fer bike.

 

[wymple]

"exceptions would be the Yamaha 650 that sold a ton and was really a bike for people that really wanted a Triumph"

Not really, tho the comparisons were everywhere. I bought 2, beginning in 73, and again in 80. Triumph never crossed my mind. I still think the Yamaha 650 is one of the best looking engines ever built. Plus they were reliable like a stone bridge. I had a couple friends & relatives who bought the XS650 because they liked mine so well. They never thought about Triumph either. My little brother picked up a 500 Trophy and wished aloud more than a few times that he'd had more money so he could get A new XS. He settled for a used Triumph. And yes, that was a mistake, he was afraid to get 100 miles from home.

 

[850 Combat]

first, What IS a "UJM"?
Is it the look? derived from 1930's streamlining copied from the British twins.....plus the layout? = ALWAYS aircooled parallel cylinders, upright, unfaired, chain drive, simple disc brake (on the front only) in a tube frame ......

Some say those parallel cylinders need be 4, but being there at the time, I'd say 4 isn't a requisite. Ujms in smaller sizes were twins... exceptions would be the Yamaha 650 that sold a ton and was really a bike for people that really wanted a Triumph...likewise the Kawasaki 750 twin that nobody bought. smaller yet, single cylinder. Honda Cub etc, but nobody can call these ujms. They were really pretty rare in North America.

A Honda CL350 scrambler would be the "Dual Sport" of the day- It would get you just about anywhere....especially when Hwy speeds were limited to 55mph!
None of the ujms were known for handling!
EVERYBODY got tickets and the national debts were not so high then....

so...the Honda 4 here is technically a UJM albeit it'd be a monster in 1975 and very few would own it then.
Philosophically, today, it might extend to the Honda CB500F and that ilk. Simple,versatile and cheap not doing anything perfectly but most things well. Maybe a Ducati Scrambler.or some kind a dual sport but these wander from UJM per looks,engine,ignition,carburetion,suspension...everything.

I guess there's no going back.

I disagree, partly. The term UJM was coined when all of the Japanese factories were turning out a line of 4 cylinder air cooled cross frame fours. They were universal only because it was what all the factories were making. When Honda went to V4s, and the cx line and Wing, those were NOT UJMs, because the other factories were not making that stuff. The Yamaha triple line wasn't a UJM, by the definition the term had in the day. It wasn't a compliment, either. I think the lack of distinction between the products of the various Japanese brands brought about the introduction of different engine types later on, like thew Magna, XS750, and Vtwin cruisers. Today, if anything represents a UJM, it would be a perimeter framed, upside down forked, liquid cooled crossways engine sport bike. All of the factories still make that.

Another feature of a trure UJM is that they were designed to be used for any purpose. The Honda 750, KZ1000, or GS1000 were normally seen with Vetter or other touring set upon them, or looking more like a dragster. 16" rear wheels with fat tires, struts instead of rear shocks and pull back handlebars were common. So were low bars and Superbike look modifications. The new CB1100 Honda will never be all those things. All of those things are all marketed separately by various manufacturers, in separate "Niches". In the day, a true UJM was not a bike for a niche market. They had a very broad focus. The GS1000 when introduced was a Superbike, back road burner, drag strip demon, and a tourer, and a commuter, and a base for a cruiser/custom bike. Few bikes today are designed to be remotely as broad focused as a true UJM was in its particular time.

 

[jsandidge]

After 227K miles my FZ1 still fills all those requirements.

227,000 miles? I've never heard of a bike with that many miles. I'm sure it's possible....

 

[Boriqua]

Whew I am glad someone else asked what UJM stood for .. while i was enjoying the thread and got the inferred meaning .. I had no idea what UJM stood for.

850 Combat hit a nerve with me. When I bought my GS 750 back in 77-78 it had some 60,000 miles and was supposedly ridden to NYC from California. It was outfitted with hard bags and a fairly substantial windscreen, buck horn style bars and king and queen seat. All of which I dispensed with immediately and set about doing 4-1 exhaust, pods, lower handlebars and other things to satisfy my teenage angst. They were just motorcycles and could be transformed to be anything you thought a motorcycle should be. That was the ultimate cool thing about those old bikes. He saw tourer and I saw street racer. I am sure it did neither a great service.

Even in some of the stellar drool worthy suggestions in this thread .. not all of them can be dressed up well enough to perform everything OK. I guess that is a plus but .. I was happy to buy a bike I could make anything I wanted.

Now that CB honda has the looks .. am I getting it right and its crippled from the factory??

I wont get into payments and the insurance that comes with them but if it were low priced enough .. I would consider it maybe . but not if it is already hamstrung.

 

[GSXR7ED]

I quickly learned what UJM was not long after I joined the GSR. And I learned these great bikes have grab rails too.

There's never a stupid question...just sarcastic people...lol. It's good to have thick skin and a short memory in that regard.


Ed

 

[Grimly]

227,000 miles? I've never heard of a bike with that many miles. I'm sure it's possible....

The 1980 bike in my sig, and then some. It's knocking on for 300K now.

 

[bobgroger]

I had a 1200 G2 Bandit, I could never get comfortable on it. The ergos weren't right. The same suspension on my '80 GS1260 is awesome, modern handling and braking on an old skool bike. That said, a KZ900 bought new was my first street bike and it is a miracle I survived. Rumor has it the Z900RS will get a supercharger next year, at the exact time my house sells and I have money. At least I will be able to rotate through bikes like Jedz and see what I like

 

[GS1150Pilot]

I like that Z900RS, but it's great just as it stands. No blower needed.

 

[KEITH KRAUSE]

I like that Z900RS, but it's great just as it stands. No blower needed.

+1. I might buy the Kaw' in the not so distant future, but if it only comes with a blower, I'll have to buy something else.

 

[wymple]

"Yeah but when you can't break 108mph we have problems..."

And I and most people have no business at those speeds. As long as it gets there in short order and doesn't strain itself to cruise at higher interstate speeds, it's retro enough for me. I'm sure my boys wouldn't be overly impressed, but I don't need their approval of my bike. The thing that would keep me from the Honda is a passion for Moto Guzzi, specifically the California Classic stuff that looks my 1984.

 

[glib]

Loving this thread.

I really like the Kawasaki (except for the funky looking front mud guards). It’s retro design is magnetic and reminds me why it’s so hard to have only one bike. I’d still choose the GSXS1000F as my favorite modern bike (not retro at all) but I could really see myself on a Z900RS.

The governed CB1100 bothers me because I don’t like the company deciding how fast I can go. It’s contrary to the motorcycling mentality IMO. I’ve only rarely exceeded 108 but I like that it’s my choice. Govern at 165 and I’m good. Ha.

I’m with the Kawasaki designer on tech like the mono shock. Retro needs to be limited to appearance. New bikes need all the new tech the price allows or why bother.

I know little about “Wings” but that video piqued my interest. Maybe I’m young(er) minded but I’d need a new friend for the trip because it’d never happen with my wife.

In the end I still wonder if a bike that costs triple to buy and triple or more to insure can give me triple the pleasure.

 

[Jedz123]

"Yeah but when you can't break 108mph we have problems..."

And I and most people have no business at those speeds. As long as it gets there in short order and doesn't strain itself to cruise at higher interstate speeds, it's retro enough for me. I'm sure my boys wouldn't be overly impressed, but I don't need their approval of my bike. The thing that would keep me from the Honda is a passion for Moto Guzzi, specifically the California Classic stuff that looks my 1984.

The Guzzis are a better product IMHO.

Hey man if your cool with a corporation telling you what to do, that's your call...

I think most are a little more free spirited... I accelerate past that quite often, forget drag days...I agree with Glib, a goverened liter bike really takes away the fun factor on why you own a liter bike... Each their own, if you really like it you should nab one!

 

[Guest]

Back in the day British bikes were more cool, but Japanese bikes were better & had a wider range of choices. So we bought Japanese bikes. (I wanted a Norton but bought Japanese.)


Triumph hit a sweet spot with modern Japanese reliability + retro British cool.
Ducati hit another sweet spot with more performance + less retro cool.
The CB1100 missed the mark with less coolness than the Triumph & not enough performance.


A lot of cafe builds start with a Japanese bike from the 70s & add upside down forks + monoshock.
The Z900RS might have hit another sweet spot with less retro coolness + more performance + the suspension upgrade.

 

[GS1150Pilot]

There are some companies, like Guhl, that reflash the ECU on the CB1100, so it might be a very different bike after a little electrical wizardry.

 

[earlfor]

"Yeah but when you can't break 108mph we have problems..."

And I and most people have no business at those speeds. As long as it gets there in short order and doesn't strain itself to cruise at higher interstate speeds, it's retro enough for me. I'm sure my boys wouldn't be overly impressed, but I don't need their approval of my bike. The thing that would keep me from the Honda is a passion for Moto Guzzi, specifically the California Classic stuff that looks my 1984.

The problem with a 108 mph top speed is not so much the 108 mph, it is that around 80 mph, you're out of acceleration. On the interstate, I have often needed a burst of acceleration at 75-80 to get clear of a predicament. No go makes me a sitting duck.