Having gone from a 1998 Honda VFR 800 to a DL650 Wee-Strom this summer, I thought I'd do a writeup on the transition and do a compraison of the two bikes, even though that's comparing apples and oranges...
I actually learned to ride a motorcycle on a Wee, and when I got my license 3 years ago I purchased a red 1998 VFR. That purchase was done purely by heart, as the 5th. gen VFR has been a dream for me ever since it came out. Many claim it to be the best VFR generation, and the last one with gear driven cams and a non-VTEC engine. The transition from the school Wee to the Vifffer was huge, and it took me a great deal of time to learn to ride it well. The VFR is an easy bike to ride, very stable and a low centre of gravity. But riding it well is another story. A lot of things had to be "relearned", and just learning how to sit on a sportsbike took some time. But when I got it, the Viffer was great. So why change? Well, the riding position and seat was killing me on rides over 1 hour. Also it encourages speed, and on our twisty Norwegian roads with low speedlimits that's not healthy for your wallet or your drivers license in the long run.
So this summer I picked up a 2006 Wee (a US import, actually) with 6500 miles on it. Complete with Givi crashbars and a sweet Givi set of cases. I've since added the MotoAgora (greek) skid-plate and handguards, and have plans for a fork brace and grip heaters during the winter break. The Viffer is now up for sale. Why a Wee? I wanted an asphalt oriented bike with a more upright riding position, enough power, low maintenance cost and a "do-it-all" bike. The Wee turned out to be the best bang for the buck, I knew the bike well from before and managed to find this gem just 40 min. from where I live.
I'm 34 years old. 180cm. heigh and weigh 81kg. Most of my riding is solo, with the wife along for the occasional trip. I commute to work on my bike, take it for spirited rides on weekends, with the occasional longer trip thrown in. 98% of my riding is on asphalt, the rest is on gravel roads. In 5 weeks of owning the Wee, I've put around 400 miles on it. Tires are Michelin Pilot Road 2 on the VFR and Metzeler Toruance EXP (front) + Michelin Anakee (rear) on the Wee.
So here's my two cents on these bikes compared...
What the Wee does better:
- The riding ergos are upright, relaxed, and far superior to the VFR for speeds under 90 km/h.
- The same upright riding position with excellent view makes it superior in city traffic.
- For the same reason, picking your lines in the twisties is easier.
- Heat management is much better. Especially noticeable in stop-and-go traffic, where the VFR will cook your legs.
- The wide bars provide excellent control. Combined with the low weight of the bike, that makes for excellent abilities in tight, technical twisties.
- Weighs less than the VFR. About 15 kg. less dry, if I'm not mistaken.
- Great range! Tank volume is the same, but the Wee provides much better milage than the rather thirsty Viffer.
- Good stock seat. I seriously can't understand what everybody is bitching about. Compared to the VFR, the stock Wee seat is great. I've now gotten a gel seat, mostly because I like to sit a bit higher (more legroom). But the stocker is fine for hours of riding in my book.
- Nice seating position for the passenger too.
- Plenty of low-midrange power and runs smooth and vibration-free in the 3-5000 rpm. range.
- Less plastic = way easier maintenance. I was constantly laughing when changing the oil and filter on the Wee!
- Cheap to buy and run. You get a lot of bike for your money!
- You can take it out on gravel and forrest roads with no problems.
- Even more aftermarket farkles available than for the VFR. Didn't think that was possible!
What I don't like about the Wee:
- Doesn't have the raw power of the VFR. An 800cc engine would do this bike good.
- Doesn't have the VFRs good looks.
- Sounds like a sewing machine with the stock exhaust, and aftermarket options are limited and way too expensive.
- A bit of turbulence, mostly from the mirrors, at higher speeds.
- It's much more top-heavy than the Honda.
- Doesn't have the rock-steady, planted feel of the VFR (a fork brace might help with that?).
- Doesn't punch out of the corners like the VFR can.
- Doesn't give the same adrenaline rush as the VFR is capable of (but maybe it could with pure road tyres?).
- Some of the parts and assembly gives it a budget-bike feel. But then again, it is!
- High frequency vibrations from around 6000 rpm to the redline is pronounced.
- The cotter pin locking on the rear axle is just plain stupid. What idiot thought that was a good idea on the Wee?
- All the aftermarket farkles available are hurting my wallet, and are making my cheap bike not-so-cheap :green_lol:
What the VFR does better:
- Has the raw, arm-ripping power that the Wee lacks.
- Feels more stable and planted on the motorway and in high-speed turns.
- Punches out of corners much faster and more aggressive than the Wee is capable of.
- Ride it hard in the turns, and it'll make your adrenaline flow!
- The engine is pretty much smooth and vibration free throughout the RPM range.
- More top-end kick in the pants than the Wee.
- Very low centre of gravity and great weight distribution.
- Nothing beats the sound of a V4 engine with (a cheap) slip-on exhaust!
- The build quality and feel of the Honda is above and beyond just about anything that Suzuki turns out.
- Better overall wind management, which is to be expected on a full-fairing bike.
- Single sided swing-arm makes chain adjustment a breeze and looks great too.
- The linked brakes is a nice system. I like them, and wish the Wee had them too.
- Has an outside air temp. gauge, which is a nice touch on a touring bike.
- Holds its value well, something that's plus now that I'm selling it.
- Did I mention that it's the best looking bike EVER?
What I don't like about the VFR:
- Ergos are much more sport than touring. Even with a correct seating position and bar risers, you will get tired a lot sooner than on the Wee.
- The same ergos makes it utter crap at speeds lower than 80 kmh. Above that the wind helps support you.
- The stock seat sucks giant donkey balls! Complete lack of comfort for me.
- You're leaned forward. Your neck will get tired and you don't have the same great view as on a Wee.
- Routine maintenance is a pain with all the plastic you have to pick off first.
- Heavier and less flickable than the Wee.
- Has known problems with the electrical system. It's easy to fix, but there are $ involved. Mine died last summer.
- Heat management is terrible. You don't want to be on this bike in stop-and-go traffic.
- Not as comfy for the passenger as the Wee.
- Poor MPG compared to most other bikes in its class and the Wee.
- A complex V4 engine makes things like valve checks time consuming and expensive.
I probably could come up with more, but this will do. Like I said, this is comparing apples to oranges. For me, the negatives of the VFR, especially when it comes to ergos, are so major that I decided to sell it.
The VFR is a great bike for it's intended use: Sport-touring, with a big emphasis on SPORT! For me it was not to be. It's just not compatible with the type of riding that I do, and I find the Wee superior in every way that really matters. In a month on the Wee I've put more miles on it than I did on the VFR in all of 2010. For me, the Wee does so many things well and is so comfortable to ride that I can't wait to hit the road on it again. That was not the case with the Viffer. Keep these things in mind when selecting what bike to get. Use your head as well as your heart, and you'll find the perfect bike too :hurray: