2014 VFR 800 CYCLE WORLD Test

[VFR80025th]

If you like reading old reviews like myself I've attached a link to CW 2014 test of the then new 2014 VFR.

Enjoy.

 

https://magazine.cycleworld.com/issue/20140901#!&pid=56

[interceptor69]

Thanks for posting the link.  I haven't read any reviews of the newer Gen VFR and enjoyed it.  Now I need one.😁

[Thumbs]

Thanks for posting that, I enjoyed reading it, always interesting to see how it was received in a different country 

[Grum]

Thanks VFR80025th. Great read. I think the last paragraph sums it up nicely and says it all for me....

Add to that after 9 years, the now proven reliability of the 8gen. Gotta love it.

 

[RC79NC001]

I agree with Grum.

 

Now for a more negative take on our wonderful bike.

 

https://www.motorcyclistonline.com/reviews/2014-honda-vfr800-interceptor-first-ride/

[Skids]

16 hours ago, RC79NC001 said:

I agree with Grum.

 

Now for a more negative take on our wonderful bike.

 

https://www.motorcyclistonline.com/reviews/2014-honda-vfr800-interceptor-first-ride/

 

I thought it was quite positive, considering they could have done so much more with the engine and weight.

[Presson]

I agree with Skids. It's not too bad; a bit like a description of a favourite pair of resoled walking boots!

 

I guess that journos always seem to be searching for better, faster, more power etc to generate 'wow' factor articles. That's a bit at odds with our community's value for superb quality engineering, reliability and longevity, balanced by really good handling, sensible power and fuel consumption for everyday riding. But then I m biased.

[TimC]

I don't think the MO review was very negative, but let's call this out:  Moto journalists who spend days on the track and on amazing Spanish and Italian mountain roads during all-expenses paid manufacturer launches of Fireblades, R1's, and Gixxers aren't going to get too excited about a VFR.  Of course they're going to underwhelmed and unimpressed.  Despite the writer saying everything has been improved and it's a darn good bike, that review leaves you feeling half-hearted.

 

The bane of the VFR's existence has always been writers trying to compare it to other bikes.  It's slower than a GSX-R.  It's less comfortable than an ADV bike.  It doesn't handle as well as a supersport.  It's more expensive than most middleweight bikes.  And on and on.  Instead, they should compare other bikes to the VFR.  If they did that, they'd say the Gixxer is faster than you need for a streetbike, so the 100 hp VFR makes total sense.  It's more nimble than an ADV, and less twitchy than a pure sportbike.  You can ride it all day, too, as opposed to bikes with clip-on bars.  Its weight is a plus on iffy pavement and in high winds.  It's more refined than most other middleweights.  When you turn it around like this, some of the 'negatives' are actually positives.

 

I've always thought the VFR was one of the smartest, most well-rounded streetbikes you could buy.  But so many people want a bike that does just one thing great, instead of a bike that does several things well.  I loved my 6th gen.  I used it for commuting, long single day rides, weeklong trips, and corner carving (to the best of my abilities).  It was also pretty reliable.  Not perfect, but I'd say better than average.

[Noles]

On 5/22/2023 at 10:19 AM, TimC said:

I don't think the MO review was very negative, but let's call this out:  Moto journalists who spend days on the track and on amazing Spanish and Italian mountain roads during all-expenses paid manufacturer launches of Fireblades, R1's, and Gixxers aren't going to get too excited about a VFR.  Of course they're going to underwhelmed and unimpressed.  Despite the writer saying everything has been improved and it's a darn good bike, that review leaves you feeling half-hearted.

 

The bane of the VFR's existence has always been writers trying to compare it to other bikes.  It's slower than a GSX-R.  It's less comfortable than an ADV bike.  It doesn't handle as well as a supersport.  It's more expensive than most middleweight bikes.  And on and on.  Instead, they should compare other bikes to the VFR.  If they did that, they'd say the Gixxer is faster than you need for a streetbike, so the 100 hp VFR makes total sense.  It's more nimble than an ADV, and less twitchy than a pure sportbike.  You can ride it all day, too, as opposed to bikes with clip-on bars.  Its weight is a plus on iffy pavement and in high winds.  It's more refined than most other middleweights.  When you turn it around like this, some of the 'negatives' are actually positives.

 

I've always thought the VFR was one of the smartest, most well-rounded streetbikes you could buy.  But so many people want a bike that does just one thing great, instead of a bike that does several things well.  I loved my 6th gen.  I used it for commuting, long single day rides, weeklong trips, and corner carving (to the best of my abilities).  It was also pretty reliable.  Not perfect, but I'd say better than average.

I love posts like this which shows how a different mindset can completely change the perspective on something.  Canton here. Do you still have a VFR?

[TimC]

On 8/22/2023 at 11:58 AM, Noles said:

I love posts like this which shows how a different mindset can completely change the perspective on something.  Canton here. Do you still have a VFR?

 

Unfortunately, no.  I sold it a couple months after buying my current bike.  There have been several times I wish I'd kept it.  But I haven't ruled out buying another one at some point!  🙂