Cycle News - Archive Issues - 1990's

The Valkyrie might not have the looks of the other machines, but it certainly has one thing that all the rest don't - power. And lots of It! PlUS, it nearly rides as smooth as a Gold Wing and corners pretty well, too. Some thought the Valkyrie had gone "full circle" - so bad that it actually began to look good. Most, though, thought. tha,t it was almost a caricature of a motorcycle. "Too much motor," was one response. Another staff member remaLked, "It looks like a diner," when he first saw our red-and-white model. Subjective styling analysis aside, it always attracted the most attention and was very finely finished. It may be the perfect bike for the Las Vegas Strip. In addition to delivering muscle-car performance, it also delivers muscle-car mileage. The figures may be artificially low because the abundance of power induces you to use it frequently. Yeah, you might be able to get better mileage than the 28.5-mpg average we got (the low was 211), but you won't have nearly as much fun. I VULCAN The Kawasaki is the Japanese Harley in this group. Depending on who you are, this can be construed as either a compliment or an insult. Walk around the Fat Boy, walk around the Vulcan - not much difference. A few details here and there, but overall, Kawasaki has nailed the styling. The tank-mounted speedometer most resembles the Harley unit. The airfilter housing, nestled right there between the 50-degree V-twin's pair of nearly 750cc cylinders is the same way. Take a moment to compare the tank badges or the dual exhausts that exit on the right side. Mounted on the Vulcan, you can see your reflection in the headlight, just like on the Harley. The 41mm fork wears fat, polished covers. All you have to do is thumb the starter and ride 10 feet to know the difference: refinement. You get the power pulses from the big, liquid-cooled and counterbalanced cylinders, but not the. harsh vibration or mechanical noise. In fact, vibration all but disappears at freeway speed. When it comes time to grab the brakes, you'll encounter a much lighter lever pull for the single disc at the front. It isn't as powerful or as firm as the dual-disc setups in this crowd, but the cross-drill~d disc and two-piston caliper are adequate for all but the most demanding panic stops. The brake lever, like the one for the clutch, is adjustable for reach. At highway speeds, the Vulcan will not wander - another steady runner beyond any reasonable speed: . The suspension is compliant, making for a comfortable ride under most conditions. The down side of this softness is that the suspension is prone to transmitting undue shock to the rider on rough pavement. Still, there were a few thillgs that made us think that we were riding a Harley. For instance, when it came time to shift, the Vulcan was actually worse. First to second was almost always completed with a grinding of engagement dogs and second to third was only somewhat better. Shifting under power was always a problem. Twisting the throttle in search ot barely extant passing power on the highway also brought back memories of the Fat Boy. The Kawasaki big t;'lin does outperform the Harley Big give in. For years now, I've been fighting the fact that I was beginning to like cruiser bikes and, well, I have to admit that I've officially lost the battle. At first the fight was easy - before Honda resurrected the Magna. That bike caught my attention. I liked the low and wide styling, the power, and the yellow paint. (Even the red and black Magnas looked nice, too). But 1got over all that. Then carne the ACE. It looked even better than the Magna; okay, maybe it didn't have the power, but it did rumble. Then came the Kawasaki Vulcan 800 Classic. Nice. Then Yamaha introduced the Royal Star. Whoa! Then - talk about kicking someone when they're down - Kawasaki unveiled the Vulcan 1500 Classic and Honda the mighty Valkyrie. Yikes! Too much heavy artillery. I surrender. If there's anyone category of motorcycle that's impossible to determine an overall best bike, it's the cruiser class. After all, when it comes to cruisers, most people agree performance is secondary to looks and style - and who am I to tell you which bike looks best? It's all a matter of opinion. This is what makes cruising so unique, that everyone has their own style preference, their own opinion as to what looks "cool" and what doesn't. Yes, when it comes to cruiser bikes, style is important to me too, but not a whole lot more than performance. Without a doubt, I feel the Harley-Davidson Fat Boy Simply looks best among the six bikes we rode to Vegas and back, but the bike left a lot to be desired in the way of performance. After we picked up our new Fat Boy, the entire taillight assembly quit working and the throttle began sticking, and then there was tlle flimsy side litand, clunky Shifting, vibrating mirrors and just plain lack of power. These are things I can't overlook. Some other people, like Rousseau, can. Still, the Fat Boy is a fun cruiser bike for short jaunts and was the bike we fought over in Vegas - after all, it is a Harley - but for the four-hour ride to and from Vegas, there was no arguing. At least not from me. If power is your game, then the Valkyrie is your ride. It has awesome power, just ask Carruthers. Had the odometer been hooked up to the rear wheel when he was on the bike while we were cruising the strip, "Mr. Burnout" would have traveled three times farther than any of us. And not only is the Valkyrie powerful but it is incredibly smooth, making it enjoyable on the interstate. It does everything well, but I'm still trying to come to terms with its looks. Still, I could easily live with this bike. I Twin, but not by very much - another victim of the mad detuners loosed upon too inany Japanese cruisers. The riding position was quite good and everyone felt comfortable on the Vulcan, including the passengers. Again, as with most bikes of this style, the wide handlebar and chest-in-wind-riding position· became punishing after extended periods on the highway. So the fact that you'll have to stop for gas most often on the Vulcan can be a blessing in disguise. The Vulcan returned the second-lowest fuel economy of the'group at 29.5 mpg. Couple this with the 4.2-gallon tank and you'll often hit reserve just a few ticks past 100 miles on the trip meter, though you'll know how close to empty you're getting by the fuel gauge - the only one you'll find in this comparison. . One staffer rated it the best of the Japanese bikes, though when it came to rating it overall he was noncomittal. Oust as a clue to how he might cast his 'vote, this same guy finds riding old British bikes across the open desert fun he's willing to put up with a·lot in the name of "character.") Another chose it as his favorite overall. The final verdict was that we thought that the Vulcan gave you everything the Harley did - high style and good sounds - without asking so much in return. Especially not when it came to price. The Vulcan qualifies as a very good value in this group - just $10,499. The only bike that undercuts it is the Suzuki, and we'll get to that in a moment. The Suzuki Intruder was designed for and introduced in 1987 and hasn't been subject to a major redesign since. That speaks volumes as to why it showed so poorly in this group of all- The Triumph was also £un to ride. Some of us questioned whether or not the Adventurer should have been included on our ride - claiming it wasn't a true cruiser - but I'm glad we brought it along. The bike feels tall and squatty but was ultranimble and maneuverable compared to the other bikes, and this made it nice ~hile cruising the car-eongested Strip. Like the Valkyrie, the Triumph is supersmooth and nearly vibrationfree, and I enjoyed the strong power and sound that is produced by the three-cylinder motor. I was more than satisfied with it on the highway, and for cruising, the bike is just different enough to tum a lot of heads. It's definitely a cruiser bike with spunk. The Royal Star is another bike I wouldn't mind having in my garage. I love the way it looks, sounds and performs, though it is down on power for such a big V-four. It's a little heavy, too, and can be a handful at slow speeds. Still, the Royal Star fits the Strip like a well-used glove and is another open-highway performer. . The Intruder? Well, the Suzuki is a prime example of why I disliked cruisers in the first place. The absolutely non-functional kicked-out front end causes the bike to steer funny and feel unstable. Plus, the funky handlebars are way too narrow for my tastes. The. bike also feels top-heavy and wallows under 45 mph, and we had problems with the clutch overheating while cruising the Strip. For me, the only things the Suzuki has going for it is its motor, which produced decent power, and its comfortable seating position. But, I just didn't feel "cool" on the Intruder. In European magazines, we've seen pictures of one of Suzuki's latest cruisers, called the Desperado; a bike that looks very similar to the Vulcan Classic. Maybe, some day... This leaves the Vulcan, my personal favorite. For one, it looks nearly identical to the Fat Boy, runs smoother, and puts out more power. Not only does this bike feel right at home on the Strip, but it's equally at ease on the interstate. Plus, when you take into account its relatively low $10,500 price tag, it looks even better. However, there are a couple things that come to mind I don't particularly care for: For. one, the Vulcan has a fuel range of only about 100 miles before having to switch.to reserve, and gear changes from first to second, and second to third are a little sloppy. Otherwise, I don't think there's a better all-around cruiser. But that's just my opinion. -KitPa1mer

• Cover