I suppose there’s no better recommendation than the bloke who sells them shelling out his hard-earned dollars and buying one for his own personal ride. Well, the sales manager at David Frasers didn’t buy one himself, but he was going to! Instead, he bought the XVS1300. For him, it was a case of a good thing but better. The 1100 was a good thing, and he said he would’ve been happy with that, but the extra power of the 1300 made it more attractive – for when you needed or wanted the extra grunt; such as when carrying a pillion etc. But he’s still a big fan of the 1100.
So, the V-Star 1100 is a great bike. No, actually, for a cruiser I reckon it’s a brilliant bike! I suppose it impressed me so much because it was so much better than I expected it to be. Being a cruiser I was expecting average performance, poor ride and pretty terrible handling. But it delivered a much better performance on all counts than I expected. It’ll do the laid-back cruise thing with ease and style; but it’ll also make you smile when you punt it through corners. And it does all that without rattling your teeth out! Throw in the usual high quality of manufacture that comes from Yamaha (it does have a good quality feel to it), and this really is a good thing!
Here’s how Yamaha describes the bike. “This exquisite incarnation of glittering cruiser metal is designed to go, stop and handle with assurance while you enjoy the peace of mind of genuine Yamaha engineering. Crank your cruising experience right up to 11, with V-Star 1100.” Well, you know what? I reckon that sums it up pretty well!
SNAPSHOT
As the title suggests, this is a cruiser with class. (And I mean quality-type class, not just image-type class!). But it's got more than just class; it's got things that a lot of other cruisers don't have, like a comfortable ride, and surprisingly good handling. As I said above, as a cruiser it's brilliant!
There's the usual "dumbing-down" (as I described it) applied to the engine, so power is kind of minimal, but it's adequate for the type of bike it is.
In appearance it does the usual cruiser thing of lots of fancy chrome, and I reckon it looks great. It's also pretty cool, and you feel cool riding it. I'll let you argue over the "Milwaukee or Metric" question (see below), but for me, this works much better than anything I've ridden from Milwaukee.
As Yamaha says, "Crank your cruising experience up to 11!"
SPECIFICATIONS:
Engine: 2-cylinder, 1063cc. Power: 46kW at 5750rpm. Torque: 85Nm at 2500rpm.
Gearbox: 5-speed.
Final-drive:- Shaft.
Fuel capacity: 17 litres.
Weight: 285kg (with fuel).
Seat height: 710mm.
Wheels / Tyres: Front: 130 X 16, Rear: 170 X 15.
Brakes: Front: Twin 298mm discs. Rear: Single 282mm disc.
Price: $15,699 + ORC.
Ridden 2010. (See Up-Date below, for 2012).
OTHER MODELS
Cruisers have long been an important part of Yamaha’s model line-up; and you can trace the history back through the various models of Viragos that have been very popular down through the years. The current range stretches from a couple of 250 models (one of which is the last bike to retain the old Virago moniker) to the very popular mid-size 650, a 950 version, a couple of 1100s, a 1300, and then up to the 1900cc behemoth called the Roadliner.
At each capacity level the only difference between the models is slight styling variations. From one level to the next though, there is quite a bit of variation from a technical point. Final drive is chain on the littlies, then alternates between shaft and belt on the bigger models. Engine configuration varies from carbies to fuel-injection, and 2-valve heads to 4-valves. Single-overhead cams are the order of the day, except for the biggie, which makes do with an old-fashioned OHV set-up. Some models are air-cooled, some are liquid-cooled.
Styling is, of course, a big factor with cruisers. One thing I liked about the old Viragos was that they didn’t follow the usual Harley-clone styling trend. Some might’ve looked a bit weird (I always thought the old 1100 looked like it had collapsed in the middle!), but at least they were different. Now they all follow the usual Harley-look-alike approach.
I mentioned the sales manager owning a 1300. This might make you wonder what the specific differences are between the 1100 and the 1300; apart from the obvious thing, the 200cc bigger engine. Well, that extra 200cc translates into an extra 10kW of power; partly due, no doubt, to the fact it runs fuel-injection rather than the 1100’s carbies. Down the back there is a belt-drive rather than the 1100’s shaft. One difference you notice when you sit on the 1300 is the extra weight. According to the specs it’s “only” an extra 18kg, but it feels a bit more. To me, when you sit on the 1100 it feels heavy but easy to manage, whereas the 1300 feels like the weight might be more difficult – it’s a fair lump of motorcycle to haul around! But the extra power and sophistication of fuel-injection would be good.
MILWAUKEE OR METRIC?
The XVS 1100 – and its similarly-styled siblings – look like Harleys, but come in at about half the price of the bikes that inspire their look and style. So do you go for the Milwaukee original, or the metric copy?
Well, if you’re asking the question, the answer is easy; you’d go metric! But it’s not that simple. Harleys, as it’s often said, can’t really be compared with other bikes. Because they’re more than just a motorcycle, they’re a lifestyle. There is an image, a sound, a feel, a “soul” almost, that is unique to Harley Davidson. And if you want that uniqueness that is Harley Davidson, then the Japanese alternatives pretty much pale into insignificance. They don’t have the same image and presence, the same “character” that is Harley Davidson. They’re like a photographic print of a genuine oil-painting – they look similar, but they lack the raw character of the original. So if this is you, well, you wouldn’t even consider the “pretender”!
If you’re not drawn into that exclusive world of Harley Davidson though, if you compare the bikes from a purely objective standpoint, then it’s a whole different ball-game! Harleys might be smoother now than they were, but the vibration will still rattle your teeth and anything else that’s not bolted down. The handling is meant for straight roads only; the gearboxes feel like they came out of a tractor; the ride, once they venture beyond smooth highways, varies from poor to atrocious; and even reliability sometimes isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. The Japanese, by comparison, are smooth and sophisticated. They perform better as an all-round motorcycle, and they’re generally better-built, than the Milwaukee iron. If they were equal in price it’d be a no-brainer; at around half the price, well, there isn’t even a question!
So it depends on who you are and what you’re looking for. Now, I get Harleys. I really do. But for me personally, well, from what I’ve written here (and in other tests) I think you probably know where I stand.
CRUISERS AND ERGONOMICS
As I explained in my test of the Triumph Speedmaster, the typical cruiser riding-position (especially with forward-controls) is ergonomically wrong. That’s a fact. Just ask a physiotherapist.
Sitting upright with your arms and legs poking out forwards encourages your back to slump. And it places all your weight on the end of your spine. Not good! Acceleration tends to increase the bad posture; because with the bottom of your body held in place by the curvature of the seat, and the top of your body held in place by your arms outstretched to the bars, the only thing that can move is the centre of your body. So on acceleration the middle of your body tends to be thrown back, exacerbating the backwards curvature, or slump. As I said, ergonomically, this is all wrong! And for me, with my dodgy old back, there’s no way I could live with this style of bike.
But, it has to be said that many people cope quite well with seating-positions that are ergonomically wrong. For example, many lounges are very poorly designed from a strictly ergonomic point, but their owners sit on them quite comfortably. And I know that a lot of people find the feet-out-front cruiser position quite good and suffer no ill-effects at all; in fact many prefer it to the "normal" sports / sportstourer type position. So it is very much an individual thing.
UP-DATE: 2012
Well, as of the end of 2012 / beginning 2013, nothing has changed except the paint. Yamaha do that with several of their models, they change the paint for the new model, but everything else stays the same. Paint is now what they call "Raven and Cream". That's kind of like black-and-white, or black-and-cream I suppose. I like the red of this one a lot better! Anyway, other than the colour, everything remains the same as above.