FJ1100 vs FJ1200

[Alf]

Sorry, but it is print. In those years there were not too much internet speed or mags online. And it is a HUGE  collection, so scan it its near an impossible mission (around 70 FJs comparatives, reviews and tests)

And like I work at the Stock Markets and stay a lot of time in front of my computers, I´m still an addict to the printed mags & real paper books (sorry, ipad fans)

[RichBaker]

Going from an XS1100 to a FJ1100 was a massive jump.  FJ1100 to FJ1200 won't be anything like that big of a difference, and won't impress in the same way.

Also look at the bikes they were compared to at the time.  A GPZ900 was a top sportbike in 84.  In 86, the GSXR1100 was stomping everything else flat in the performance world.

'84 FJ1100 won Motorcyclist magazine's Fastest Bike of the Year..... Last year they did the FBOTY. It just didn't handle quite as well as the GSXR.

[andyb]

Going from an XS1100 to a FJ1100 was a massive jump.  FJ1100 to FJ1200 won't be anything like that big of a difference, and won't impress in the same way.

Also look at the bikes they were compared to at the time.  A GPZ900 was a top sportbike in 84.  In 86, the GSXR1100 was stomping everything else flat in the performance world.

'84 FJ1100 won Motorcyclist magazine's Fastest Bike of the Year..... Last year they did the FBOTY. It just didn't handle quite as well as the GSXR.

For clarity, I should have specified more to the point that the GPZ was a top sportbike, not the top sportbike.

The 1100 beat it, and for good reason. 

[fintip]

Interesting! I did email "Doc" and he sent a response, though it wasn't as detailed as I would have hoped. (I have since sent him another response asking for a bit of clarification, we'll see if he'll deign to answer me.)

dear mr 'no name'

thanks for your interest in both the club and the Yamaha FJ's

personally the FJ1100 is the best of the bunch
it will be the one that will be colectable and is the most sporty to ride
even as standard

if you want to have fun and upgrade parts to make it modern then this is fine
but me, i find a well set up standard one fine but you will need good rear shock and front fork springs as being 28 years old isnt good.

regards
doc

PS if you must go for FJ1200, go for early FJ1200 86-87

He responded to this, from me:

Subject:
FJ11 vs. FJ12

Message:
I'm a member over at FJowner.com, and I recently discovered your site. I've been researching FJ's pretty heavily and am interested in buying one, in which case I'd probably become a member on this site. I was wondering, though, in trying to decide which model to go for, why you chose an FJ11 as the base for your racer instead of an FJ12? A lot of members on the FJowners forum have mentioned that their 11 feels sportier than their 12 (once they've swapped front ends, for sure, but sometimes I think even without doing this), but I find that hard to believe. I do know the gearing was changed somewhat, and that the sprocket size is different--was that the reason, and is there truth to their claims?

The new email I sent him is this:

My apologies! My name is Kyle, and I appreciate your taking the time to respond. I have to say, I went through your entire fjracer site, and am a great admirer of your work. Racing an '84 anything against an '01 and giving him a run... An impressive feat!

While I don't doubt your answer, could I ask what makes it the sportiest? The factors I can imagine are:

Lowest stock weight
Smaller, sportier fairing
Gearing differences?
Sprocket size?

Is it just the looks of the early ones (I agree they are the most attractive), or does it really actually perform better, and if so, why? I had thought about buying an 89/90 at first, eventually upgrading the forks to cartridge emulators, and then eventually finding an 86/87 and swapping the front ends and transferring the fuel pump, and parting the 89/90 out. (While the '84 looks the best, the '86 didn't look bad and had the 1200 engine, and a couple of things like a clock on the dash in the fairing, etc., so I thought that was better... Trying to learn why I was wrong. (Are there any other upgrades you'd make to an '84 or '86 that I'm missing?)

I just have a hard time believing an 1100 can be better than a 1200, and know I must be missing something. Would an '84 really beat an '86 on a track?

I really appreciate your taking the time to answer this, the answer matters a lot to me.

Lastly, if I may, what would say to starting with this as a restoration project: http://nh.craigslist.org/mcy/3205856069.html

Do you think it's a good candidate at a reasonable price (I'd probably get him down to $500 or so, I think).

And then, realizing I'd forgotten to 'sign' as apparently is expected (!), I sent another email:

-Grateful,
Kyle

[SlowOldGuy]

Okay Kyle, this is getting a bit tiresome.  

WE can not make up YOUR mind for you.  You solicit opinions then try to question their "technical" accuracy.  Well, they are opinions and that's as good as it gets.

For instance, your question on will an '84 1100 beat an '86 1200 on a track.  The answer is (as usual) IT DEPENDS!  You put Valentino Rossi on a Honda Trail 70 and he will probably beat your typical squid on a CBGSXR1.

The answer you need to be asking is which one do YOU want.  We have provided multiple opinions.  You need to stop wallowing in the minutiae and go try to find and ride the different models and make up YOUR mind.  You'll get as many varying "opinions" as questions you ask.  We all like something different.  You can read everything ever printed about FJs, but the ultimate conclusion on which is better will not be found in ANY article.

I agree with Doc that the 1100 model "might" be more collectable, eventually.  But, I disagree that the '86/'87 is the "best" model you should be looking for.  But, of course, that's just my opinion.

DavidR.

[yamaha fj rider]

I agree with David on this. You are looking for the best answer but the truth is what is the best answer for you. If you ask a racer he will give you the best answer for a racer. If you ask a touring guy he will give you the best answer for a touring guy. The best answer for you maybe the one with low miles, in great shape whose owner wants it to have a person who will appreciate it. No matter what year and work with it from there. Just one mans opinion. Hope this helps.

Kurt   

[fj11.5]

can ride the 11 and twelve here back to back, the 11 seems to go better, and handles better , stops ect ect but I've spent a lot of time sorting her out,  , the 12 seems to have more torque and not as rev happy , handles like a 20+ year old bike should with standard suspension , but let someone else ride them I'm sure their opinion would be different

[teeeeeceeeee]

I had a '84 FJ1100 that was dealer prepped to run in the 1984 Production Series - was a great bike with a wicked power curve. Had it dynoe'd and it produced 137RWHP.

As many have mentioned the FJ1100 & FJ1200 '84 - '87 are the lighter in weight & therefore respond more easily to "tweaking" .

Below is a photo of the "Castrol" & "Marlboro" colors I discovered on my FJ1100 whilst rebuilding.





Kookaloo


TeeCee

[FJSpringy]

some own several FJ's, 1100's, 3Cv's, 3XW's and like each one for it's own little quirks and maybe like one a little less for the same reasons.

some own two of the same model and each one has a personality of its own, one is often the favorite.

geez I like my 92 because I own it , deal with it  

[fintip]

Not intending to make this thread about me, just about the differences between the 11 and 12; I personally prefer a sportier bike that is still comfortable, and obviously he does as well, but I was more curious about what the actual differences were in regards to the 11 vs the 12. Didn't mean to be arguing. The emails obviously were a bit more personal and geared towards my specific interests, but I just thought I'd share them anyways because he's an interesting source to get feedback from.

In fact, he responded already, and I think (think, not sure, you guys tell me) that his response might be saying exactly what many of you said:

Hi Mate

happy to answer members techincal questions etc
but have limited time to help out the 1500 members so sorry if answers are short
once member happy to bore you with details

if you can answer this, and this will be the answer
which is the best bike

RC30 or RC45
Z1a or Z1000
H1 or KH500
GPZ900 or 1000RX

hope your starting to work in out

regards
Doc

I don't know those bikes all off the top of my head, but I'm going to take a guess and say he's comparing touring to sport models from various brands... Though if I'm wrong, tell me, I haven't looked anything up on those yet so I find his email a little hard to decipher.

As for me, I personally feel that a bike that performs well shouldn't compromise comfort, and for this I love the FJ series; as Yamaha lost confidence and invested their performance elsewhere in a platform that cared almost nothing about comfort and cared only for performance, I (personally) feel they betrayed the FJ platform and made it only touring and forgot its performance side. Thus the upgrades only being in the fairing and hardly anything for suspension or frame (hell, the 91-later frame was the cheapest and heaviest, though least vibrating, no?), and nothing in the engine department other than boring it out. Just because it CAN be comfortable for miles and miles and is stable as a rock doesn't mean you have to call it a sport tourer, just a well designed sport bike!

But I'm just one consumer. And I'm clearly not the majority; the FJ sold well in its later incarnations, and they were very popular. Many here love it as a touring platform. The performance freaks skipped over it. I'm the weird guy in between. So don't mind me.

But if we're talking about the 11 vs. the 12, this is the issue we are talking about--a big bore sport bike vs a touring bike. The question is, did that touring role eventually compromise its performance, or did it only get better? And that's unavoidable. What you prefer is irrelevant; just, what are the differences?

(I sure hope I'm making sense, I had a fair amount of alcohol this evening as a disclaimer...)

[SkyFive]

The FJ1100 handles like a fat lady buxom babe and you won't care if your friends see you riding her.

[SlowOldGuy]

You've got it WAY wrong.

Performance-wise, there is practically no difference in sporting ability between the years.  Yamaha did nothing to take anything away from the performance of the later year models.  In fact, when I got my '93, I realized what a turd my '85 handled like.  Which led me to upgrade it to an '89 front end which totally transformed the bike. 

Prior to that "upgrade" I had practically stopped riding the '85 because the '93 was such a better bike.  Now they're about the same.

DavidR.

[yamaha fj rider]

If you like blue, red, silver, pink or white, this is as good as any reason to buy one FJ over another. Quit over thinking this, find one YOU like and buy it.

Kurt   

[Flynt]

WE can not make up YOUR mind for you.  

+1...  and using reviews from 20 years ago is a bad way to make up your mind as well.  I don't think you'll find an FJ today that performs exactly as described in those reviews for a variety of reasons, mostly related to age and upgrades/modifications.

You sound like you're trying to pick between first gen FZR1000, then '89, then Thunderace, then R1...  now that's a decision with lots of differentiation between models, mostly weight in this case but with lots of other changes including EXUP.  We got nothing like that going on between FJs (until you try to include FJR in the roster, but that's barely related).   

As has been said many times, go find a good one and buy it.  You can target a year if you like the particular style or fancy a certain early review.  Fact is getting an earlier model will necessitate the use of more modern parts to make it function at its best.  Any FJ will benefit from use of some new parts (shocks, springs, brakes, tires, wheels, chains, seats, etc...), so think of the purchase partially as buying good bones (good cosmetics, straight frame, solid engine) and maybe some upgrades already done (careful here...).   

Once you have made it yours through following your vision (sport, touring, hooligan, bobber, etc), you're in a great position to argue the value of your choices over the campfire.  Arguing virtues over ancient reviews and historical racing choices isn't particularly valid anyway and distracts you from your actual mission...  finding a FJ for sale out there to make your own.

Frank

[Alf]

You've got it WAY wrong.

Performance-wise, there is practically no difference in sporting ability between the years.  Yamaha did nothing to take anything away from the performance of the later year models.  In fact, when I got my '93, I realized what a turd my '85 handled like.  Which led me to upgrade it to an '89 front end which totally transformed the bike. 

Prior to that "upgrade" I had practically stopped riding the '85 because the '93 was such a better bike.  Now they're about the same.

DavidR.

In Spain we say: "para gustos, colores" that it could be translated to anything similar that for each individual there is a different preference

My 93 was bought only for touring duties because the handling is way off my modified 3 CV or the completely STD 86 1TX of my friend Mingo. Riding my 93 and trying to follow in a minimal way any of the 2 bikes could finish on the ditch. For me the 93 model is the worst by a mile