FJ hunting.

[fintip]

I'm not going to be in the US for a couple months, as I'm on a trip on my XJ650 Maxim in Central America for a while and am thinking of settling down for a little bit in Nicaragua and living cheaply. But I've decided, after a few months of mulling over it, that I WILL buy an FJ as my next bike, and possibly the last bike I might ever want. At some point, you don't need any more speed... And I can't imagine wanting a modern sportbike bigger than a 650, MAYBE 750 unless I started going to a track to really learn on a regular basis, which I have no intention of doing soon. And what you might want then is more roll-on power, but the FJ supposedly was the roll-on king in its day and produces a ridiculous amount of torque, even by today's standards. An '08 Hayabusa, at 1300cc, still only beats an FJ12 by half a second to a second on the 1/4mile! And on top of that, comfort is paramount to me--I like long trips. And this bike seems to be that ideal balance of maximum power I'd want, no real weak spots in the powerband (maybe just some 'less powerful but still powerful' spots), and long-term driving comfort.

I'm willing to go a thousand miles or so to get the right one. I am just now deciding what the ideal FJ will look like. First off, I know I like the cosmetics of the Red/White scheme a lot, and am not fond of the black/blue--though some of the less common black schemes are ok. I think the fairing shape on the 90's models aren't nearly as attractive as the earlier fairings--can they be swapped? Also, if I am not mistaken, there were improvements made starting with the '88 model over the earlier yearmodels, right? How hard/expensive/much are the upgrades that were made to put on the earlier models? At what year did the rubber engine mounts all around appear?

Next, according to one review I read, they took them off the market in '87 before trying it out again as a sport-touring instead of superbike sales angle in '88. So why do I sometimes see '87 models?

Also, what are pannier/saddlebag options? Are there aftermarkets that fit well, were there good factory options, etc.?

I'm willing to get one that's a little bit of a project and not in perfect condition, but it does need to be driveable. I want one 1.8k or under as a starting price. And unless the upgrades aren't that substantial or aren't difficult/expensive to adapt to early models, I think i'd like it to be 88 or 89 (I think those are the last years they had the red/white scheme, right?), unless fairings can be swapped between early and late models.

Any comments, advice, etc.?

Also, as far as tranny 2nd gear issue... Does anyone ever go in and fix this? Are there any other internal engine problems that go bad after a certain mileage? (Example: on the XJ shafties, there is a plastic piece in the final drive that goes at this age on some bikes between 30k and 80k miles that you have to split the case to replace.)

[Flying Scotsman]

I have 2 FJ's a 85 and a 90.The 85 is a better bike i.m.o.
Right off the bigger fairing is i.m.o. worse ergonomically than the smaller one on the 85.My 90 FJ needs more work than my 85 its my beater back up bike and some day it might contend with the 85 but for now the 85 handles stops and accelerates better than my 90 does.It looks better too with the Red and White colours.
Best FJ to me is a 85 with a built motor and some suspension and brake upgrades thats my goal.If I still have the 90 at that time then I will do the same to it and make the comparison again.
1985 FJ 1100 works for me........

[fintip]

I have to admit, bigger just seems better to me. It's harder to really believe an 1100 could be better than a 12. Surely the '90 is just in a worse state of tune?

It seems there were a couple of stock red/white color schemes, but so far I like them all (maybe 3 I've seen?)

Also, it appears that the review I read was wrong and it's the '88 that America didn't get, and that the 89 and 90 had the upgrades and were the last year with the old fairing? But according to flying scotsman, the fairing was different by '90? So am I shooting for an '89 here?

[1tinindian]

The red and white scheme ended in 87.
It was the 88 year model that wasn't offered in the us.
The 91 was the first year for the rubber mounted engine.
To get the better brakes on the front, you'll need to get at least the 89 model year, or be willing to swap 89-93 forks on to the 84-87 year models.

I'm sure others will be able to help further.
Leon

[1tinindian]

Fairing sizes grew larger was the year went by.
84-85
86-87
89-90
91-93
The 91 was the year ABS was an option, had the largest fairing, rubber engine mounts and the headlight with the bottom corners more rounded.

[fintip]

There's also this black color scheme that I've never seen before, with no year given: http://alabama.freeshopperads.com/motorcycles/yamaha-fj1200-sporttourer.html

Bummer that the red/white ended in '87.

I'd be fine swapping forks. Straightforward swap, I presume, yeah?

What suspension upgrades are available for these bikes in general? Do most of them have fairly saggy suspension by this time when still stock, or do they hold out?

I only thought there were two fairing shapes, that's good to know. Thanks indian. I'm going to have to look more closely between them and see which are best. Could I hear some more opinions on the pre-'91 fairings? (Sorry, I feel like the FJ lost its looks those last 3 years. Personal preference.) Anyone have a straightforward reference to show the different fairing styles?

How much of the upgrades from the last years are backwards compatible? All of them? Are the fairings all interchangeable between different models, or just some with some?

Lot of questions--if anyone feels like just directing me to old threads or giving me terms to search for, I'd be happy to just research on my own as well. Thanks so much for your help.

[fintip]

Ah ok! So I've searched and found them, and will upload them to my imageshack account and add links here for reference. They're uploading now.

I have to say, actually, that the white with very light red trip from the 89 models is also attractive. I was throwing that one in with the red/whites without realizing.

Also, this luggage set looks pretty awesome: http://rka-luggage.com/pages/14gallry/10yam/page3/pics/fj1291bi.jpg

(Makes the 91 look pretty good, actually. )

84:


86/87:












89:



90:



Maybe a 90?



91:

[RichBaker]

There's also this black color scheme that I've never seen before, with no year given: http://alabama.freeshopperads.com/motorcycles/yamaha-fj1200-sporttourer.html

That's a '90, the color is actually a very dark metallic blue. The only black is the top of the tank, probably done to make touch-ups easy for tankbag users...

[andyb]

Nah, there's more than that.  The lower edge of the sidepanels and tailsection, and the grab handles are all black.

It varies from a blue to a purple depending on the light.  I'd think it'd be super difficult to photograph well.

[Firehawk068]

It's a '90, and same color scheme as mine.
Everything above the top stripe is black, and everything below the botom stripe is black. The part in the middle changes from a dark blue, to purple depending on the lighting.

[FJmonkey]

Check out Lotsokids bike, black with red, very cool.

[fintip]

Still no answer, though on this: Can the fairings be swapped out between years?

What's the net effect of the fairing changes? Scotsman, why is it worse ergonomically? After all this I've been leaning towards the white 89/90 model because of the suspension upgrades, but I could just find some forks and put them on the older one. How much do the forks alone run for?

How about other forks, though? Is it possible to get forks from other bikes like a (random example of a bike that I know had good handling) 90's gpz900 onto it? I know nothing about fork transplants, I've always only put factory forks back in. Maybe this is a bad idea for some reason, changing height or not being calibrated for the same weight, etc.?

What would a complete list if upgrades that are different between the 84 and 89 be? Could I hear some opinions and/or information on the fairings regarding issues other than cosmetics?

EDIT: Again answering my own question (feel free to add!) I found this mentioned in a favorable review of the 89:

That excellent stability results in part from replacing the old 2.75 by 16-inch front wheel with a lighter, cast-aluminum hollow-spoke 3.00 by 17-inch wheel and lower-profile tire. The rear is also a hollow-spoke design, but in the same 3.50 by 16-inch size as before.

The diameter of the low-profile, 70-series, 17-inch Dunlop K330 front is within millimeters of that of the 80-series 16-incher it replaces. Rake and trail remain the same at 27.5 degrees and 4.4 inches, as do the Kayaba fork's 41mm stanchion tubes. But the bike feels more stable, at least partly because the 70-series tire has less sidewall to flex.

Tire choice greatly affects a sport-bike's feel. The FJ was originally designed around 16-inch Pirellis purpose-built for Bimota. The front tire, although designated a 120/80, was actually 128mm wide. That tire's width and profile created steering torques that tried to stand the previous FJ up abruptly when braking into corners. It also contributed to the bike's unwillingness to change lines in mid-corner.

The new 17-inch front Dunlop, though also designated a 120, is considerably narrower at 117mm, and helps the FJ's steering considerably. The tendency to stand up under braking while leaned over is much less pronounced, and the bike changes headings in mid-corner more readily, although it still requires more effort than do modern superbikes. Overall, the new tire makes the bike feel more precise, and minimizes its handling quirks at the bargain cost of a minor increase in steering effort.

While fitting those new wheels, Yamaha engineers decided to graft on new front brakes, as well. Larger, 298mm floating discs replace the old 280mm solid-mount rotors, and they're squeezed by four-pot calipers in place of the previous model's twin-piston units. Yamaha's ineffectual anti-dive has been shown the dumpster and is rarely missed; especially now that spring rates are stiffer. The radially vented rear disc is unchanged, and is still one of the best rear brakes around, offering excellent feel and power - especially with a passenger. The brake upgrade doesn't necessarily allow the bike to stop any faster but the '89 does require less effort, and feeds back reliable information.

Some things never change, thankfully. This motor will still leave bruises on your heart from constantly banging it into your spinal column. A regimen of gradual refinement has made it even stronger throughout its rev band. Displacement increased to 1188cc with 3mm-large bores in '86, and the '89 FJ improves or that engine with a more precise, digitally controlled spark-advance unit. A new electric fuel pump satisfies the 36mm Mikuni constant-vacuum carburetors, which have one-size-leaner main jets for fewer nasty emissions.

Only thing that worries me in that last is the addition of a fuel pump; if it fails, are you stranded? Does one notice the difference? As far as the leaner jets, screw emmissions, this model produced one less hp; is that where it went? What is the forum consensus on ideal jetting?

All things being equal, the 89 should handle better than the 84, right? Scotsman, what contributes exactly to your experience riding? Does the front wheel feel less stable, are the forks more spongy, or what? Any chance your wheel is wider than what's intended for it?

[fj11.5]

my bike as pictured << is an 84 with 89 body work , forks ect ect, , I changed fairings originally because no 84 fairings available when I needed one, , just required front side mounts and the mounts at the lower front under the headlight to make it fit , , guessing any forks with 41mm dia will fit, but different story Making them actually perform , , rpm has fork valves and springs that transform the Fj forks into ones that actually work perfectly

[FJmonkey]

The fuel pump can be bypassed into gravity feed to get home, maybe not full on Kookaloo but not exactly limp home speed either. You will need a small bit O' hose and a fitting to keep in your tool kit but not the end of the world if the pump quits.

[ribbert]

Only thing that worries me in that last is the addition of a fuel pump; if it fails, are you stranded? Does one notice the difference? As far as the leaner jets, screw emmissions, this model produced one less hp; is that where it went? What is the forum consensus on ideal jetting?

You could expect to replace a fuel pump maybe once in the life of the bike and they improve the reliability of fuel flow. The forum is full of fuel problems, even today, that are gravity feed specific. The problem is the lack of pressure. With the tank mounted immediately above the motor there is very little head (pressure) and it takes very little to interupt the fuel flow.

I do a lot of work on vintage cars and one of the most common reliability fixes is the addition of a fuel pump to cars built in the 20's and 30's that were originally gravity fed, and the tanks on those generally sit a lot higher than the bike.

When was the last time you car left you stranded on the side of the road with a dead fuel pump?

If I had an early model bike I would fit a fuel pump to it.

In terms of model/year hunting, the rubber mounted engine on the later bikes alone would seal the deal for me.

The FJ is as smooth as my previously owned Goldwing and CBX1000 (6 cyl) and I do a lot of trips so this appeals to me.

Noel