2014 DL1000 Test ride

[cpjs]

Well, I've had my test ride on the new 1000.
I am 5'6" 160 pounds with an inadequate 28" inside leg
The roads were wet and covered in crap after heavy rain, 8deg C.

 I have not ridden the old 1000. My bike is a much modified 09 DL650, so only this to compare with.

The bike looks leaner than the old model and did not feel any different in weight to my 650, the seat is higher than mine and put me right up on tippy toe. I sat on the lower seat which was just like the standard seat with the padding removed, this pushes your legs further apart so your feet are no nearer the ground but you are now uncomfortable as well. I did not bother riding with it, I can't see Suzuki selling many.
The riding position is pure vstrom the seat/feet position feels similar with the (same) bars are a little nearer, for me I would still put up and back risers on it.

I did not play with the traction control because of the crap conditions and unfamiliar bike I am sure it will be better than not having it. The dash usefully shows charging volts and ambient temp as well as miles to go etc.

The ride.
The throttle was set with usual load of slack so hunt the pick up point this made it a little snatchy, there may have been some chain slack as this bike is one of the 2000ml Spanish launch press bikes.
Wow that engine is strong and nearly as smooth as the 650. All you need is 2k, open the throttle and it's off, no build up just go. The fuelling seemed as good as the 650 and my GSXR. Max torque at about 4k power tailing off after 8k, 100mph about 6k and topped out at an indicated 135 mph. The dealer says the new speedo is more accurate than the old DL optimistic speedo. I doubt putting the Doris on the back will make much difference.

The clutch is heavier than the 650 (most bikes are) but was OK and the gearbox good with a positive  short throw capable of clutchless changes.

Comfort was typical vstrom with wind protection better as standard than the old with rake easily adjustable on the move, height is adjustable with tools like the old.
The brakes are very strong just two fingers to pull up hard, better than on my braided hosed GSXR callipered 650. This bike had a warped front disc. Mmmmmm.

The suspension is much better out of the box than the old stuff particularly the front which is now fully adjustable, it coped well with our under funded roads without that crashing that a standard DL used to have. I was not able to push the handling of the bike due to the conditions though it had a good and solid feel. The steering was light at slower speeds though heavier than the 650 at speed, harder work to change direction.

 A lot of people have spent a lot of time improving their dl's, I think Suzuki have done a lot to address most of the issues, OK you could put Ohlins on the new one if you want to, now you are less likely to need to.

My dealer says that if the new 650 is 20% better than the old then the new 1000 is 60% better.
Maybe he is right.....?

Will I buy one ? Probably.

The red ones are fastest.

[JRS81]

Interesting reading, thanks for the review! The more I read about this bike the more I think it could well be a contender as my next bike (once prices drop a bit).

How was the screen compared to your 650? Any problems with buffetting?

[cpjs]

Wind protection seemed better than the old bike as standard.
Screens are one of the most discussed items on adventure bike forums ( all marques ) so there will be plenty of gripes regardless.
A friend on mine recently got rid of his Triumph 800xc after just one year because he couldn't find a suitable screen.

[Jacko]

Went to Lincoln Suzuki event day today, test rode this.

[TLPower]

A well written, objective and informative review.

Sounds like you enjoyed it.

[Oop North John]

A well written, objective and informative review.

Sounds like you enjoyed it.

Concise certainly  

[Juvecu]

Tell us what you thought about it, Jacko?

[Jacko]

I've offered my opinion on various aspects of the bike before Juv and it wasn't welcomed. I'm not about to fall into the same trap, I'm just letting folk know I've now ridden it.

If you're still interested when we next meet I'll tell you then.

[Fat Rat]

Jacko, don't be a knob  

Let's have your review.  

[mr_diver]

A brief chat with Jacko and you'll soon discover a biker with experience of road and track riding, with many varied bikes over the years. Someone who shoots down his ideas with little background evidence is a fool... if you feel different l, say your bit and leave it be.
This is an owners forum for the bike in question. It's in the interest of current members to share our experience of the new models with potential new owners.

I'd like to hear Jacko's ride review as I value his experience and opinion.

But as fat rat said.... don't be a knob.

[Jacko]

OK, think Glee with more torque and a better front end, providing almost sportsbike levels of feedback. The trouble with that is you don't really want that level of feedback on that type of bike, it let's you know how every bump and imperfection is affecting the steering and stability, but with a tourer you don't want to be bothered with all that, 'just glide me over everything and stop moaning' is the order of the day. The rear, on the other hand is too soft in comparison, it wasn't balanced, I was constantly adding preload to the rear to try to match the front, maybe given some time I could balance them out properly, I think the shock would need a stiffer spring though. I'm 'only' 14st 5lbs, it shouldn't trouble it.

Engine is strong, not quite as smooth as the Glees though, a bit rough when applying throttle in 6th at 60, you need to knock it down to get it singing again, this may just be engine characteristics though, it is a big V twin after all, Some have mentioned a disconcerting drop off in the fuelling at <2,500 revs, but if you're letting the engine drop below that you're not riding it properly and forcing it to labour. It's a none-issue.

Dash is clear, lots of info, all easily cycled. I didn't get the TC working as it was dry and the roads were annoyingly gravel free.

It's fast, and rides well, but, there were only two of us on the led ride, and I was behind the leader on a new 650, he was having just as much fun as I was and never really needed any more power. And that's the problem, the Glee does the same thing, sure there's no TC and less grunt on tap and the front end isn't as bling but if these aren't high on your list of requirements then there's no reason to spend the extra.

Ultimately it's as easy to ride as its younger brother, with 2up touring with luggage a much better prospect. If you never ride with a pillion though, and you're not bothered about changing down for the odd overtake then get the 650, just as involving to ride, smoother and a little more refined. Not to mention almost half the cost.

A good bike, but there are better alternatives available for less.

[Ptarmigan]

Nice review Jacko, thanks  

I'm looking forward to trying it for myself once the weather gets a bit warmer.

[Gassoon]

Good thoughtful review and opinion Jacko, thanks!:-)  

[mr_diver]

Id say get a job as a bike journalist mate. But you tell it like it is so MCN won't take you sorry. Good review, I'm still waiting to be arsed to take one out. Maybe I will soon, maybe back to back with a glee.
We all complained about the wee needing a stiffer spring on the back... glee was better. Why not do the same with the new 1000??? Silly

[Jacko]

On it's own the rear isn't too bad, better than the Glee, wind it up and it tightens up OK. The problem is it's no match for the superior front now, in comparison with that it's too soft. They've upped the game with the front and haven't kept up with the rear, it is improved, only the balance is out. Stick a decent fully adjustable shock in it (comp. rebound, preload) that matches the front and you'll be getting close to tall sportsbike levels of compliance, a budget Multistrada if you like.

I keep referring to it as a tourer, one of the Suzuki GB blokes said quite emphatically it's a road bike, not built with any off road ability, it's a style, not a function. That clears that up.

[Oop North John]

Interesting to hear a review which doesn't ignore negative thoughts.

I'm planning to have a test ride at the end of May when the Glee is having a service but I keep on thinking that the biggest competition for the new 1 litre bike is the current Glee, and is it almost a twice as good a bike, which is what we're looking at in the UK in terms of price? Sure it'll accelerate faster, break harder, won't spin the rear wheel up if you haver the traction control on, but the only quantifiable bit that is double, is the service interval.

[Jacko]

We've yet to see prices for the 7.5 come in yet. The interval is very good, but the Suzuki bloke that told me about the oil/cycle parts servicing program also said about longer intervals 'be careful what you wish for'... Cryptic.

[Gassoon]

We've yet to see prices for the 7.5 come in yet. The interval is very good, but the Suzuki bloke that told me about the oil/cycle parts servicing program also said about longer intervals 'be careful what you wish for'... Cryptic.

I suspect your speculation about the prices might be correct, Jacko. Look at what the dealers are charging for what are basically oil-changes now...Once they realise they'll be seeing less of their 'money' bikes they'll want to extract as much as possible when they get them in their workshops. It might also be a case of the phone call while its in to say 'Oh and the fork seals are starting to go - might as well have them done, sir? While it's in, makes sense...' I wonder if that's what he had in mind with his cryptic comments.

[Jacko]

He also mentioned, that the Explorer has 10k intervals but the 10 and 20k services come in at around £500+ and £600+ respectively.

This after mentioning they looked at what the competition was doing when reviewing the 1000s intervals. It all points to higher cost, without actually saying so.

[frez]

Triumph also won't let you get it serviced independently and still maintain the warranty.