1700 Special edition - The "Vaquero"

[Cajunrider]

Originally Posted by cactusjack

I believe only the Vaqueros have side opening bags. The Voyager and Nomad still have the tip opening bags.

The Voyager and Nomad are unchanged from last year.

[caper]

I think Kawasaki hit a hommer here!!!!!

[Jared]

+1 I think it is an awesome looking bike!!! LOVE IT!!

[wiz]

It is a good loking bike, but there isn't one "best for everybody" bike so more choices is always good!

[cactusjack]

I think the top-opening bags statement is a typo. Watch the movie, they are definitely side-opening bags, just like the pre-2009 Nomads, minus the 3 aluminum strips on the door. You can see the hinges at the bottom if you look closely.

And...I found this image in the Vaquero photos:

[ponch]

No, it has side opening bags and the mufflers are definitely reminiscent of the old Nomad. I also noticed that the incentives to buy the Voyager are gone. I imagine the incentives would make the voyager too competitive with the new model. On the other hand, 2000 off for a Concours is a pretty good deal.

Originally Posted by dank

Looks like a couple things a re getting mixed reports. Trip reported side opening bags and the 2005-2008 mufflers. The picture on the Kawasaki site shows the same muffler as the 1700 Nomad and side opening bags like the 1600 Nomad. But the text in the details section of the Kawasaki site says:

"The Vaquero features hard, lockable and sealed top-opening side cases that provide nearly 10 gallons of storage space each for overnight touring."

So both things seem up in the air at this point.

But overall seems like an exciting bike, especially if they have the old style bags and mufflers, offer a taller windscreen and passenger seat and backrest as an option. Make ABS an option and it could be very enticing.

[dank]

Originally Posted by ponch

No, it has side opening bags and the mufflers are definitely reminiscent of the old Nomad..

I was simply quoting the "Details" section of the Kawasaki site, which clearly says top opening even though the picture shows the hinges at the bottom.

I realize that you are certain about the mufflers too, but again, look at the picture on the details section of the Kawasaki site and compare it to the 1700 Nomad picture. Then tell me what you think. I'm not saying it is one way or the other, just that there is mixed info.

[Sin City Stan]

Originally Posted by Yellow Jacket

[quote author=cactusjack board=general thread=20124 post=302781 time=1286239307]

The 327 Chevys would eat my lunch however. :'(

327s ate everybodys lunch to about a 100. The big blocks ate the 327s after that.

[ponch]

There's no replacement for cubic inch displacement. Chevy's big block came out when? 1965? Other GMs around the same time. If the car is light, a small block works fine, for heavier vehicles, not so much. I had a 1983 camaro with a 400 small block in it. Lots of fun eating most cars, but there's nothing like the howl of a big block. I wish they put bigger engines in the Suburbans. I have a 2009 with the 5.3, and it's underpowered. I don't know what Chevy was thinking. My 1984 K10 with crappier gearing and a 350 was quicker off the line.


[quote=Sin City Stan]

Originally Posted by "Yellow Jacket":r48exxkn

[quote author=cactusjack board=general thread=20124 post=302781 time=1286239307]

The 327 Chevys would eat my lunch however. :'(

327s ate everybodys lunch to about a 100. The big blocks ate the 327s after that.[/quote:r48exxkn]

[cocheese72]

I would suspect it to ride, pretty much the same as that 1700 Nomad in your sig. If you like the ergos on the 1700's you will probably like this as well. Heck go ride a Voyager, if you like that, you would like the Vaq.

[blowndodge]

Too bad they didn't make the V2K into a Ultimate touring platform. That monster 2053CC motor would have been a welcome addition...

[ponch]

Yeah, like the bike of the guy from Sweden. Thing is, v2K engines have issues. they don't hold up and will burn oil, and no they aren't diesel. I would have hoped that Kawasaki could have made an engine like that that would be reliable int he long run. then there are the oil changes...How many drain plugs?

They also need to figure out how to lighten their bikes. BMW came out with a new touring bike with 160HP, 130ft/lbs of torque and it weighs 765 wet. That's 150lbs lighter than a gold wing, with more juice on tap and just about as much torque as the V2K with a smooth 6 cylinder engine.

Originally Posted by Blowndodge "Darksider"

Too bad they didn't make the V2K into a Ultimate touring platform. That monster 2053CC motor would have been a welcome addition...

[dank]

Originally Posted by ponch

BMW came out with a new touring bike with 160HP, 130ft/lbs of torque and it weighs 765 wet. That's 150lbs lighter than a gold wing, with more juice on tap and just about as much torque as the V2K with a smooth 6 cylinder engine.

Yeah, and based on other forums, if they can prove they have figured out how to make a rear drive that doesn't self-destruct, they are going to sell a lot of them! Kawasaki seems to have forgotten that performance..power on tap... really does sell bikes, even if you rarely use it. Just knowing it is there spices up the ride. Triumph figured that out. So did Victory.

[blowndodge]

First time I rode a V2K I couldn't believe the power difference! Yea they have had a few complain of "longevity" issues that seem to be valid... But dang... that motor is a stud.... If anyone bought one and complained that they needed to "open up the intake and exhaust" for better performance they've bought the wrong type of motorcycle. They need a VMAX..

Imagine the Voyager with a more polished finished with that 2053CC motor.....

[cactusjack]

Originally Posted by Blowndodge "Darksider"

Too bad they didn't make the V2K into a Ultimate touring platform. That monster 2053CC motor would have been a welcome addition...

Yeah, and they could name it after you...the "pendejo".