Selecting a Touring Motorcycle
This is an endless debate. People will never agree on what makes a good touring bike just as they will never agree on what makes a good Pizza. Depending on experience and personal preference, everyone has different ideas. For some, anything less than a full dress luxury-barge like a Goldwing or an Electra Glide is unthinkable. For others, a 250 cc scooter is just fine. I think the important attributes of a touring bike are,
•Reliability
•Comfort
•Dealing with the Wind and Windshields
•Seating Position
•The Seat
•Ride Quality
•Fun
•Carrying Capacity
•Range
Reliability
This seems self-evident but you wouldn't believe the number of bikes I've seen along the side of the road in the middle of nowhere with something basic broken like a drive chain which should have been replaced (8000 km) ago. You don't want to spend several days of your trip broken down in some small town waiting for some obscure part to be delivered. My point here is that if you tour on a bike that needs maintenance or is prone to failure; don’t be surprised when it breaks. One of the most common on the road failure in motorcycles is dead batteries. This particular problem is usually entirely preventable by replacing the battery before it fails.
You can either buy a bike in good condition and then properly maintain it or buy an older bike and fix it up. The later is sometimes cheaper but is a lot of work and you need to know what you're doing.
Comfort
It won't do you any good to have a reliable bike if you feel like you've been tortured every time you go for a ride. That being said, there are no hard and fast rules as to what constitutes a comfortable bike. Goldwings and the like are generally considered to be the most comfortable bikes around. While they are certainly pretty good I don't like them because their sculpted seats force you to sit in one place. You can't move around on the seat, which is something I like to do. There is one universal principle though -- you need some way to deal with the windblast.
Dealing With the Wind and Windshields
“Naked bikes" have a "sit up and exposed" riding position and usually have zero wind protection. As standard they can be exhausting to ride for any significant distance at any reasonable speed. You need to hold on to the bars for dear life while constantly flexing your stomach and lower back muscles to fight the wind. An after-market windshield usually solves this problem nicely.
The only caveat on a windshield is that it be the proper height and shape. Some windshields can create turbulent airflow near your helmet which can jerk your head about. It can be worse than the windblast you were trying to eliminate. Usually, the solution is to use a shorter windshield. It won't stop all the windblast but it will stop enough of it and the airflow will be smooth. My preference is to look over the windscreen, not through it. I also like to have some airflow around my helmet. It's cooler when it's really hot out and it clears the rain off your helmet's visor. Don’t be fooled by the size of a screen some bikini fairings offer great protection and large frame mounted fairings that are completely useless. The bottom line here is that you can't always predict the effectiveness of a particular windshield on a particular bike until you try it out.
Another thing you can do to improve your ability to resist the windblast is to adjust where the handlebar handgrips are located. Standards, cruisers, and dual sport's usually have tubular handlebars that can either be adjusted or replaced with a different curve to make you lean forward a bit. Even a small amount of forward lean can help a lot with windblast, even without a windshield. Changing the handgrip position on a sport bike can be more difficult. The degree of adjustment is dependent on the design of the clip-ons on the particular bike. On some sport bikes the handgrips are too low and actually need to be raise.
Cruiser style bikes are pretty popular these days but they also have the same wind problem as the standard bikes. The solution is generally the same -- get a windshield. Cruisers have an additional problem with the seating position: at least I think that it's a problem. Your feet are farther forward, in some cases, a lot farther, than on other styles of motorcycles. The feet forward pegs when combined with the position of the handlebars tend to make your torso lean to the rear. As a result you must use abdominal muscles and your grip on the handlebars to resist the windblast. This can be quite fatiguing and also makes the bike harder to control.
For optimal control you should not be applying any force to the handlebars except the small pressures needed to initiate or maintain counter steering for cornering and general control. Applying forces to the handlebars for any reason not related to control is called bar loading and is a bad idea. It does not matter if you're loading the bars because of nervous tension, resisting windblast, or doing your daily exercise. It's a bad and interferes with your ability to precisely control the bike. Ideally your hands should be simply resting on the handle bar grips.
Sport bikes are generally not considered touring bikes but a lot of people use them for touring. The relatively extreme forward lean, at least when compared with naked bikes and cruisers, almost perfectly compensates for the windblast, at least above 70 km/h or so. At lower speeds it's not as nice as all your weight is on your wrists and shoulders. There is quite a bit of variation in the amount of forward lean and wind protection in various sport bikes. If the clip-on is above the triple-clamp the lean is usually not too bad. If they are below the triple-clamp it may be uncomfortable. Your degree of comfort on a sport bike will depend on the length of your arms and torso, the size of the tank, the vertical position of the seat relative to the clip-on, how the fairing shapes the airflow and your physical condition. For example, a CBR600 is much more comfortable than a GSXR600 for some.
Seating Position
Standard and Dual Sport Bikes both have the "sit up" position and are quite comfortable as long as you've solved the windblast problem and have a decent seat. On both types of bikes your feet are more or less under your thighs and you can stand up on the pegs if you want. It's nice to be able to stand on the pegs as you can use your leg muscles to absorb bumps and reposition your butt on the seat.
Cruisers force you to put your feet out in front so far that you can't use your legs as shock absorbers and all your weight is on your tailbone. The shock of every bump goes straight into your spine. Also, on the classical cruiser you grip the bars near shoulder level - too high for good spinal position. This all can get real uncomfortable and is the main reason I don't like cruisers.
Sport bikes position your feet further back and higher. There is a lot of variation from bike to bike in foot peg position and even a centimeter can make a big difference. You don't so much sit on a sport bike as you squat on it. You'll notice this after your first long day; your thighs will feel like you've been doing squats in the weight room. After you're conditioned to this it's not a problem but it is different than other types of bikes.
If the bike is comfortable and you are in fairly good physical condition, touring on a sport bike is really nice when you get to some serious twisties. Sure, twisties are probably fun on any bike but they're more fun on a sport bike.
The Seat
There are three things to consider about the seat: its firmness, surface texture, and shape. I prefer a firm almost hard seat. The plush pillow-like seat on most cruisers may seem like it would be a good seat for the long haul but I've found that the foam is too soft and after several hours you are essentially sitting on the seat pan and it can get pretty hard. Also, after a long day those nice tuck and roll seams form little ridges that can really dig into your butt and thighs, especially when it's hot out. Standard, Dual Sport, and Sport bikes tend to have relatively flat and firm seats. Some are firmer than others but at least there are no seams to dig into your butt.
The shape of the seat can be important. I like a flat and fairly wide seat so I can move around. A seat that isn’t means that when you sit on it becomes dished so much that there is only one place that you can sit and while it wasn't a bad position you were constrained to sit in that one place all the time. On tour, it's nice to be able to move around, it helps minimize butt ache. You can get seats re shaped to make then a bit wider and have the foam replaced with the stiffest foam you can get.
A note for those vertically challenged riders out there. All motorcycle seats are somewhat triangular in shape with the narrow end near the tank and your butt normally sitting the wide part. They have this shape so that the edge of the seat doesn't dig into your thighs. This will only work if your calf is long enough. Shorter people tend to have shorter legs and when seated on a motorcycle their thighs are lower than normal. Sometimes the seat digs into their thighs. This can be very uncomfortable. If this is happening to you, you may find that additional narrowing the forward part of the seat can help. It will also help you reach the ground better, effectively lowering the seat, because when you put your feet on the ground your thighs are not forced as far to the side as much so your legs can go straight down from the hip.
The last seat quality is texture. You want the seat to have a little grip. Do not put Armor-All on your seat unless it has significant texture features in the plastic. Armor-All will make the seat very slippery making the bike hard to control as you're sliding around. You don't want too much grip though. You want to be able to move around on the seat with a minimum of effort.
Ride Quality
The bike's ride quality can make all the difference in a comfortable trip. The two primary considerations are suspension harshness and engine vibration. The relatively stiff suspension on sport bikes helps them handle well but long days on less than perfect roads can really pound you. This is not fun. You can buy a more capable after market shock but this will be pretty expensive. The really soft plush suspension, like those found on most cruisers, is very comfortable on reasonable roads but on rough roads the suspension can bottom out and they can feel like you're about to compress your spine.
In general, you want a properly setup suspension that is compliant. That means proper sag (spring pre-load and spring rate) and proper compression and rebound damping both front and rear. Most bikes (including many sport bikes) come from the factory with marginal suspension components, compound that with the fact that most riders don't have a clue how to properly setup a suspension (if the adjustments are even there) you have a recipe for lousy ride quality AND lousy handling on many of the bikes on the road today.
Fun
Motorcycle riding is about having fun. For me the essence of riding is leaning into the turns and the more lean the better. That's why I like sport bikes so much -- they can achieve substantial lean angles without scraping hard parts. This characteristic also makes sport bikes a bit safer. You have more margins in corners. If you come into a corner a bit to fast you almost always can lean a little further and make it through the turn without scraping anything. Sport bikes also have more precise steering and just generally handle better than other types of motorcycles.
Lean, or the lack of it, is why I do not prefer cruisers. They have low ground clearance so you will be scraping hard parts well before you even approach decent lean angles. Cruisers also have relatively slow steering and their handling can be described as ponderous. I admit that cruisers are not designed for spirited riding and it's not really fair to criticize them for poor handling and lack of ground clearance. If you're into "The cruising style” of riding, a cruiser may be good choice. They just aren't my cup of tea.
Dual sport bikes have essentially limitless ground clearance and lean angles are limited only by tire traction. They do tend to have rather flexible frames and poor suspensions so they don't generally handle as crisply as a sport bike. Still, they can be a blast to ride and with higher quality after-market suspension components and ultra-smooth riding technique a dual sport is nearly the equal of a sport bike in the twisties.
Carrying Capacity
In general, the less stuff you take with you the more choices you have as to the sort of bike you can use. The two carrying capacity considerations are weight and volume. Generally, the bigger the bike, the more volume it can carry. The ultimate bikes for cargo volume are the big rigs like the Goldwing, Electra Glides, and BMW R1100RT. These bikes all come with hard panniers and top boxes and have room for mind-boggling amounts of stuff. If you're one of the kitchen sink crowd and need even more room some can also tow a trailer. You have to be careful when considering how much gear your bike can carry. When you do the math you will find that many bikes have quite a bit less cargo weight capacity than you would think. If you ride solo (one person per bike) you will have a LOT more capacity.
Even if you're riding solo, you still have to attach your gear to the bike. If you have a land-barge there are probably enough nooks and crannies to pack things. However, naked bikes, sport bikes, and cruisers vary tremendously in their ability to simply attach stuff. Look for ockey strap hooks or frame rails on the rear of the bike. Often there's nothing there but pretty body plastic and attaching gear is damn near impossible without major modifications. On other bikes there are real nice ockey strap hooks or other means to attach tie-downs.
Range
By range I mean both comfort range and fuel range. I've already covered comfort so I'll not dwell on it. Fuel range is tank size time’s mileage. Most bikes get around 20km/litre--some less, a very few get more. With a given bike the mileage can vary up or down depending on speed and how smooth you are with the throttle, just like a car. I think that you should have at least a 220 km range without going on reserve. For most bikes this means at least an 18 litre tank (assuming 3 litres reserve). This is not so you can be a "Real Man" and ride a jillion km’s nonstop. The reason you want the (240 km) range is margin and flexibility. If you get out in the outback there are many places where it's at least (200 km) between fuel stations. Some places it can get hard to find late at night fuel especially the far south coast.
The point here is that you shouldn't assume that a bike you're thinking of buying has an adequate fuel range. Check out the fuel capacity and the mileage and be sure that ratings will meet your needs. The cost of the bike goes in there somewhere but I'm not sure where. You will most likely have the same categories but not necessarily in the same order.
I'll repeat that; Any motorcycle can be used for touring.
I think that one reason many people prefer larger displacement bikes is that many riders equate the ability to go fast in a straight line with rider skill. The reality is that there is no relationship between fast straight line speed and rider skill. Bigger bikes have higher top speeds because they have more horse power, pure and simple. Straight line speed is a function of horsepower and the willingness to use it: it has nothing to do with skill. Many riders are simply deluding themselves when they think that because they can go fast in a straight line that they are good riders. The skill in operating a motorcycle comes into play in the turns.
