23-04-14, 08:46 AM
So Yamaha hit on a winning bike(maybe by accident?) with the Gen 1. As Pitternator says-if the gen 2 effectively killed the genre by making it more "sporty" in seating position & engine characteristics, that begs the question:what could/should they have done to the Gen 1 to retain its essential essence/character?
History has since shown they were going in the right direction in the early 2000s by providing an alternative to racebike clones-they had the FZS models as an alternative to the R6/R1. They seemed to lose direction in recent years with no new designs & high prices. Hopefully the new models arriving now will help keep biking fun& affordable as I don't know many people willing to shell out £12 to £15 grand for a bike. So what could/should they have done to the Gen 1 in 2005 to get round the euro emissions regs at the same time keeping the essential character of the machine?
History has since shown they were going in the right direction in the early 2000s by providing an alternative to racebike clones-they had the FZS models as an alternative to the R6/R1. They seemed to lose direction in recent years with no new designs & high prices. Hopefully the new models arriving now will help keep biking fun& affordable as I don't know many people willing to shell out £12 to £15 grand for a bike. So what could/should they have done to the Gen 1 in 2005 to get round the euro emissions regs at the same time keeping the essential character of the machine?