Transalp review
- Thread starter bigpoppa
- Start date
It's a good bike but it's not all roses. Yes no cruise but it's not the only one in the group missing that.
Suspension is rather poor on the first few years and has been upgraded a bit (stiffer) just recently. Still mostly not adjustable though.
Gravel mode is useless if you want to actually go off pavement. Turning off TC and/or ABS is involving and annoying. There's a "custom" riding mode but it still won't allow these changes in it so it remains involving and annoying.
Video review commented that the AT is 18kg heavier and only a few HP more powerful and that they're pretty comparable. They're not. The AT has the TQ and feels significantly stronger. It also feels significantly bigger and heavier. I've ridden the TA and AT back to back and the TA feels like a mountainbike in comparison in terms of weight/size.
Not to say it's not a great bike as it's quite good. Just know what the strengths and weaknesses are.
Suspension is rather poor on the first few years and has been upgraded a bit (stiffer) just recently. Still mostly not adjustable though.
Gravel mode is useless if you want to actually go off pavement. Turning off TC and/or ABS is involving and annoying. There's a "custom" riding mode but it still won't allow these changes in it so it remains involving and annoying.
Video review commented that the AT is 18kg heavier and only a few HP more powerful and that they're pretty comparable. They're not. The AT has the TQ and feels significantly stronger. It also feels significantly bigger and heavier. I've ridden the TA and AT back to back and the TA feels like a mountainbike in comparison in terms of weight/size.
Not to say it's not a great bike as it's quite good. Just know what the strengths and weaknesses are.
Last edited:
100%
I took one out for a ride and was going to do a write-up on it, but realized I had zero nice things to say about it, so I skipped the review.
The suspension is terrible for off-road. Too soft and the bike doesn't track where you want it to go in the rough stuff. Horrible handling, easily the worst of the "mid-weight" ADV bikes on the market.
Would not recommend.
Pavey Jr of Brake Magazine bought one and the first mod he did was to switch out the suspension (to TracTive I believe).
Damn, while Honda has never been the choice for exhilaration but a few of their recent bikes that seem interesting at first glance (Transalp and 250 Rally) seem to be lost to the bean counters. Some more money in suspension and they may have been acceptable out of the box.
My buddy bought one of the 23/24 bikes and after the first year he spent a good chunk on new shock and fork internals. Not sure on brand, he got them sent over from somewhere in Europe. Also put crash bars, a Motoz Adventure rear and AX41 front tires, and some other stuff. It's a great bike on/offroad now.
sburns
Well-known member
Why don't you have a AT and a KLR?
Thinking of trading my AT and the Alp was one i was looking at
Is there any real benefit to the TA over the 500X (or NV or whatever they call it now) besides more power going from 500 -> 750?
Seems more in line with a NC750XA or similar...but for more money and in a different skin.
Seems more in line with a NC750XA or similar...but for more money and in a different skin.
Last edited:
CB500X is more street-oriented, with its 19" front wheel and 17" rear. Earlier models (pre 2018) had both 17" wheels. Wheels are cast, which make it lighter and more nimble on the street. Suspension travel is short, 5.9"F/5.3"R, it will bottom out prematurely on obstacles but be more planted on the street.
Transalp has the off-road-oriented 21" front and 18" rear. Easier to roll over obstacles like rocks or logs. However, on pavement, it's slower turning, reduced cornering grip and braking (more due to the skinny size of the tires than wheel diameter - less contact patch). Wheels are spoked, which make it heavier unsprung weight on the road, but more durable to impacts off-road. Suspension travel is taller than CB500X - 7.9"F/7.5"R - more ground clearance, better for off-road, but will feel more pogo-like on the street than CB500X.
Power and electronics aside, if you're planning on going off-road, the Transalp is the superior bike. However, as mentioned above, there are better offerings in this space by other manufacturers. If you're staying on the pavement, the CB500X will behave better on tarmac than the TA, especially when pushed hard.
Most people share the same preference but just haven't realized it yet.
They choose an ADV bike thinking it will be a comfortable road bike due to its relaxed ergos, but quickly realize that the handling and the tall seat are detriments for daily on-road riding.
What makes a bike good off-road will make it suffer poorly on the street, and vice versa.
There is a class of bikes out there I call the Faux-ADV. Bikes like the Multistrada, S1000XR, Versys, earlier VStroms, Tiger Sports, F650FGS which have relatively shorter suspension travel and cast 17" or 19" front wheels. These bikes make no pretension that their owners will ever ride dirt, but still have the relaxed ergos and styling of a real Adventure bike. Most of these also come shod with sport-touring tires or 90/10 tires from the factory, instead of the big-block knobbies that ADV bikes come with. These motorcycles get to offer a better road ride because they are more pavement-focused.
I went the other direction. I started taking my Faux-ish-ADV R1250GS more off-road, dented my 19" front wheel ($$$), bottomed out on the 7.5"/7.9" suspension, scraped the centerstand. So I got a DesertX Rally which has no centerstand for more clearance, more durable 21" front, and I almost never reach the end of my 9.8"/9.4" suspension. Tall, though - 36" seat height compared to my 29" inseam...
Worth it!
Thanks for that. I've tried, and didn't enjoy, going into the dirt / off roading as much as I would like.
Could be me, could be the wrong bike for the job...but not for me.
Anything new for me will be primarily road focused.
When my wife was shopping for a sport-touring bike ages ago, one that made the shortlist was a Faux-ADV, the Tiger 1050, the precursor to the current Tiger Sport 800 and 660s (also road-oriented).
The looks might be a bit polarizing, but she really liked the ergos, the power was decent (better torque specs than the current gen 800s and 660s) due to its larger displacement, had an interesting triple-cylinder powerplant, had lighter, cast street wheels (17"F/R) and shorter suspension. Also came with sporty rubber straight off the showroom floor. Would make for an awesome-handling, yet comfortable road bike. Being an older model, you might get a good price on one if it strikes your fancy.
I kinda hoped she would have picked this one instead of the R1200ST that she settled on.
Later models (post 2013) had the single-sided swingarm, which I think looks great!
Oh, I just found out there is already a term for "Faux-ADV".
They're calling it a "Crossover Motorcycle".
Here's a good article on the difference between ADVs and Crossovers:
/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/octane/5G44Y3FXWNFSTEQKCA355PXOPU.jpg)
Maximize Performance & Versatility With Nine Crossovers
From $9499 to $37,995, these nine crossovers are as versatile as their price ranges are broad.
www.cycleworld.com
