1998 or 2003

Only on 98-99, 00-01 did not have the enricher.

 

One of the things that changed from 5th to 6th is the frame. The 6th gen was given a stouter frame AND heavier subframe in order to handle the load of rear hard bags + topcase + passenger. Then, Honda also fitted it with stouter springs. The result is the bike rides pretty firm right off the bat. That's why it weighs so much more than a 5th gen. However, this stouter chassis means you can push a 6th gen pretty hard without the stock suspension wallowing and running out of ground clearance. That's why I said if a rider is heavy, like over 200 lbs., the 6th gen's base suspension works better at a faster pace. However, you can tweak the preloads on the 5th gen to get better handling at a faster pace....up to a point. After a certain point it just gets harsh and bouncy. This is also true with the 6th gen except its limits are higher. Having said that, the 5th gen is just a better shock and forks away from exceeding the handling performance of a 6th gen. In fact I think the 5th gen is a better basis to start with if you really want to build a canyon/track weapon that can tour.

When I had my 5th Gen, I just tweaked the stock suspension a bit and got it to handle pretty sweet. It was right at a pivot point between being too firm and being overly soft. I got it so it was a bit too firm but in return it gave me good handling at a fast pace. OTOH, I could ride my 6th gen just as fast BEFORE I needed to tweak its suspenion. Then there is ground clearance--the 6th gen has a lot more of it.

Honestly though, if you own a 5th Gen, the grass isn't generally greener with a 6th gen. They're pretty similar and you only will notice the difference when you push them hard in the corners. So given equal riders the 6th gen will "feel" better in the corners using OEM suspension.

 

I like the way the arguments are flowing... very constructive! Thanks guys!
Too bad Honda messed up so bad with the electrical part of their bikes... I was looking into getting the XX 1100, but I found out the issues with RR, CCT and stator failure witch to me, made the bike unreliable... should not be the case for a sport-tourer!
How is the electrical dash cluster on the 5th? Is it faulty like the 6th?

 

I think the bottom line is that you can't lose with either bike. Neither bike has any real functional, mechanical or reliability issues (except for the RR). I've owned both a 5th and 6th Gen and to me, they were extremely close in EVERY category - power, handling, etc. I think the thread owner needs to just ride them and see what feels better to him. The other part of it is the visual aspect of it. Some prefer the looks of one over the other - that to me is the biggest difference between the two bikes.

 

I felt the difference right away, especially when I pushed it in the corners pretty hard. Maybe it was just the suspenders on the 6th gen that was firmer right off the bat.

 

I agree. Its not like talking about difference in reliability between a Honda and a Yugo. I was nitpicking trying to compare the two bikes. I believe the difference in handling felt between stock 5th gen and stock 6th gen is due to the firmer stock suspension on the 6th gen. Considering the price difference you can buy the 5th gen and put aftermarket suspenders and the bike will handle way better than any 6th gen can do with the stock susp for the same price. But if the price difference was smaller then my opinion might be different.

The OP has to compare the true cost of the two bikes by evaluating both bikes carefully and figuring out how much it would cost to make them both reliable and ready for a multi-day trip. On more expensive or newer bikes the cost of taking care of minor issues or getting tires or chain might not matter much as it will be small in comparison to the purchase price. For a $3000 budget minor issues are easily a big percentage of the purchase price.

Ultimately its going to come down to the OP's budget for total cost of ownership and personal preference on the looks and feel of the bike.

 

While I like the look of most of the VFR's, and I also like the look of the 5th gen. The 6th gen looks very contemporary. The 5th Gen looks traditional, which is now beginning to look different because many bikes now look like the 6th gen! Funny how that works out.

 

So there is no other difference then the weight caused by the frame/subframe, design and engine/distribution + v tech...
Faults are identical? Do not say there are no faults (wire cluster, CCT, stator-alternator, power regulator....)
The design in my eyes, 6th gen wins by far, it seams it rides better, at least on the turns and with luggage and/or wife and sells quicker in case of moving on to something else...

How wrong/correct am I in my conclusion???

 

I'd have to agree with that. Most Japanese bikes have woeful stock suspension and horrible seating.
I reckon the best value purchases are low mileage second hand bikes, as you can buy significantly lower than the cost of a new one and have money left to put toward suspension/seats.

 

I owned an '01 and now an '07. Neither had any electrical faults. But some bikes, maybe the earlier versions of the 5th/6th Gens had some weaknesses in their electrical systems. The 6th Gens had a factory recall campaign for their wiring looms? I've never heard of their CCT failing but I'll believe other owner's testimonials on these issues.

The 6th gen will NOT "ride" better. It will handle better thanks to its stouter suspension. Like I said, both generations have a limited suspension adjustment capability. That is, you can only go so far before they become harsh/bouncy. The problem is they do not allow much damping adjustment. The rear shock is only adjustable for rebound damping and the front forks have no adjustments for damping! So it's kind of hard to "tune" it for handling and ride at the same time. It's possible but with more than a few compromises. It's not crap suspension...I would say "barely adequate".

I do agree with your conclusion. If you're going to be carrying luggage + wife, get the 6th Gen.

 

OK, time to hijack my thread back....
I had a chance to throw a leg over both bikes. Short story is that the '98 felt smaller. Crotch to ground and handlebar reach. The reach could have been a visual trick with the fairing as it was closer to the bars than on the 2003/2004. The 2004 felt better in the seat and bar reach. I did not ride either of them hard so I can not toss that evaluation into the mix. I imagine the power delivery to be similar. The 2004 sounded better and felt better to me. The gear whine on the '98 is cool, wish they all had that.
Purchase will be this week. Stay tuned for the results and thank you all for your contributions. I took all of them with me on the test rides and used them as consulting material. (no kidding!)

and I found this old thing.... excuse the obnoxious long URL
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...1eqpopaES9ZuAHA&bvm=bv.41642243,d.b2I&cad=rja

 

As luck would have it, I waited too long. I took an extra week so that I could buy both of them. Yes , yes , yes, I know I am a greedy prick.... but karma stepped up her game and dashed my hopes to bits.
Back on the market to search for another VFR. Chat with you all soon!

 

on my 6th gen, the CCT front and rear were changed at 109,619km (68,114 miles) and stator burned out at about 155,000 km (96,313 miles). The CCT did not happen suddenly. You could hear that coming. With those kind of miles on the bike and the hard riding I did, I don't find these repairs unreasonable.

 

it sure was a good thing that those other two sold fast... I stumbled upon another 1998 VFR, one owner, 11.5K miles. Bone stock, flawless body work, almost entirely scratch free/ It still had the stock Dunlop ShiteMax tires on it. (weathered and cracked.) The ownder just had it serviced, put in a new battery and a new rectifier.
Without any hesitation, I test rode it and purchased it this evening. Will post pics in the noob section!

 

Congrats!! Saw the pic in the other post. I was always told that red is the fastest color