And Mercedes is making an 8 speed automatic because of "peer pressure"? A correctly spaced transmission with 6 gears versus 5 allows more precise tuning. Why not just stick a 4 speed on it? Or 3? There is a reason technology takes us to new levels. Nobody needs magnesium and carbon fiber components, but it's where it's going. You can put ABS on drum brakes as well as on discs. No brake dust, longer life, and unless you are racing it, heat buildup and fade are minimal. No one seems to want to go back that route either. Discs are lighter and easier to maintain. And as Shane pointed out they added the same electronics as the other bikes now. So why not concede there is at least a slim market appeal for Yamaha to stop being the only 5 speed out there? There are plenty of "not needed" examples out there. Even with a 6th gear I wouldn't buy one, so I'm sure Yamaha could care less what I, and numerous others apparently, think.
8 speed gear box...? I if it's automatic, fine. Manual? Hell no. I mean, you're talking Benz, there. In that case, you're likely talking about trying to balance MPG from a 500hp overkill engine and the "feel of power" that spending stupid money on a car demands.
:-) I hear you.
I'm not discounting the idea that newly designed and updated things are beneficial. If it increases strength, rigidity, decreases weight, increases functionality that makes a better experience for the driver/rider, makes it safer, etc... by all means.
But for me, I'm sticking with the real-world package in the FJR. Shifting for the sake of shifting sucks. Shifting to find the right rpm range for the speed and road...? Absolutely. I defy anyone to actually ride the FJR for an appreciable number of miles, and *objectively* show me where it falls on its face because it doesn't have the right grunt at any speed/gear combo, and the thing is a long way from running out of top-end. That's all I'm saying. At this point, it would gain nothing but peer pressure equivalence. And that's just not an idea I can support.
If you just like a 6 speed, you like the tradition of it, or you feel like it's a competing point, then fine. That's an opinion that every person is free to hold for himself. I'd never discount anyone's opinion when they're building a comparison sheet. For me... my opinion... I would rather shift fewer gears more suited to the engine/gearing than to shift more gears because of keeping up with the competitors' spec sheets.
But objectively... nah, the FJR is fine as is. They got it right.
If the engine didn't put out the torque that it does, and/or needed another 4000 RPM to achieve the desired overall performance, then by all means. Having spent 30,000 miles on an FJR, I never once - not cruising across the turnpike for hours on end at felony speeds, or carving up twisties in 15mph hairpins going into 100mph sweepers - ever felt like I needed another top gear or any closer ratios. Heck, considering you could easily go from 1st to 3rd to 5th and never lose any real-world driveability, the 5 speed is perfect, if not more than is *objectively needed*.
I would put money on the notion that Yamaha has already done a cost/benefit analysis and has decided that *if* there is a benefit to adding a 6th gear, it isn't enough of one to absorb the cost of the re-engineering. And given the space and design, a complete and full reworking of the gearbox / engine casing would be necessary.
Part of "better" is cost. Adding another $1500* to the bike takes away its 'better' status.
* - complete guesswork, bullshit number pulled from the ether.
