qcnr wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2019 6:52 am
Did you ride both?
Was there a significant difference between them?
I rode only the R version, and sat on the non-R (which really felt too low for me saddle-wise, but that could be corrected). I also felt the 790 R felt slightly lower than my 1090 R, but not necessarily narrow in the mid-section of the saddle and bike. I personally found significant differences between the ride and feel of the 1090 R and the 1090 non-R (the suspensions really felt different, and I preferred the R version not just for off-road capability but the on-road feel).
My friend definitely found the 790 R version significantly too tall, and he found the ride and power and suspension of the non-R completely to his liking (coming from a Honda VRF 800 and wanting to do some light green lanes with his next bike, but retaining long-range road comfort and speed). It's worth noting the non-R doesn't have the Rally mode settings of the R version, but that can be added for like £180. The dealer said the entire front end (fender and I think even forks) could be put on the non-R from the R. My friend liked the front fender of the R version better and may have selected it to be put on the non-R he bought.
Here are a few more notes from the ride I put on a comment on my youtube channel:
Question: If you were buying one right now, would you go for the 790 R or the 1090 R?
Answer: Good question— multipart answer.
Right now, pristine low-mile 2018 1090 Rs looks to be around £9k, compared to £12k for the new R. It would be hard to spend £3k more for the 790 R, since that is a lot of petrol.
If the prices were about the same, and I have 12k miles experience on the 1090 R, I’d go for the 1090 R again because the great feeling I had on the test ride is still there 12k miles later. On my last bike, I rode it for 3 years but was bored with it after six months. The 1090 R is far more challenging, and even if I ride another 48k miles on it I still likely won’t master all of its off-road capability. Keeps it interesting!
If the prices were the same and I had only an hour on both bikes, it might be a harder decision. The 790 R is easier to ride, and more compact. However, most of my big miles on are on motorways, and the 1090 R does great at speed with good wind protection. The 790 R is more exposed. If I were feeling like a challenge, it would be the 1090 R. If I were looking for more confidence sooner (for big-bike off road), it would be the 790 R.
Last, I have a 32 inch inseam. I think that’s the minimum for a 1090 R, even with a 20mm lower Touratech saddle. If my inseam were half an inch shorter, I would go for the 790 R or 790 regular. I rode the 1090 regular for a day, and I wasn’t taken by it. I think the 790 R or regular would be an excellent choice if I were shorter, since it has several options for lower seat height, even if it were more expensive.
,