Owner satisfaction:

1. Victory (notable high ratings for handling)
2. Harley Davidson (notable high ratings for handling)
3. Honda
4. BMW
5. Can-am
6. Ducati
7. Yamaha (dinged for comfort)
8. Triumph (dinged for comfort)
9. Kawasaki (dinged for comfort)
10. Suzuki (dinged for comfort)

High cost of maintenance was flagged by owners for Harley, BMW, Can-am and Ducati.

In terms of brand reliability: percent repairs and serious problems reported by owners:

1. Yamaha 11%
2. Suzuki 12%
3. Honda 13%
4. Kawasaki 15%
5. Victory 17%
6. Harley Davidson 26%
7. Triumph 29%
8. Ducati 33%
9. BMW 40%
10. Can-am 42%

Quote:

Yamaha, Suzuki, Honda and Kawasaki are among the more reliable motorcycle brands. Conversely, Triumph, Ducati, BMW and Can-Am are among the more repair-prone brands. That's what we found based on the feedback of more than 11,000 subscribers reporting on over 12,300 motorcycles purchased new between 2008 and 2014. The graph shows the percentage of motorcycles from each brand that we predict will need a repair by the fourth year of ownership. Our statistical model estimates failure rates for 4-year-old motorcycles not covered by a service contract and adjusts for mileage driven over a 12-month period. The mean annual mileage is around 3,800 among all motorcycles included in this analysis. Differences of fewer than 10 points between brands are not meaningful. Note that models within a brand may vary, and design or manufacture changes may affect future reliability. Still, choosing a brand with a good repair estimate can improve your odds of getting a reliable motorcycle.

Not enough owners yet for Indian to be rated. Funny, the three most popular big bike brands, Harley, BMW and Triumph are the worst for reliability.

 

Consumer reports hates domestic vehicles and adores Japanese brands. Fine for other things but I wouldn't waste my time on their vehicle ratings.

 

Of course a Triumph Bonneville will get a ding for comfort compared to a Harley Road King. Are they talking strictly cruisers or a mix of cruisers, sport bikes, retro, adventure touring, etc.

Not enough information given to take this thread seriously.

 

Any rating system most times is not worth the paper it is written on. Always a lot of bias involved just like the TV show rating experts and why we never see them on the tube anymore.

 

^^ This

A Triumph Daytona 675 sucks for comfort when doing 50+ miles on a long straight interstate, but they're made to be on a track and not on a highway. And what kind of repair counts towards their survey and is it weighted? Obviously needing a new transmission in one motorcycle is not the same as a foot control coming loose.

 

I stopped taking consumer reports seriously years (decades) ago. If you want info on a washing machine, fine. Anything more personal, not so much.

I used to into bicycling and their reviews of bicycles was pathetic to the point that I questioned if they even rode them before writing their reviews. YMMV.

 

I agree. My Harley is from 2006. Never have had a problem. I guess they didn't ask me.

 

Consumer Reports? What a joke.

In 1966 they reported that the Porsche 911 Targa was a bad design due to poor handling characteristics. Haven't listened to those idiots since.

 

I agree.

I subscribed to CR, I'm ashamed to admit, shortly after buying a new home and beginning to purchase the usual array of "new owner" items for it. "What a useless goddamn service" !!

Their rating criteria, near as I can tell, are geared to the most extremely parsimonious of buyers. I wouldn't allow most of the junk, on their "recommended" list, on my property. They should change the name to "Crap Reports".

"OK, rant over. I just don't like CR".

 

This make no sense. The only way this could be close to credible is if they break out the type of bike and have a large sample base.