The CB1100 Community Forum

I don't know what you guys who say it is a Sport Bike are thinking...

It's like the Honda Civic guys saying their civic si is a sports car.

Fun and sporty? Sure.
A sports car...most definitely not.

(05-01-2016, 03:55 AM)Guth_imp Wrote: [ -> ]Ah the Freddie Spencer video.

I'm guessing that Mr. Spencer could make just about any bike look like a sportbike given his riding skills. But one of the things that I like about the CB1100 is that it is not a sportbike. I enjoy the fact that it's just a great motorcycle. My riding ability represents just a small fraction of the ability that someone like Freddie enjoys. But I'm okay with that, I still enjoy riding. Obviously you can ride a CB1100 in a more spirited manner if you choose, and that's fine by me. If I were Freddie Spencer, I might have a hard time not wanting to put all of that talent to the test every time out.

My favorite thing about the CB1100 is that it doesn't look like a sportbike. Instead it looks like a bike that I should be riding. It matches up with the way I view myself as someone who rides. No disrespect intended towards any of you older guys that don't feel the same as me (to each their own and all that), but as I get older I'm having a harder time envisioning myself on a bike without the upright riding position of the CB. Me being on a bike that requires me to hunch down would just look a bit too much like I'm trying to fit in with the cool kids, lol. (Burt Munro I am not.) Not to mention that I find the upright ergonomics much more comfortable. While I can live with the ergonomics of my Hawk GT which still has an upright riding position (even though it has clip-ons, they are riser clip-ons), I'm much more comfortable on my CB1100. Obviously I like the CB1100 for what it is.

Older guys? I'm looking forward to my 60th birthday this year. I ride in the "A" group at track days and just did 44 laps last Saturday at one of my favorite racetracks. Have another one scheduled later this month. The CB1100 has become a "top tier" street bike for me (most likely to be ridden from among the choices I have) along with the ZX-10R. It has a level of quality that puts it right up there with anything money can buy. I say that with full confidence, especially after looking at the valve train.

To you, it does not look like a sportbike. But it sure did in 1982, something Freddie remembers. When I ride mine I ride it like it was meant to be ridden, hard and fast. If it looks like a sedate relic to millenials and Gen-X'rs, they are welcome to that view of it as well. Many versions of the CB engine were produced, from tourers to the red-hot CB1100F.

I think there should be a separate category for high performance on this site so the few guys who want to can wade straight into it.

At least let us acknowledge the history and heritage of this amazing bike.
[attachment=4581]
[attachment=4582]

(05-01-2016, 04:05 AM)The ferret_imp Wrote: [ -> ]another interesting capture from the video

[url=http://smg.photobucket.com/user/theferret111/media/freddie%205_zpsbjatitfe.jpg.html]

ball of the foot? don't think so

"Je suis Freddie Spencer"

That's Freddie's style. Maverick Vinales rides the same way. Only on the outside peg, though. Also he is preparing to upshift once he exits the turn; the bike has standard shifting, not GP shift, so he's got to get his toes under the lever to upshift.
At least this got a lot of folks interested! Three pages a'ready. Good deal. I love this bike. It can be all things to all people.

But he's still wearing lace up boots.

More of a naked Sport(-y) Bike than a cruiser. Of course that doesn't stop people from treating them as such. It's whatever the owner deems it to be for their purposes. You can take a sports car off roading if you like and can make a truck into a corner carver. Same with bikes. Build what you like. Don't expect everyone to agree upon it. Ride to your abilities, not someone else's.

I know I can't corner like Freddie on my CB. I also couldn't stack it full of luggage, raise my bars, and go touring.


Sent from an undisclosed location

(05-01-2016, 11:23 PM)WhiskeyUSMC1979_imp Wrote: [ -> ]More of a naked Sport(-y) Bike than a cruiser. Of course that doesn't stop people from treating them as such. It's whatever the owner deems it to be for their purposes. You can take a sports car off roading if you like and can make a truck into a corner carver. Same with bikes. Build what you like. Don't expect everyone to agree upon it. Ride to your abilities, not someone else's.

I know I can't corner like Freddie on my CB. I also couldn't stack it full of luggage, raise my bars, and go touring.


Sent from an undisclosed location

You are making far too much sense, lol!

Yep, thinking about all this, there seems to be a tendency to lump all bikes with a full fairing and more sporty riding position into the "sportbike" category.

Going back to just the 1970s, where our bike traces its ancestry, there are a lot of motorcycles that would without doubt be called sportbikes; I am sure the Kawasaki 500 and 750 triples were regarded as very hot bikes, and I think we can include the Norton Commando, Triumph Bonneville, and many others in the group. The British bikes were lighter and handled far better than anything else for a time, and they dominated desert racing and road racing. Now we consider them quaint and classic but in the 1960s and into the 1970s, until the advent of the 750 Four (CB750), they pretty much ruled the roost. The 750 Four was the first "superbike", if you will. It was considered an expert's machine, the top of the line.

Now we come to our retro-machine, the CB1100, and folks are so used to hearing about today's superbikes which put out over 200 HP (at the crankshaft), so the CB1100 looks like an anachronism. It appears benign, a good first bike. It's honest, doesn't have all that racy plastic and low bars.

Well, bikes are more advanced, but new riders are not. Just because technology has pushed the limits of what can be done with engineering doesn't mean people can start out on a bike that would have been considered fantastic just 35 years ago. Maybe that's why Honda, in the USA, anyway, classifies the CB1100 as a sport bike, as a caution. In the EU, regulations prevent a rider from operating a bike like the CB1100 until they've passed certain tests and have spent time on lower-powered motorcycles. That may explain why it's not called a sportbike in those areas. By the time you can own one, you've proven you know how to ride.

I also note that some comments seem to confuse a sport bike with a production racebike. They are very different. Your Kawasaki ZX-10R, Honda CBR1000RR, Aprilia RSV1000 and the like are homologated production racebikes built under a set of strictures set forth by various racing organizations. But here again, a Honda CBR300, Ninja 300, KTM RC390, or Yamaha R3 looks almost exactly like these bigger machines, but they are not production racebikes. They have rather high bars and low footpegs and are designed as beginner motorcycles or economical transportation. Make no mistake, those bikes can haul in the turns and they are all raced in various clubs, but they're not superbikes.

Any bike can be ridden for sport but there is no set of criteria that can be universally applied to determine what a sportbike is. Is it power, cornering clearance, looks, or the electronics package? No. I don't think anyone would argue much over the idea a Gold Wing or Road King aren't considered sport bikes in the usual sense, but those bike come from a very different design philosophy than the CB1100, whose DNA is traced right back to the very first superbikes and sportbikes.

(05-01-2016, 01:44 PM)EmptySea_imp Wrote: [ -> ]But he's still wearing lace up boots.

Yep, sneakers, really, and jeans and some kind of light jacket. Fits the story. Basically the translation of what is said at the cafe is "How the heck are you going so fast on that dang bike?" and Freddie replies, "It's the talent. I'm Freddie Spencer." So all that frustrated work the other guy is doing, pouring in nitromethane racing fuel, reworking his bike, was for nothing. It's talent.

Yeah, even if the CB had really good suspension and great tires, it wouldn't come close to a 10 year old true sportbike at the track. Suspension and frame geometry being the key here. I was back roading my CB this weekend and got surprised a couple of times. Nothing major, just that , "Oh yeah, now I remember" thing. I had a blast.

My local track isn't sponsoring another track day until June.....Booooooo.

(05-02-2016, 12:05 AM)Ulvetanna_imp Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-01-2016, 11:23 PM)WhiskeyUSMC1979_imp Wrote: [ -> ]More of a naked Sport(-y) Bike than a cruiser. Of course that doesn't stop people from treating them as such. It's whatever the owner deems it to be for their purposes. You can take a sports car off roading if you like and can make a truck into a corner carver. Same with bikes. Build what you like. Don't expect everyone to agree upon it. Ride to your abilities, not someone else's.

I know I can't corner like Freddie on my CB. I also couldn't stack it full of luggage, raise my bars, and go touring.


Sent from an undisclosed location

You are making far too much sense, lol!

Yep, thinking about all this, there seems to be a tendency to lump all bikes with a full fairing and more sporty riding position into the "sportbike" category.

Going back to just the 1970s, where our bike traces its ancestry, there are a lot of motorcycles that would without doubt be called sportbikes; I am sure the Kawasaki 500 and 750 triples were regarded as very hot bikes, and I think we can include the Norton Commando, Triumph Bonneville, and many others in the group. The British bikes were lighter and handled far better than anything else for a time, and they dominated desert racing and road racing. Now we consider them quaint and classic but in the 1960s and into the 1970s, until the advent of the 750 Four (CB750), they pretty much ruled the roost. The 750 Four was the first "superbike", if you will. It was considered an expert's machine, the top of the line.

Now we come to our retro-machine, the CB1100, and folks are so used to hearing about today's superbikes which put out over 200 HP (at the crankshaft), so the CB1100 looks like an anachronism. It appears benign, a good first bike. It's honest, doesn't have all that racy plastic and low bars.

Well, bikes are more advanced, but new riders are not. Just because technology has pushed the limits of what can be done with engineering doesn't mean people can start out on a bike that would have been considered fantastic just 35 years ago. Maybe that's why Honda, in the USA, anyway, classifies the CB1100 as a sport bike, as a caution. In the EU, regulations prevent a rider from operating a bike like the CB1100 until they've passed certain tests and have spent time on lower-powered motorcycles. That may explain why it's not called a sportbike in those areas. By the time you can own one, you've proven you know how to ride.

I also note that some comments seem to confuse a sport bike with a production racebike. They are very different. Your Kawasaki ZX-10R, Honda CBR1000RR, Aprilia RSV1000 and the like are homologated production racebikes built under a set of strictures set forth by various racing organizations. But here again, a Honda CBR300, Ninja 300, KTM RC390, or Yamaha R3 looks almost exactly like these bigger machines, but they are not production racebikes. They have rather high bars and low footpegs and are designed as beginner motorcycles or economical transportation. Make no mistake, those bikes can haul in the turns and they are all raced in various clubs, but they're not superbikes.

Any bike can be ridden for sport but there is no set of criteria that can be universally applied to determine what a sportbike is. Is it power, cornering clearance, looks, or the electronics package? No. I don't think anyone would argue much over the idea a Gold Wing or Road King aren't considered sport bikes in the usual sense, but those bike come from a very different design philosophy than the CB1100, whose DNA is traced right back to the very first superbikes and sportbikes.

(05-01-2016, 01:44 PM)EmptySea_imp Wrote: [ -> ]But he's still wearing lace up boots.

Yep, sneakers, really, and jeans and some kind of light jacket. Fits the story. Basically the translation of what is said at the cafe is "How the heck are you going so fast on that dang bike?" and Freddie replies, "It's the talent. I'm Freddie Spencer." So all that frustrated work the other guy is doing, pouring in nitromethane racing fuel, reworking his bike, was for nothing. It's talent.

And in Australia too. It's amazing to me that bikes up to 650cc, even slightly detuned, can be considered to be Learner Approved Motorcycles. Back in the day one started out on a 125 or 175 or, if you were a real goose, a 350. A 650 or 750 was powerful beyond imagining. If you rode a British bike, you liked wrenching more than riding.

(05-02-2016, 09:51 AM)Cormanus_imp Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-02-2016, 12:05 AM)Ulvetanna_imp Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-01-2016, 11:23 PM)WhiskeyUSMC1979_imp Wrote: [ -> ]More of a naked Sport(-y) Bike than a cruiser. Of course that doesn't stop people from treating them as such. It's whatever the owner deems it to be for their purposes. You can take a sports car off roading if you like and can make a truck into a corner carver. Same with bikes. Build what you like. Don't expect everyone to agree upon it. Ride to your abilities, not someone else's.

I know I can't corner like Freddie on my CB. I also couldn't stack it full of luggage, raise my bars, and go touring.


Sent from an undisclosed location

You are making far too much sense, lol!

Yep, thinking about all this, there seems to be a tendency to lump all bikes with a full fairing and more sporty riding position into the "sportbike" category.

Going back to just the 1970s, where our bike traces its ancestry, there are a lot of motorcycles that would without doubt be called sportbikes; I am sure the Kawasaki 500 and 750 triples were regarded as very hot bikes, and I think we can include the Norton Commando, Triumph Bonneville, and many others in the group. The British bikes were lighter and handled far better than anything else for a time, and they dominated desert racing and road racing. Now we consider them quaint and classic but in the 1960s and into the 1970s, until the advent of the 750 Four (CB750), they pretty much ruled the roost. The 750 Four was the first "superbike", if you will. It was considered an expert's machine, the top of the line.

Now we come to our retro-machine, the CB1100, and folks are so used to hearing about today's superbikes which put out over 200 HP (at the crankshaft), so the CB1100 looks like an anachronism. It appears benign, a good first bike. It's honest, doesn't have all that racy plastic and low bars.

Well, bikes are more advanced, but new riders are not. Just because technology has pushed the limits of what can be done with engineering doesn't mean people can start out on a bike that would have been considered fantastic just 35 years ago. Maybe that's why Honda, in the USA, anyway, classifies the CB1100 as a sport bike, as a caution. In the EU, regulations prevent a rider from operating a bike like the CB1100 until they've passed certain tests and have spent time on lower-powered motorcycles. That may explain why it's not called a sportbike in those areas. By the time you can own one, you've proven you know how to ride.

I also note that some comments seem to confuse a sport bike with a production racebike. They are very different. Your Kawasaki ZX-10R, Honda CBR1000RR, Aprilia RSV1000 and the like are homologated production racebikes built under a set of strictures set forth by various racing organizations. But here again, a Honda CBR300, Ninja 300, KTM RC390, or Yamaha R3 looks almost exactly like these bigger machines, but they are not production racebikes. They have rather high bars and low footpegs and are designed as beginner motorcycles or economical transportation. Make no mistake, those bikes can haul in the turns and they are all raced in various clubs, but they're not superbikes.

Any bike can be ridden for sport but there is no set of criteria that can be universally applied to determine what a sportbike is. Is it power, cornering clearance, looks, or the electronics package? No. I don't think anyone would argue much over the idea a Gold Wing or Road King aren't considered sport bikes in the usual sense, but those bike come from a very different design philosophy than the CB1100, whose DNA is traced right back to the very first superbikes and sportbikes.

(05-01-2016, 01:44 PM)EmptySea_imp Wrote: [ -> ]But he's still wearing lace up boots.

Yep, sneakers, really, and jeans and some kind of light jacket. Fits the story. Basically the translation of what is said at the cafe is "How the heck are you going so fast on that dang bike?" and Freddie replies, "It's the talent. I'm Freddie Spencer." So all that frustrated work the other guy is doing, pouring in nitromethane racing fuel, reworking his bike, was for nothing. It's talent.

And in Australia too. It's amazing to me that bikes up to 650cc, even slightly detuned, can be considered to be Learner Approved Motorcycles. Back in the day one started out on a 125 or 175 or, if you were a real goose, a 350. A 650 or 750 was powerful beyond imagining. If you rode a British bike, you liked wrenching more than riding.

And in Australia too. It's amazing to me that bikes up to 650cc, even slightly detuned, can be considered to be Learner Approved Motorcycles. Back in the day one started out on a 125 or 175 or, if you were a real goose, a 350. A 650 or 750 was powerful beyond imagining. If you rode a British bike, you liked wrenching more than riding. This is the thing in Canada too. We have zero restrictions regarding bike size on a learners. The common decision of every new rider seems to be wheather to start on a 600cc Supersport or wheather a liter bike can work as as beginners bike if your "careful with the throttle."

(05-02-2016, 09:51 AM)Cormanus_imp Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-02-2016, 12:05 AM)Ulvetanna_imp Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-01-2016, 11:23 PM)WhiskeyUSMC1979_imp Wrote: [ -> ]More of a naked Sport(-y) Bike than a cruiser. Of course that doesn't stop people from treating them as such. It's whatever the owner deems it to be for their purposes. You can take a sports car off roading if you like and can make a truck into a corner carver. Same with bikes. Build what you like. Don't expect everyone to agree upon it. Ride to your abilities, not someone else's.

I know I can't corner like Freddie on my CB. I also couldn't stack it full of luggage, raise my bars, and go touring.


Sent from an undisclosed location

You are making far too much sense, lol!

Yep, thinking about all this, there seems to be a tendency to lump all bikes with a full fairing and more sporty riding position into the "sportbike" category.

Going back to just the 1970s, where our bike traces its ancestry, there are a lot of motorcycles that would without doubt be called sportbikes; I am sure the Kawasaki 500 and 750 triples were regarded as very hot bikes, and I think we can include the Norton Commando, Triumph Bonneville, and many others in the group. The British bikes were lighter and handled far better than anything else for a time, and they dominated desert racing and road racing. Now we consider them quaint and classic but in the 1960s and into the 1970s, until the advent of the 750 Four (CB750), they pretty much ruled the roost. The 750 Four was the first "superbike", if you will. It was considered an expert's machine, the top of the line.

Now we come to our retro-machine, the CB1100, and folks are so used to hearing about today's superbikes which put out over 200 HP (at the crankshaft), so the CB1100 looks like an anachronism. It appears benign, a good first bike. It's honest, doesn't have all that racy plastic and low bars.

Well, bikes are more advanced, but new riders are not. Just because technology has pushed the limits of what can be done with engineering doesn't mean people can start out on a bike that would have been considered fantastic just 35 years ago. Maybe that's why Honda, in the USA, anyway, classifies the CB1100 as a sport bike, as a caution. In the EU, regulations prevent a rider from operating a bike like the CB1100 until they've passed certain tests and have spent time on lower-powered motorcycles. That may explain why it's not called a sportbike in those areas. By the time you can own one, you've proven you know how to ride.

I also note that some comments seem to confuse a sport bike with a production racebike. They are very different. Your Kawasaki ZX-10R, Honda CBR1000RR, Aprilia RSV1000 and the like are homologated production racebikes built under a set of strictures set forth by various racing organizations. But here again, a Honda CBR300, Ninja 300, KTM RC390, or Yamaha R3 looks almost exactly like these bigger machines, but they are not production racebikes. They have rather high bars and low footpegs and are designed as beginner motorcycles or economical transportation. Make no mistake, those bikes can haul in the turns and they are all raced in various clubs, but they're not superbikes.

Any bike can be ridden for sport but there is no set of criteria that can be universally applied to determine what a sportbike is. Is it power, cornering clearance, looks, or the electronics package? No. I don't think anyone would argue much over the idea a Gold Wing or Road King aren't considered sport bikes in the usual sense, but those bike come from a very different design philosophy than the CB1100, whose DNA is traced right back to the very first superbikes and sportbikes.

(05-01-2016, 01:44 PM)EmptySea_imp Wrote: [ -> ]But he's still wearing lace up boots.

Yep, sneakers, really, and jeans and some kind of light jacket. Fits the story. Basically the translation of what is said at the cafe is "How the heck are you going so fast on that dang bike?" and Freddie replies, "It's the talent. I'm Freddie Spencer." So all that frustrated work the other guy is doing, pouring in nitromethane racing fuel, reworking his bike, was for nothing. It's talent.

And in Australia too. It's amazing to me that bikes up to 650cc, even slightly detuned, can be considered to be Learner Approved Motorcycles. Back in the day one started out on a 125 or 175 or, if you were a real goose, a 350. A 650 or 750 was powerful beyond imagining. If you rode a British bike, you liked wrenching more than riding.

And in Australia too. It's amazing to me that bikes up to 650cc, even slightly detuned, can be considered to be Learner Approved Motorcycles. Back in the day one started out on a 125 or 175 or, if you were a real goose, a 350. A 650 or 750 was powerful beyond imagining. If you rode a British bike, you liked wrenching more than riding. +1 I am with you there.

(05-02-2016, 10:59 AM)kmoney_imp Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-02-2016, 09:51 AM)Cormanus_imp Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-02-2016, 12:05 AM)Ulvetanna_imp Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-01-2016, 11:23 PM)WhiskeyUSMC1979_imp Wrote: [ -> ]More of a naked Sport(-y) Bike than a cruiser. Of course that doesn't stop people from treating them as such. It's whatever the owner deems it to be for their purposes. You can take a sports car off roading if you like and can make a truck into a corner carver. Same with bikes. Build what you like. Don't expect everyone to agree upon it. Ride to your abilities, not someone else's.

I know I can't corner like Freddie on my CB. I also couldn't stack it full of luggage, raise my bars, and go touring.


Sent from an undisclosed location

You are making far too much sense, lol!

Yep, thinking about all this, there seems to be a tendency to lump all bikes with a full fairing and more sporty riding position into the "sportbike" category.

Going back to just the 1970s, where our bike traces its ancestry, there are a lot of motorcycles that would without doubt be called sportbikes; I am sure the Kawasaki 500 and 750 triples were regarded as very hot bikes, and I think we can include the Norton Commando, Triumph Bonneville, and many others in the group. The British bikes were lighter and handled far better than anything else for a time, and they dominated desert racing and road racing. Now we consider them quaint and classic but in the 1960s and into the 1970s, until the advent of the 750 Four (CB750), they pretty much ruled the roost. The 750 Four was the first "superbike", if you will. It was considered an expert's machine, the top of the line.

Now we come to our retro-machine, the CB1100, and folks are so used to hearing about today's superbikes which put out over 200 HP (at the crankshaft), so the CB1100 looks like an anachronism. It appears benign, a good first bike. It's honest, doesn't have all that racy plastic and low bars.

Well, bikes are more advanced, but new riders are not. Just because technology has pushed the limits of what can be done with engineering doesn't mean people can start out on a bike that would have been considered fantastic just 35 years ago. Maybe that's why Honda, in the USA, anyway, classifies the CB1100 as a sport bike, as a caution. In the EU, regulations prevent a rider from operating a bike like the CB1100 until they've passed certain tests and have spent time on lower-powered motorcycles. That may explain why it's not called a sportbike in those areas. By the time you can own one, you've proven you know how to ride.

I also note that some comments seem to confuse a sport bike with a production racebike. They are very different. Your Kawasaki ZX-10R, Honda CBR1000RR, Aprilia RSV1000 and the like are homologated production racebikes built under a set of strictures set forth by various racing organizations. But here again, a Honda CBR300, Ninja 300, KTM RC390, or Yamaha R3 looks almost exactly like these bigger machines, but they are not production racebikes. They have rather high bars and low footpegs and are designed as beginner motorcycles or economical transportation. Make no mistake, those bikes can haul in the turns and they are all raced in various clubs, but they're not superbikes.

Any bike can be ridden for sport but there is no set of criteria that can be universally applied to determine what a sportbike is. Is it power, cornering clearance, looks, or the electronics package? No. I don't think anyone would argue much over the idea a Gold Wing or Road King aren't considered sport bikes in the usual sense, but those bike come from a very different design philosophy than the CB1100, whose DNA is traced right back to the very first superbikes and sportbikes.

(05-01-2016, 01:44 PM)EmptySea_imp Wrote: [ -> ]But he's still wearing lace up boots.

Yep, sneakers, really, and jeans and some kind of light jacket. Fits the story. Basically the translation of what is said at the cafe is "How the heck are you going so fast on that dang bike?" and Freddie replies, "It's the talent. I'm Freddie Spencer." So all that frustrated work the other guy is doing, pouring in nitromethane racing fuel, reworking his bike, was for nothing. It's talent.

And in Australia too. It's amazing to me that bikes up to 650cc, even slightly detuned, can be considered to be Learner Approved Motorcycles. Back in the day one started out on a 125 or 175 or, if you were a real goose, a 350. A 650 or 750 was powerful beyond imagining. If you rode a British bike, you liked wrenching more than riding.

And in Australia too. It's amazing to me that bikes up to 650cc, even slightly detuned, can be considered to be Learner Approved Motorcycles. Back in the day one started out on a 125 or 175 or, if you were a real goose, a 350. A 650 or 750 was powerful beyond imagining. If you rode a British bike, you liked wrenching more than riding. This is the thing in Canada too. We have zero restrictions regarding bike size on a learners. The common decision of every new rider seems to be wheather to start on a 600cc Supersport or wheather a liter bike can work as as beginners bike if your "careful with the throttle."

And in Australia too. It's amazing to me that bikes up to 650cc, even slightly detuned, can be considered to be Learner Approved Motorcycles. Back in the day one started out on a 125 or 175 or, if you were a real goose, a 350. A 650 or 750 was powerful beyond imagining. If you rode a British bike, you liked wrenching more than riding. This is the thing in Canada too. We have zero restrictions regarding bike size on a learners. The common decision of every new rider seems to be wheather to start on a 600cc Supersport or wheather a liter bike can work as as beginners bike if your "careful with the throttle." lol, yeah. Not a good strategy.

(05-01-2016, 09:00 AM)0011bc_imp Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know what you guys who say it is a Sport Bike are thinking...

It's like the Honda Civic guys saying their civic si is a sports car.

Fun and sporty? Sure.
A sports car...most definitely not.

Hmm they are probably thinking it's a sport bike because Honda labels it as a SPORT BIKE.

CB1100 is not:[ul] [li]Cruiser[/li] [li]Dirt Bike[/li] [li]Dual Sport[/li] [li]Supersport[/li] [li]Adventure Bike[/li] [li]Touring
[/li][/ul]
What does that leave?A Sport Bike or a Standard. I consider it a standard bike, but it has sporty features most standards don't, like an inline 4. Not to mention every accessory you can buy is made by sport bike companies.

It's easy to see why people would call this a sport bike when the manufactured calls it a dang sport bike.

[url=http://s305.photobucket.com/user/mikecouts/media/SPORT_zpshjoydo1d.png.html]