+- The CB1100 Community Forum (https://cb1100forum.net/forum)
+-- Forum: Honda CB1100 Discussions (https://cb1100forum.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: General Discussion (https://cb1100forum.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: Retro bikes, comparison. (/showthread.php?tid=3110)
RE: Retro bikes, comparison. - JustPassinThru_imp - 04-04-2015
(04-04-2015, 09:55 AM)Rboe_imp Wrote: It seems to me many of the guys that bought then sold their CB's were expecting a Camaro but got a Caprice instead. With resources like this forum that is just not doing due diligence, no fault of the bike at all. She is pretty much just what Honda wanted to put out there; and for many of the folks that bought her, just what we were looking for. I'm a bit surprised, being aging Boomers, there aren't more of us.
If Honda built a classic vertical twin like the old CB450 I'd be quite keen on getting one of those too.
Another "retro" bike but with EFI is the Moto Guzzi V7. Shaft drive, light, screw adjusted valve tappets - and right out there in the open so easy peasy to work on. Many complain about its' "low" horse power but she is a light bike and if your belt still have plenty of expansion holes, it will put a big grin on your face. My old 550 KX only had about 50 horses and she put me in the hospital several times and one speeding ticket.
There are lots of bikes out there to choose from; if a particular machine does not do it for you I'm sure one of the others will. It's also very hard to find a bad bike. Most are built very well and complaints typically revolve around nit pics, not true debacles. I submit that in general there are no bad bikes, just riders that picked the wrong bike. Get divorced and keep looking!
I like that comparison. I'm not a young guy or a new rider; and popping wheelies was never my thing. A legal-limit cruiser, with stock muffler, was always my thing.
I hate to think of it as a Caprice; but it's probably fitting. If I wanted competition there's a whole array of Ninjas and other like models. My back hurts just thinking about that crouched posture...
I would have liked more power; but it's not a deal-breaker. I can beat traffic at lights; and that's all I need. I can make it go fast enough I think I'm getting blown off.
I'm suited. Even in the day, few street racers had the guts to open up their 750s. I only broke 100 twice; once five years ago on a BMW GS on an empty South Dakota road; and once as a new rider, thirty years ago, intoxicated and riding.
Twice is enough. More than enough. I'm glad that bike, time and money to do it, all came together.
RE: Retro bikes, comparison. - ChipBeck_imp - 04-04-2015
(04-04-2015, 01:25 AM)The ferret_imp Wrote: pearsonm said "I think that illustrates what a great job Triumph did with the Bonneville T100 platform."
Triumph purists don't think they did such a stellar job, and will point out the gas tank is out of proportion, the pipes are all wrong, no space around the motor, and it's slower than the original. It's brakes are poor, seat horrible and handling only fair, and many don't care that the FI is disguised as carburetors.
I will give credit to Triumph for making the retro popular again. Then again, at the time they were basically the only game in town besides the Royal Enfield and Kawasaki W 650.
Many of us on this board bought Triumph Bonneville T-100's (my self included) and sold them to get this CB 1100.
I sold my T-100 and much prefer the CB1100.
Chip
RE: Retro bikes, comparison. - Chapomis_imp - 04-04-2015
I almost did, it was on my short list before I knew the CB existed. Guess I got to skip a generation.
RE: Retro bikes, comparison. - uscgmac_imp - 04-04-2015
Don't get me wrong guys, I'm very happy with the bike. Truly happy, just need a little getting used to the more relaxed life style of the bike. In regards to the power, was just expecting a 2014 bike with over 1100 CC to have a little more kick. I have a 900lb touring bike, full tour pack so I'm used to the laid back cruise mode. I just never really thought a modern inline 4 would be capped at 112mph. I also understand that the motor is more than capable to exceed that just don't know why they won't let us have it out of the box. I like to have the option to be a little aggressive if i want. Still love the bike and when I'm up around the Max I think it will be enough to keep me happy. I know some of the guys here are not to keen on playing around the 100+ mark but on the highway passing trucks and keeping my distance from the crowd of cagers I like to get up in the higher zone and create my distance. On my Z1000 I would be up over 140 with a simple twist within seconds and back down within seconds as well. Like I said just getting used to it and its all good.
Also, by no means am I comparing this bike to my old Z1000. I know its two totally different animals just saying a top speed of 120 to 125 would have been ideal for me. I went to this bike for the styling and comfort plus reliability and uniqueness it offers so I will get over the speed thing and eventually it will be a safer and wiser choice for me.
RE: Retro bikes, comparison. - redbirds_imp - 04-04-2015
Honda may have built in the speed limitation because of the OE tires. Anyway, a higher top speed is easily had with a re-flash of the ECU as described on other posts.
RE: Retro bikes, comparison. - the Ferret - 04-04-2015
we have discussed this before but for the benefit of those new to the board. The bike was originally intended for Japanese home market. Japan has a domestic national speed limit of 180 kms or 112 mph and the bikes ECU was set up for that. ALL bikes sold in the Japanese market are so enabled. Even the Kaw Z1000. Even the new R1M Yamaha. It's their law.
Most mfgs use a different ECU for exported bikes but ALL motorcycles outside of Japan are electronically speed limited by the European agreement of 187 mph. The race is how fast they can get to 187 mph. There are 200 hp bikes, but there are not 200 mph bikes, even if the mfgs are capable of producing them.
Why Honda chose to ship this one outside the US with the Japanese Domestic limit of 180 kmh is anyone's guess, but my guess is the nature of the riders Honda was going to sell it to. Their targeted demographic. I can imagine a discussion where engineers said "are we going to de-restrict this bike?" And another said "why? old guys are going to buy it. If anyone wants to go faster, they can buy our CBR 1000 which will go 170 mph."
RE: Retro bikes, comparison. - ClassicVW_imp - 04-04-2015
(04-04-2015, 10:24 PM)The ferret_imp Wrote: we have discussed this before but for the benefit of those new to the board. The bike was originally intended for Japanese home market. Japan has a domestic national speed limit of 180 kms or 112 mph and the bikes ECU was set up for that. ALL bikes sold in the Japanese market are so enabled. Even the Kaw Z1000. Even the new R1M Yamaha. It's their law.
Most mfgs use a different ECU for exported bikes but ALL motorcycles outside of Japan are electronically speed limited by the European agreement of 187 mph. The race is how fast they can get to 187 mph. There are 200 hp bikes, but there are not 200 mph bikes, even if the mfgs are capable of producing them.
Why Honda chose to ship this one outside the US with the Japanese Domestic limit of 180 kmh is anyone's guess, but my guess is the nature of the riders Honda was going to sell it to. Their targeted demographic. I can imagine a discussion where engineers said "are we going to de-restrict this bike?" And another said "why? old guys are going to buy it. If anyone wants to go faster, they can buy our CBR 1000 which will go 170 mph."
Exactly. There are plenty of choices to buy to go faster.
If anyone is really all that disappointed in their CB100 then shame on them for not doing their due diligence before buying. Don't blame Honda for producing exactly the bike they set out to produce.
RE: Retro bikes, comparison. - uscgmac_imp - 04-05-2015
You can read and watch all the reviews you want and talk to whoever you want. Nobody was talking about or advertising that the bike has a speed limiter of 112mph. I've been riding for 26 years and had over 20 bikes and never heard of this so don't say shame on anyone. Your statements are as rediculous as the speed limiter. Not everyone has to be 60+ to want this bike, some wantitfor the cool Retro look and modern touches, expecting an 1100 to have some balls, not have the same capability of a 500cc bike. My riding capabilities far exceed the speed limiter.
RE: Retro bikes, comparison. - JustPassinThru_imp - 04-05-2015
Now...not trying to fan flames...but...
...WHY would someone want to ride this bike faster than 112?
Not A bike. THIS bike...with no fairings; heavy chassis; soft suspension.
Why? There are lighter, faired crotch-rockets that'll do 160. The BMW boxers, any of them, will do 140 and are limited by the redline.
A naked bike, over a hundred...there's a serious chance of being blown off!
RE: Retro bikes, comparison. - emptysea - 04-05-2015
The speed limiter has been mentioned in at least one published magazine review and there are several threads about it on this forum. I must say, though, that I didn't know about it before I bought my bike. Then again, it's not something I was worried about in the least. 14000 miles and I've had my CB to something close to 100 (I was a little afraid to look down to be sure) just once. I like to pass other vehicles as quickly as possible, especially trucks, but have never approached the speeds that some of you hit regularly.
Yes, it is anyone's guess as to why Honda decided to ship bikes to the U.S. with the speed limiter--mine is that it was expedient for them to do so.
As to "shame", I would say to uscgmac that if the speed limiter would of been a deal breaker had you known, then that's a shame. The good news is that there's a relatively easy fix for it. It sounds like you otherwise like the bike a lot, so maybe it was a good thing you didn't know about the limiter before you bought.
Now, it's 60+ here and I think I will ride for a bit. Not a chance I'm going to hit the ton today, that is for sure
