+- 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: whats the diff between the cb1100 and the cb1100f (/showthread.php?tid=2991)
whats the diff between the cb1100 and the cb1100f - nitro50@comcast.net_imp - 05-29-2015
diff between cb1100 and cb1100f
RE: whats the diff between the cb1100 and the cb1100f - flynrider - 05-29-2015
(05-29-2015, 09:50 AM)nitro50@comcast.net_imp Wrote: diff between cb1100 and cb1100f
About 30 years.
CB1100F 1983
CB1100 2013
![[Image: 87fa0e1c5aa48397dd3135c87794ad58.jpg]](https://cb1100forum.net/forum/uploads/imp/201505/87fa0e1c5aa48397dd3135c87794ad58.jpg)
RE: whats the diff between the cb1100 and the cb1100f - rboe - 05-29-2015
Was the bottom picture taken on 89a in the Spars area south of Prescott?
RE: whats the diff between the cb1100 and the cb1100f - JustPassinThru_imp - 05-29-2015
I'm gonna get lots of rotten tomatoes tossed at me for this...
...but I like the style of the 1983 better.
It was a period where I thought they were showing some imagination in motorcycle styling. The UJM format was good but bland. Harley hadn't really started its comeback; it was a few years before all the Asian companies would be deep into Vee Cruisers.
This was a natural progression of the UJM. A stepped seat, to give the little lady behind you a view of something other than your back. Yet still the operator sits in a natural position...not a crouch; nor reclined and unable to rise up. And the raised tail incorporating seat and fender.
I always liked the Nighthawk styling...hated to see the Nighthawk 250 go by the wayside. Wanted one as an around-town ride. Although I gather that in use they were mean, crude, poverty rides...DRUM BRAKES!...even erzatz-cruiser Rebel was updated to disks.
But the style was always pleasing to me.
RE: whats the diff between the cb1100 and the cb1100f - AndyHe_imp - 05-29-2015
(05-29-2015, 11:13 AM)JustPassinThru_imp Wrote: I'm gonna get lots of rotten tomatoes tossed at me for this...
...but I like the style of the 1983 better.
It was a period where I thought they were showing some imagination in motorcycle styling. The UJM format was good but bland. Harley hadn't really started its comeback; it was a few years before all the Asian companies would be deep into Vee Cruisers.
This was a natural progression of the UJM. A stepped seat, to give the little lady behind you a view of something other than your back. Yet still the operator sits in a natural position...not a crouch; nor reclined and unable to rise up. And the raised tail incorporating seat and fender.
I always liked the Nighthawk styling...hated to see the Nighthawk 250 go by the wayside. Wanted one as an around-town ride. Although I gather that in use they were mean, crude, poverty rides...DRUM BRAKES!...even erzatz-cruiser Rebel was updated to disks.
But the style was always pleasing to me.
I agree.
I've owned four nighthawks and very much like the styling. If Honda would bring over their CB1300 Super Four BOL D'OR ( http://www.honda.co.jp/CB1300/ ) I'd trade in my CB1100 for it but quick... sacrilege!
RE: whats the diff between the cb1100 and the cb1100f - jazzmans_imp - 05-29-2015
(05-29-2015, 10:03 AM)Flynrider_imp Wrote:(05-29-2015, 09:50 AM)nitro50@comcast.net_imp Wrote: diff between cb1100 and cb1100f
About 30 years.
CB1100F 1983
CB1100 2013
About 30 years.
CB1100F 1983
CB1100 2013
![[Image: 9447230e376820d01785e6f80144f3eb.jpg]](https://cb1100forum.net/forum/uploads/imp/201505/9447230e376820d01785e6f80144f3eb.jpg)
Also, the motor,
82 750F
Displacement: 748.00 ccm (45.64 cubic inches)
Engine type: In-line four, four-stroke
Power: 78.00 HP (56.9 kW)) @ 9000 RPM
Top speed: 203.0 km/h (126.1 mph)
Compression: 9.0:1
Bore x stroke: 62.0 x 62.0 mm (2.4 x 2.4 inches)
Valves per cylinder: 4
Fuel control: DOHC
Cooling system: Air
Gearbox: 5-speed
Transmission type,
final drive: Chain
Weight incl. oil, gas, etc: 253.0 kg (557.8 pounds)
Fuel capacity: 20.00 litres (5.28 gallons)
CB1100 (European Model)
Dimensions (L x W x H)(m) 2.195 x 0.835 x 1.130
Wheelbase (m) 1.49
Ground clearance (m) 0.125
Seat height (m) 0.795
Curb weight (kg) 248
Engine type Inline four-cylinder, air and oil cooled DOHC
Displacement (cm³) 1,140
Bore × Stroke (mm) 73.5 x 67.2
Compression ratio 9.5:1
Maximum output (kW/rpm) 66 kW/7,500 rpm(95/1/EC)
Maximum torque (Nm/rpm) 93 Nm/5,000 rpm (95/1/EC)
Fuel Capacity 3.9 gallons
I sure wish I had a 5.28 gallon tank, as well! I miss my F's
(edit to add)
Doh! I missed the fact you were comparing the 1100's... I never had one, but always wanted one, hence my 2013. Imma let my post stand anyway, but here's the old 1100 specs
Displacement: 1062.00 ccm (64.80 cubic inches)
Engine type: In-line four, four-stroke
Power: 110.00 HP (80.3 kW)) @ 8500 RPM
Compression: 9.7:1
Bore x stroke: 70.0 x 69.0 mm (2.8 x 2.7 inches)
Valves per cylinder: 4
Fuel control: DOHC
Cooling system: Air
Gearbox: 5-speed
Transmission type,
final drive: Chain
Weight incl. oil, gas, etc: 266.0 kg (586.4 pounds)
Fuel capacity: 20.00 litres (5.28 gallons)
RE: whats the diff between the cb1100 and the cb1100f - Ghis_imp - 05-29-2015
Just choose what speaks to you. However the CB1100 is an homage to bikes of old with air cooled engines, and people buy them because that's what they like and want. You like the CB1100F better, and I would never give up my air cooled four with fins. No sacrilege here. Though I always thought, because of the look of the motor, that the 1100F was a water cooled bike.
RE: whats the diff between the cb1100 and the cb1100f - flynrider - 05-29-2015
(05-29-2015, 10:17 AM)Rboe_imp Wrote: Was the bottom picture taken on 89a in the Spars area south of Prescott?
I don't know. It's not my pic. I lifted it off the forum somewhere (i.e. found through Google images).
RE: whats the diff between the cb1100 and the cb1100f - rboe - 05-29-2015
I'm with Andy, I'd take that Bold'or very very quickly.
RE: whats the diff between the cb1100 and the cb1100f - SanPete_imp - 05-29-2015
(05-29-2015, 11:26 AM)AndyHe_imp Wrote:(05-29-2015, 11:13 AM)JustPassinThru_imp Wrote: I'm gonna get lots of rotten tomatoes tossed at me for this...
...but I like the style of the 1983 better.
It was a period where I thought they were showing some imagination in motorcycle styling. The UJM format was good but bland. Harley hadn't really started its comeback; it was a few years before all the Asian companies would be deep into Vee Cruisers.
This was a natural progression of the UJM. A stepped seat, to give the little lady behind you a view of something other than your back. Yet still the operator sits in a natural position...not a crouch; nor reclined and unable to rise up. And the raised tail incorporating seat and fender.
I always liked the Nighthawk styling...hated to see the Nighthawk 250 go by the wayside. Wanted one as an around-town ride. Although I gather that in use they were mean, crude, poverty rides...DRUM BRAKES!...even erzatz-cruiser Rebel was updated to disks.
But the style was always pleasing to me.
I agree.
I've owned four nighthawks and very much like the styling. If Honda would bring over their CB1300 Super Four BOL D'OR ( http://www.honda.co.jp/CB1300/ ) I'd trade in my CB1100 for it but quick... sacrilege!
I agree.
I've owned four nighthawks and very much like the styling. If Honda would bring over their CB1300 Super Four BOL D'OR ( http://www.honda.co.jp/CB1300/ ) I'd trade in my CB1100 for it but quick... sacrilege! The Japs are keeping the best bikes for themselves those bloody boogers.