Hi thinking about getting a cb 1100 have some questions

[Wisedrum]

Wisedrum Wrote:Further development did not make the Honda any better, the opposite is the case. It driftes too much away from the origin.
This is simply not true. The suspension and overall handling are noticeably better on the 2017 model. No one disputes this. Also, the '17's tank range is superior, compared to the '13 model, or the '14 Standard. The '13 lacks the gear indicator of later models, and the '17 simply has far prettier pieces throughout the bike, never mind the addition of the more period-correct spoked wheels. The '17 also makes slightly more power than the previous models, plus it sounds better.

Oh, and the '13 model drifted just as much as the '17 does from the origin. One look at the artist's original sketch shows how little the '13 resembles the intended design. None of the recent CB1100 models follow the original intent, so that issue is a nonstarter.

Is the '17 six thousand dollars better than the '13, or the '14 Standard? Strictly on a percentage basis, no, of course not. Is a Mercedes-Benz E-Class two or three times better than a Toyota Avalon? Functionally, no, of course it isn't, yet people still pay three times as much for the M-B because they perceive its value to be worthy of the higher price.

'Worth' is determined by each individual. I could have bought a very inexpensive '13 or '14. I almost did, in fact. When I bought my '17, the option was still there to buy an older model, but I wanted the much nicer '17 badly enough to pay the difference. I wanted the '17 a whole lot more than I wanted the '13 or '14. In that regard, the relative worth of each bike wasn't even close. Spending less to get something I didn't want made no sense to me. Either way, it's a lot of money.

As long as you can afford it, get the bike that you really want. If you have no real preference, or if you prefer the older models, absolutely, save your money and get the cheaper one. Just don't try to rationalize the purchase of the cheaper one by telling yourself it's no different from the '17. Make no mistake, the '17 is functionally superior to the older models. Anyone who has ridden both versions will confirm this, without hesitation.

This is simply not true. The '17 also makes slightly more power than the previous models, plus it sounds better.

Oh, and the '13 model drifted just as much as the '17 does from the origin. One look at the artist's original sketch shows how little the '13 resembles the intended design. None of the recent CB1100 models follow the original intent, so that issue is a nonstarter......

Is the '17 six thousand dollars better than the '13, ....

'Worth' is determined by each individual.

I doubt the slighty more power thing, but power is not the reason for buying this inline 4.
Looking at the values of both machines, the 2013 model has the highest and comparable torque earlier rpmwise than the 2017. Horsepower don't differ. Also the bike is lighter. Must be the other way round, if one wants to find something in this direction.

I have to specify my thought concerning the further develepoment. With origin I meant the 2013 CB not the 750 Four out of the past. This 'origin' picks up various details out of the CB family that was build over several decades. It comes up with its own mixture not being strictly based on one forerunner. Exactly this original mixture is what attracts me with its shape and parts like the tank, 5speed gearbox, 4 in 1 exhaust and so on.
Newer models step by step went away from it, in my eyes not to the better at least optically.

Right from the start Honda did a good job with the choice of components for suspension and the overall driving feel. Never had a problem with it, even fully packed on long tours. I don't want and need to change something. The 2017 CB may be improved, not yet ridden one. But as all things in life, it's a matter of personal taste and needs to alter the given for the customer or the manufacturer, the one who buys, the one who wants to sell.

A piece, part or vehicle is worth what a buyer wants to spend. If it's offered under value, the better the situation gets.

If you can afford it, buy the one you like, not someone else.

Wisedrum

[VLJ_imp]

el duque, I forgot to mention that the '17 also includes an easy-pull slip-assist clutch, which the previous models don't have...

http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2017/09/2...de-review/

That review discusses all the changes for the '17 model. Of special note is the repeated mentions of how much better the '17 handles bumps (new forks, revised shocks, altered chassis), compared to the older models. It also mentions the increased engine power, which is largely the result of the new, much better-sounding exhaust system.

This article...

http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2017/08/2...ront-fork/

...goes into greater depth, regarding the new suspension and revised chassis.

I've ridden the old model and the '17. Alprider owns both models. He and I and everyone else who's ridden both models all notice a significant improvement in the ride quality of the '17. It's there, plain as day.

Wisedrum Wrote:I doubt the slighty more power thing, but power is not the reason for buying this inline 4.
Doubting it doesn't make it any less true. The dyno doesn't lie. The '17 makes slightly more midrange and roughly three more peak hp than the older model. It also sounds quite a bit different.

It's the new exhaust.

Quote:Looking at the values of both machines, the 2013 model has the highest and comparable torque earlier rpmwise than the 2017.
That's just down to different gearing, with the '17 having the highway-friendly sixth gear that's missing from the '13.

Quote:Horsepower don't differ.
Yes, it does. The '17 makes more peak hp on the dyno, and everyone who's ridden both models notes the slightly more energetic midrange.

Quote:Also the bike is lighter.
The '13 is lighter because it only has one exhaust pipe, which is more restrictive than the redesigned dual exhausts of the '17. The '13's lack of dual exhausts is just one more thing that further distances it from either the classic CB or the designer's intent for the reborn retro model. The '17 doesn't have the original's 2+2 system, but it at least has duals, like the original CB750, or the artist's original sketch for the new CB.

Quote:I have to specify my thought concerning the further develepoment. With origin I meant the 2013 CB not the 750 Four out of the past.
I'm referring to the original design sketch for the new CB retro. Neither your bike nor mine adheres very closely to what the designer originally intended, never mind the original CB750. Between our two bikes, however, the '17 with its dual pipes, spoked wheels, and pleated seat hits more of the marks. The '17's tank differs more from the original, but its seamless design just plain looks higher-spec and nicer than the seamed "toaster oven" tank on the '13 and '14 Standard. I'll take that trade eight days a week, particularly since the prettier tank with the more brilliant paintjob also includes greater fuel capacity.

Quote:Right from the start Honda did a good job with the choice of components for suspension and the overall driving feel.
Perhaps, but they did a better job with the '17's components and driving feel. No one is going to hop off the '17 following a serious ride and say, "Yeah, the '13 handles better. It's a plusher set-up."

Just not going to happen.

Quote:Never had a problem with it, even fully packed on long tours. I don't want and need to change something.
I'm sure you don't, but if someone were to slip into your garage one night and replace your '13's chassis and suspension with those of the '17, you would be unusually delighted all throughout your next ride. You definitely wouldn't complain.

Conversely, if someone swapped out my '17's chassis and suspension with those from the '13, I'd notice the difference the moment I hit the first stretch of bumpy road, and I'd be mighty po'd

[alprider]

again and again and again
its fact...

on Thursday with the yello bee , yesterday with my blue darling on the same 1,5hour standard and on certain sections bumpy loop......
scroll down
[url=http://cb1100forum.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=2481&page=159]http://cb1100forum.com/forum/showthread....1&page=159
.
.
well.....on the bumpy sections, I voluntarily drove a bit slower with the blue ....

..

[url=http://cb1100forum.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=2481&page=163]http://cb1100forum.com/forum/showthread....1&page=163

[Wisedrum]

Just for comparison I post 2 pics of power torque diagrams of both models. They were published in the German magazine 'TOURENFAHRER' at times when each model was tested for the 1. time.

First CB 2017:




Second CB 2013:




Now it's up to the beholder to decide which bike perhaps offers a stronger midrange performance theoretically.
Round about 2 HP for the new model is neglectable but what makes the ' Kohl fett' imo, is the much earlier peak of torque, 1.400 rpm earlier, that's a lot, of the 2013 CB, once again theoretically.

Maybe there is an owner of both in this forum, alprider for example, who can clear up the situation out of the praxis by sharing his experiences. All theory is gray....

Wisedrum

[alprider]

i worte already any times... minimum bcos the other exhaust sound and different ignition timing and other air intake it lets you feel like more power by the 17 model comapred to the 14 model (engine character)............and i meant the enginebrake works better at the 17 model.......

the 13er model i dont know with such kind i made 2 years befor only 1 short test ride.............and yes . solong i am not on the racecourse what cares me this littel difference.....

the look of the wonderful shiny headers from the 14 (DLX) and 17 models are for my THAT thing that i like much more .........................as earlier a littel swallow more torque

and
if i am in mood i let put my two models (14/17models) of performance test bench at my dealer this year...(ok i have a other exhaust by the 14 model smile and QD write of their page: The maximum horsepower gain is about 1,5 HP, while normal increasement is about 3 HP...)

http://www.qdexhaust.it/en/catalogo/honda-en/2550/

[Wisedrum]

Thanks for your reply alprider.
The torque is the same but earlier accessable.
That's a whole other story.

Also the 5 gear box offers another way of feeling the power and torque I assume.

So what, I'm more a smooth rider and don't care for the power thing that much. Only for the sake of numbers and values. I once studied mathematics....
but it's the heart that matters and mine beats for the 2013 CB.

Wisedrum

[itstuantran_imp]

I totally agree on the 2017 front suspension. My RS responds so nice over a series of speed reduction pumps. I have not ridden previous versions of CB1100 but compared to my ex-CB400 2015, it's way better.

el duque, the first time you hit a series of sharp-edged bumps you will notice the improved suspension and chassis of the '17. It has nothing to do with riding skill, or aggression level. The '17 is simply plusher, more controlled, accurate, and compliant.

Any rider will appreciate the difference, every ride.

[Houtman_imp]

I have a 2013 , 2014 and a 2017 all with ABS.
The 2017 gives a far better ride than the earlier ones , especially the front forks.
I would buy a 2017 if I was you , the only thing I do not care for is the tubes , would prefer tubeless tires (flats)
Having put RIDE ON in the tubes gives me some safety incase of a flat.
In my opinion the 2017 is also a better looking and sounding bike than earlier ones.
In my 50 years of riding and over 50 bikes the CB 1100's are by far my favorite bikes.

[emptysea]

Hi!!! Just wondering if any members have had a 2013 or 14 cb and purchased a 2017 model. It seems to me I can purchase a 13 or 14 cb for thousands of dollars less than a 2017 model. Does the 2017 model justify paying in some cases 5000 to 7000 more? I have had a mid 80s Nitehawk, with shaft drive and liquid cooling and a 2001 Nitehawk 750..I’m just missing a cb!!!!! I currently have a nc 700 x and a Hd Sporster and Iwould trade or sell the NC to help make it happen. Thank you for ant help or suggestions and opinions.

A LOT of possibly helpful advice provided above, but you have asked a question that requires a completely subjective answer. “Does the 2017 model justify paying in some cases 5000 to 7000 more?“. Only you can answer that. VJL can expound (and boy, can he) about the virtues of the 2017 and the drawbacks of the 2014. wisedrum can tell you that he would never switch to a 2017. Two opinions. Neither of which should be of any use to you because your question isn’t whether on bike is better than the other; it’s about quantifying monetarily how much better.

You should ride both and price both then decide for yourself. If you’re like VJL, you’ll buy the more expensive 2017. If you’re like wisedrum, you’ll buy the 2013. If you’re like Housman, you’ll buy both.

[baxtercat_imp]

I recently traded my 13 in for a 17, and would agree--the newer one feels somewhat more planted, thanks to the suspension, and is easier to ride, with the new clutch and 6 speed box. That said, I liked my 13 quite a bit, and if the 17 had never appeared, I would feel I had the best retro bike available, short of a DLX. These discussions always mix objective criteria (hp, torque) and subjective (seamless tank, engine color) and things in between (spokes and tubes) with some detectable effort to justify the writer's choice of ownership of one or the other. Clearly the OP will need to concoct his own justification, and follow his head or budget or desires. I like the upgrades on the 17, but my personal justification (and that's all it is) was that really well made, reliable true retros are rare. The best , such as the Honda GB500 and the Kawa W650, appeared on the US market for only two years, and neither sold well, leading to discounted prices, and then their quick disappearance and subsequent unavailability. I suspect the 17 CB1100 will fit the pattern, perhaps with us getting only the one model year here, and that the next 12 months will prove to be the best time to get a good price on what is for me the best iteration of the bike. All things equal (ie if one could conceivably afford either) I would suggest looking at opportunity, and not just the difference in price, but how prices will be trending. If you want the 17, these will be factors; if you want a 13 or 14, less so.