2017 More Power...?

[dbarkdoll_imp]

I have noticed in a few instances online that the 2017 CB is claimed to make more power than the preceding models. Does anyone know the specifics/validity of that claim?

I realize I could easily do my own homework on this matter, but out of laziness/boredom I have decided to post here instead. Plus I’m curious to see how this thread will progress and or digress.

[peterbaron]

I have noticed in a few instances online that the 2017 CB is claimed to make more power than the preceding models. Does anyone know the specifics/validity of that claim?

I realize I could easily do my own homework on this matter, but out of laziness/boredom I have decided to post here instead. Plus I’m curious to see how this thread will progress and or digress.

By how MANY HP more, please ??

pb

[SportsterDoc]

According to one on-line article the RS is 89 HP and 555# wet.
A 2014 is 86 HP and 540# wet.

HP is an increase of 3.49%
Weight is an increase of 2.78%

[dbarkdoll_imp]

I have noticed in a few instances online that the 2017 CB is claimed to make more power than the preceding models. Does anyone know the specifics/validity of that claim?

I realize I could easily do my own homework on this matter, but out of laziness/boredom I have decided to post here instead. Plus I’m curious to see how this thread will progress and or digress.

By how MANY HP more, please ??

pb

By how MANY HP more, please ??

pb

That’s the thing, I’m not sure. Basically what I’m trying to figure out. And how Honda has coaxed those few purported HPs out of the engine.

[peterbaron]

FEW ponies more at 86 or 89 means ZERO to me, I drop a gear to match these 3 HP by increasing RPM without changing my speed

pb

[Guth_imp]

As currently noted elsewhere on this forum, dyno readings aren't likely going to be very consistent from one machine to the next (or from one operator to the next from the sounds of it). The difference in power is probably negated by the difference in weight so I wouldn't want to base a decision to purchase on the supposed "power increase". However, if you prefer the looks or other features of the 2017 EX (there were definitely other more notable changes made in 2017) over another year model, then I'd say you'd have a much better reason to explore a change.

[VLJ_imp]

A better comparison to the '17 EX would be the dual-exhaust '14 Deluxe, not the single-exhaust '14 Standard. When compared to the '14 Deluxe, the '17 EX is roughly five hp stronger on a dyno, with a bit more midrange, and about fifteen lbs lighter. Most reviewers mention the increase in power, describing it as noticeable, but nothing earth-shattering. They're usually more effusive regarding the '17's throatier, burblier engine note, which is the result of Honda's decision to give the motor more visceral character by altering the timing of cylinders one and two. The slight bump in power is said to be the result of the new exhaust system.

[LongRanger_imp]

Period dyno tests indicated the dual-muffler '14 DLX made no more hp than a '13. Any noted differences were inconsequential.

[Guth_imp]

Man, it's a bummer that you can't ride one of these EX's before buying one. (The cylinder timing thing has been around since day one — there's been lots of talk about this here on the forum over the years.) Still, if you enjoyed the '14 Standard then I'm guessing that you'll enjoy the 2017 EX, especially if you like the looks of it more.

[VLJ_imp]

LongRanger Wroteeriod dyno tests indicated the dual-muffler '14 DLX made no more hp than a '13. Any noted differences were inconsequential.
Right, but the dual-exhausts Deluxe weighed thirty lbs more than the single-exhaust Standard. Since the '17 EX has dual exhausts, it's more fair to compare its weight to that of the '14 Deluxe, and the '17 makes more power than any of the 2010-on-up CB1100s.