Design Disadvantages of the CB1100

[calamarichris_imp]

Color me pessimistic, but I don't see you (Chris) being happy with a CB 1100 . Just a feeling. You come in being an acknowledged " card carrying Honda Hater" (see I did read every word of your valve adjustment procedure). You say you want to trade in an EX500 which is rather a milquetoast motorcycle ( but maybe a perfectly fine motorcycle, dont know, never ridden one) but you keep comparing the CB to your "mighty ZX9R " .

The CB is not going to compare to the ZX9. It was never designed to. The CB is designed specifically for the "smile on your face/sunny day sentimentality ". That is what the motorcycle is all about. Honda has built other models for other purposes with lighter stronger frames, sharper handling, physically smaller but more potent motors like the CBR1100XX Blackbird, or CBR1100RR but this bike was built rather heavy, rather slow, not very technically advanced, but in a style designed to appeal to those who impressed enough to own the original inline 4 Hondas, or those who were too young but wanted too. There are what some would observe as flaws in this motorcycle. Plastic used in the tail light assembly, engine covers, and headlight lens. A relatively short service span for valve adjustments, probably ball bearings in the steering head, and probably plastic or resin swing arm bushings if I were guessing. Steel frame, 8500 rpm redline, narrow tires and rims, and speed limited to 112 mph. Barely adjustable built to a price point suspension. Its got a lousy tool kit. It's heavy, it's slow and it costs a lot of money.

It's great that your ZX9 will "still hit an actual 100 mph in first gear" or that "it has a brutal hit at 9000 that still scares you on public highways", but the CB is never going to compete with that. Was never intended to. You seem to be hung up on a performance standard that the CB is never going to match.

There are any number of motorcycles that would seem to me to be more appealing to you... The Kawasaki Versys or 650 Ninja, the Suzuki SV 650 or maybe the new Yamaha FZ-09. Plus Honda makes some very nice, if not very exciting, NC 700 series of bikes for thousands less that would compare more directly to your current dog sled.

I'm confused, you don't seem old enough to want a CB for nostalgic reasons, you admittedly don't like Hondas, you obviously like to explore the outer limits of speed and handling on public highways, you seem bright and intelligent, and you are obviously mechanically gifted... Why are you even considering a CB 1100?

You’re not pessimistic, Ferret, and you may be right. I no longer consider myself a Honda-hater (I created that valve adjustment guide nearly 10 years ago), but before my Superhawk experience (and being told by the Honda technician: “I’m surprised you got this many miles out of it! I’ve never seen a bike with that much.”) I always considered Honda’s reliability unimpeachable. You get an A+ for attention to detail and recall—I didn’t even remember mentioning that. Now I’m more of a bitter old grouch than a hater of one specific brand. When I was young, old guys would always badmouth the new bikes and talk about how their old Bonnevilles, BSAs, and Nortons were so much better, looks like I've finally become one of them.

It’s not the technical advancement or high performance I’m looking for (god knows technical advancement has taken us backward into problems like electroplated cylinders.) It’s the efficiency and the longevity I’m after, but these things appear less a priority among the manufacturers than .

Sorry if my boasts about my 9R threw a red-herring into the mix. I ride like an old man usually, and I’m not looking for another 9R, nor did I come here to badmouth the CB. I honestly assumed the CB would have the perfect balance of an I4—the advantages of a vertical twin, AND of the parallel twin. IMO, anything more than 100hp on two wheels is overkill. I bought that 9R when I was much younger, but now I can't bring myself to part with it.

Thanks for the suggestions, but V-twins aren’t efficient enough for me, (and they’re too mechanically noisy, which is why I suspect most of them have aftermarket exhausts—loud pipes drown out the noise between your legs), and the Versis/650R are both vertical twins—basically just the latest version of my EX500, except that they commit the sin of electroplating cylinders in the top-half of the crankcase. For brevity’s sake, from now on, I’m just going to refer to these as disposabikes. The CBR1000 & Blackbird are both disposabikes.

I don't mind milquetoast. Golly-heck, I like milquetoast, which is one of the reasons I was drawn to the CB.

I thought that this would be an interesting thread titled "design..." yet there is not one bit of discussion on the actual bike engineering design. Three pages of nothing but meandering anecdotal blah blah blah.

Thanks for the contribution.

Here's my list of design failings of the CB:

1. It's air-cooled. What were they thinking? It's so much easier to control engine heat, and thus provide more power for comparable displacements, with water-cooling.

2. There's no fairing. Riders are exposed to the elements, including wind-blast, rain, and cold. A large, modern fairing would not only resolve those issues, but would also provide a location to install features such as "Infotainment" systems, GPS, satellite TV, etc.

3. No luggage. Where the heck are you supposed to put your hair dryer if you take a road trip? A large top case and side-bags would go a long way here.

4. Chain drive. Are you kidding me? A shaft drive would be quieter, cleaner, and virtually zero maintenance. CB buyers are stuck with cleaning and lubricating chains for the life of the motorcycle.

5. I-4 engine layout. This engine design is simply outdated. A V-4 or horizontally opposed 6 cylinder engine would produce more power and fewer vibrations.

6. Single headlight. Two headlights would provide better visibility for both the rider and surrounding traffic. Shame on Honda for not investing a few dollars more here.

I4's are the most efficient engine design on a motorcycle period. I defy anyone to tell me of a more efficient platform. My hopes are flickering that this is just some journlistic poetic license, and a misprint in the service manual.

I know you're just being silly, but you're also wrong on chains. Chains're the most efficient final drive for a motorcycle. Shafts & belts do have their advantages, but efficiency isn't one of them. I have a belt-driven bicycle, and even when it's adjusted perfectly and broken in, that belt is a serious power drain compared with a well-adjusted/lubricated chain.