CB1100 Questions from a potential new owner

[pdedse]

I think I had read an article explaining what "he" was going after a number of years back, so thanks for the nice summary:

pdedse, he wanted the most relaxing, gentleman's ride possible. Top speeds, or any sort of sporting pretensions were not on his list of priorities. Rather, he wanted a uniquely air-cooled I4 experience that would work perfectly for tooling around Japan's busy streets and scenic roads at an easy, sightseeing pace. He specified a seamless, stress-free, locomotive-like power delivery, with dead nuts perfect throttle response, even at very low speeds. The only concession he made for performance or excitement was he allowed the engine timing to be altered in such a way as to introduce a bit of intentional roughness, to give it character, and a meaner exhaust note.

To give it more power all Honda needs to do is introduce hotter cams, larger throttle bodies, and a more aggressive airbox. It has four cylinders, and 1140 cubic centimeters. 75 ft-lbs of torque and 115 rwhp is not a stretch for such a motor. It would barely need to get out of bed to produce those numbers, and still have gobs of low-down torque.

pdedse, he wanted the most relaxing, gentleman's ride possible. Top speeds, or any sort of sporting pretensions were not on his list of priorities. Rather, he wanted a uniquely air-cooled I4 experience that would work perfectly for tooling around Japan's busy streets and scenic roads at an easy, sightseeing pace. He specified a seamless, stress-free, locomotive-like power delivery, with dead nuts perfect throttle response, even at very low speeds. The only concession he made for performance or excitement was he allowed the engine timing to be altered in such a way as to introduce a bit of intentional roughness, to give it character, and a meaner exhaust note.

To give it more power all Honda needs to do is introduce hotter cams, larger throttle bodies, and a more aggressive airbox. It has four cylinders, and 1140 cubic centimeters. 75 ft-lbs of torque and 115 rwhp is not a stretch for such a motor. It would barely need to get out of bed to produce those numbers, and still have gobs of low-down torque.

This, above, is what I was after, thanks.

I enjoy learning about the bikes I ride. If you or others don't mind elaborating, I'd love to hear what you have to say about the 3 factors you mention--specifically, why didn't he pursue these:

1. hotter cams: higher price? more frequent valve checks? lower fuel economy?
2. larger throttle bodies: again, price? what else?
3. more aggressive airbox: What does "aggressive" mean related to airbox? Larger air intake? Does this go hand in hand with hotter cams and larger throttle bodies?

I'm not asking the questions because I doubt the factors you mention would have made any difference--just trying to understand how / why some of these decisions were made.