07-10-2014, 02:43 AM
"I am interested in the issue of torque with respect to the two bikes. It seems to me the sportster is "fussier" for the lack of a better word then the CB1100 is. The sportster pulls like a tractor IF it's in the right gear but it really does not like to out of it's torque sweet spot. The CB not so much. So from that I would have guessed the CB had more torque?? I could be entirely wrong on this but it would be an interesting comparison to have done on a dino. I like both bikes. The biggest plus for the sportster for me is it's better suits the vertically challenged. And there is absolutely no comparison of my 2012 to even the 2006 I had and I can only imagine the earlier sportsters."
<SNIP>
Your impression is spot on. Having owned Sportster's and bigger Harley's as well as ridden other twins, it seems to me a 4-cylinder engine's power pulses are closer together, giving smoother power (torque) delivery. My BMW six has an even broader torque band than my Honda. Cam timing has something to do with this too, but the CB1100 just makes more torque than a Sportster 1200 does - H-D claims 71 lbs./ft, Cycle World's dyno said the Honda made 82 lbs./ft. Nuff said...
<SNIP>
Your impression is spot on. Having owned Sportster's and bigger Harley's as well as ridden other twins, it seems to me a 4-cylinder engine's power pulses are closer together, giving smoother power (torque) delivery. My BMW six has an even broader torque band than my Honda. Cam timing has something to do with this too, but the CB1100 just makes more torque than a Sportster 1200 does - H-D claims 71 lbs./ft, Cycle World's dyno said the Honda made 82 lbs./ft. Nuff said...