What's Great About the CB1100?

[Rolls_imp]

The way the designers have pulled iconic cues from 70's and 80's Hondas into coherent design continues to amaze me. And that this brew of elements stands on its own and is quite recognizable is an accomplishment, too.

I can only conclude that this bike was lovingly designed by experienced bike guys who were highly motivated and really cared.

[Cormanus]

The answer to the question? With thanks to Calamarichris ...

[quote="calamarichris_imp" pid="112344" dateline="1392113520"]
[quote="Guth_imp" pid="112317" dateline="1392076200"]
[quote="calamarichris_imp" pid="112302" dateline="1392059040"]
Everything designed by the hand of man has its advantages and disadvantages. As PeeWee Herman says, "Everyone I know in life has a big but(t)...":
~Harleys sound great and you never have to adjust the valves, BUT they're slow, inefficient, and the rear cylinder does not get as much cooling air as the front. (That, and you have to ride everywhere with a serious scowl of determination on your face, as if you are on your way to commit your third-strike felony.)
~Crotch-rockets are light & fast, but the cylinders are bored into the top half of the crankcase (disposabike) and being stuck behind an RV on a twisty road sucks even worse when you're on one of them.
~Vertical Twins (one piston goes up while the other goes down) can rev higher and are generally more efficient overall, but they get lumpy and weak at low rpm.
~Parallel twins (both pistons rise & fall together) are terrific at lower rpm and have a sweet, balanced sound, but they create a pressure maelstrom in the crankcase which inhibits higher rpm power.

So what are some of the advantages and disadvantages of the CB11's engine? Not interested in the smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day advantages. Every design has its disadvantages, what are the CB11's?
Heavy weight?
Plastic bits?
Throttle governor?
Less cooling air for #2 & 3 cylinders? (Are they jetted identically with #1 & 4, or richer/cooler?)

Of course, the advantages of and disadvantages of those things designed by the hand of man pale in comparison to the advantages and disadvantages of man himself. In this case, I'd ask what exactly is it that you're looking for from this engine? Only by answering this question can you begin to address advantages and disadvantages when it comes to the CB1100. (i.e. If your not inclined to ride over 110 mph, then the speed-limiter isn't a disadvantage.)

How many Harley owners are concerned about riding overly fast or how much cooling their rear cylinder is getting compared to the front? Chances are it's a very small percentage. Conversely, what percentage of supersport class bike owners are concerned with how sedately their bike cruises when not being pushed or even have thoughts of long-term ownership? How many guys with twins are really worried about the lack of low-end or high-end power of their respective machines? For most, these disadvantages from a purely technical sense aren't disadvantages at all. Those who consider such items as disadvantages are more than likely those who didn't properly consider their own needs.

In my mind, you have to have something to measure against (in this case the desired use for the bike) to try and identify the respective disadvantages. My needs are bound to be different from yours and therefore what I see as an advantage or disadvantage might vary quite a bit from you, especially if your not concerned about the "smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day" type of stuff. It's honestly hard for me give you much feedback as one of my actual requirements was for a bike that I got as much enjoyment from looking at it when I was off of the bike as I did from actually riding it. What can I say, I went to school for engineering and ended up working for a number of years as a graphic designer, I'm a bit skewed.

I quickly identified two issues with the bike that were a disappointment to me. Thus far these are my only real gripes:

1.) The weight of the bike when moving it around in the garage and so forth. Obviously this can't be chalked up just to the engine, but the size of the engine surely plays a part in this. I'll simply live with this and won't be addressing it further. Once the bike starts rolling, however slowly, I'm good with it.

2.) The tone of the factory exhaust. Simply too peaceful for me. I'm not a fan of loud exhausts, but I do like an exhaust note with a bit of soul if you will. I addressed this by adding a slip-on exhaust from Staintune and I've been very pleased with the result.

Some issues, such as engine longevity, will only be answered in time. People can theorize as much as they want, but until enough units have withstood the test of time and miles (or not), theories will remain just that.

At this point, I can't tell you much at this point about working on the bike. That will change over time as I plan on doing pretty much everything on my own. I'm no expert mechanic by any means, but I've learned a heck of a lot by doing all of my own work on my Hawk GT (the only other street bike I've ever owned) over the past 7 years, and I like the feeling of satisfaction that I've received from that experience. No reason to change things up at this point. If I fail at something, then I can pay somebody else, but until that time comes, I'll keep turning my own wrenches.

With all that said, as mentioned, my Hawk GT is the only other street bike I've ever owned. A 647cc V-Twin and an 1140cc Inline Four don't exactly make for a wealth of experience. Therefore, for better or worse, my expectations are probably far different than many guys here who have owned a wealth of bikes over the years and have a lot more comparables to draw from.

Hmm... thanks Guth.
I'm looking for the balance, symmetry, quietness, and smoothness of an I-4; also conservative engineering (therefore I don't mind extra weight), a long service life. I like the simplicity of air-cooling, because all the additional plumbing, gaskets, & O-rings wear out more quickly than aluminum cooling fins do. And when those little gaskets start leaking, sometimes they can damage other components.

Your Hawk was as great a bike as my Superhawk was a POS. And it's not the number of bikes that makes for a wealth of experience. I know guys who buy a new bike every 18 months who still don't know the first thing about maintaining (heh--or riding) a bike well.

I disagree about the Harley owners and crotch-rocketeers: I've met a few Harley guys (bikes always seem to be at home) who absolutely believe that Harleys are the best, fastest, only real bikes on the planet. (Nevermind that my little EX500 twin will walk away from every Harley but the V-rod.) And most of the sport-squids with whom I've ridden/spoken are under the mistaken impression that all their bikes will last at least 100,000 miles--it certainly helps their own resale value to believe that myth, because I seldom see one with 50K miles.

Strange to me that you prefer a louder exhaust. I love a quiet bike. I used to get frustrated with everyone getting the loudest aftermarket exhaust possible, thinking they were "creating a bad name for motorcyclists", but that was a dumb thing to think. I've decided it's entirely to my benefit: I didn't spend a penny, and now I have a garage full of stealth bikes. It's true! I regularly travel at ~15 over the speed limit, and I never get tickets.
LEO’s have become so utterly conditioned to equate speed with noise that I regularly ride past speed traps at illegal speeds, and the cops just nod at me. It’s as if all the other gazelles have voluntarily donned belled collars to let the lion know that dinner is on the way.

My first bike was a '93 Harley Sportster. I rode it all over Colorado, all over California, and even out to Key West once. I put 70,000+ miles on it in less than 3 years, but it was stolen. I cracked the rear cylinder at about 50K, and it wept a little bit of oil, but that bike got 50mpg no matter how easy or hard I rode it. Fun little bike, until I rode a Japbike and got addicted to the power & efficiency.



Peace & safe riding.
[/quote]
I find the engine on the CB1100 to be rather fascinating in this regard. While quiet, it does create a plethora of minor mechanical noises, a machine-made symphony of sorts. I have rather sensitive ears and very early on this was somewhat a cause of concern for me. Now I don't really think about it. I certainly find the engine very smooth, then again, my comparable is the V-Twin of my Hawk. Before purchasing the CB, I had read countless times how "boring" I-4s are. I wouldn't necessarily call the CB1100's engine boring. However, I would call it predictable. Due to the broad powerband, propulsion always seems so effortless. It's easily able to launch itself forward from a dead stop, by just letting out the clutch lever without applying any throttle. Going down the open road, needing to pass another vehicle, rolling on the throttle always yields some nice solid grunt when needed.

[quote="calamarichris_imp" pid="112302" dateline="1392059040"]
Everything designed by the hand of man has its advantages and disadvantages. As PeeWee Herman says, "Everyone I know in life has a big but(t)...":
~Harleys sound great and you never have to adjust the valves, BUT they're slow, inefficient, and the rear cylinder does not get as much cooling air as the front. (That, and you have to ride everywhere with a serious scowl of determination on your face, as if you are on your way to commit your third-strike felony.)
~Crotch-rockets are light & fast, but the cylinders are bored into the top half of the crankcase (disposabike) and being stuck behind an RV on a twisty road sucks even worse when you're on one of them.
~Vertical Twins (one piston goes up while the other goes down) can rev higher and are generally more efficient overall, but they get lumpy and weak at low rpm.
~Parallel twins (both pistons rise & fall together) are terrific at lower rpm and have a sweet, balanced sound, but they create a pressure maelstrom in the crankcase which inhibits higher rpm power.

So what are some of the advantages and disadvantages of the CB11's engine? Not interested in the smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day advantages. Every design has its disadvantages, what are the CB11's?
Heavy weight?
Plastic bits?
Throttle governor?
Less cooling air for #2 & 3 cylinders? (Are they jetted identically with #1 & 4, or richer/cooler?)

Of course, the advantages of and disadvantages of those things designed by the hand of man pale in comparison to the advantages and disadvantages of man himself. In this case, I'd ask what exactly is it that you're looking for from this engine? Only by answering this question can you begin to address advantages and disadvantages when it comes to the CB1100. (i.e. If your not inclined to ride over 110 mph, then the speed-limiter isn't a disadvantage.)

How many Harley owners are concerned about riding overly fast or how much cooling their rear cylinder is getting compared to the front? Chances are it's a very small percentage. Conversely, what percentage of supersport class bike owners are concerned with how sedately their bike cruises when not being pushed or even have thoughts of long-term ownership? How many guys with twins are really worried about the lack of low-end or high-end power of their respective machines? For most, these disadvantages from a purely technical sense aren't disadvantages at all. Those who consider such items as disadvantages are more than likely those who didn't properly consider their own needs.

In my mind, you have to have something to measure against (in this case the desired use for the bike) to try and identify the respective disadvantages. My needs are bound to be different from yours and therefore what I see as an advantage or disadvantage might vary quite a bit from you, especially if your not concerned about the "smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day" type of stuff. It's honestly hard for me give you much feedback as one of my actual requirements was for a bike that I got as much enjoyment from looking at it when I was off of the bike as I did from actually riding it. What can I say, I went to school for engineering and ended up working for a number of years as a graphic designer, I'm a bit skewed.

I quickly identified two issues with the bike that were a disappointment to me. Thus far these are my only real gripes:

1.) The weight of the bike when moving it around in the garage and so forth. Obviously this can't be chalked up just to the engine, but the size of the engine surely plays a part in this. I'll simply live with this and won't be addressing it further. Once the bike starts rolling, however slowly, I'm good with it.

2.) The tone of the factory exhaust. Simply too peaceful for me. I'm not a fan of loud exhausts, but I do like an exhaust note with a bit of soul if you will. I addressed this by adding a slip-on exhaust from Staintune and I've been very pleased with the result.

Some issues, such as engine longevity, will only be answered in time. People can theorize as much as they want, but until enough units have withstood the test of time and miles (or not), theories will remain just that.

At this point, I can't tell you much at this point about working on the bike. That will change over time as I plan on doing pretty much everything on my own. I'm no expert mechanic by any means, but I've learned a heck of a lot by doing all of my own work on my Hawk GT (the only other street bike I've ever owned) over the past 7 years, and I like the feeling of satisfaction that I've received from that experience. No reason to change things up at this point. If I fail at something, then I can pay somebody else, but until that time comes, I'll keep turning my own wrenches.

With all that said, as mentioned, my Hawk GT is the only other street bike I've ever owned. A 647cc V-Twin and an 1140cc Inline Four don't exactly make for a wealth of experience. Therefore, for better or worse, my expectations are probably far different than many guys here who have owned a wealth of bikes over the years and have a lot more comparables to draw from.

Hmm... thanks Guth.
I'm looking for the balance, symmetry, quietness, and smoothness of an I-4; also conservative engineering (therefore I don't mind extra weight), a long service life. I like the simplicity of air-cooling, because all the additional plumbing, gaskets, & O-rings wear out more quickly than aluminum cooling fins do. And when those little gaskets start leaking, sometimes they can damage other components.

Your Hawk was as great a bike as my Superhawk was a POS. And it's not the number of bikes that makes for a wealth of experience. I know guys who buy a new bike every 18 months who still don't know the first thing about maintaining (heh--or riding) a bike well.

I disagree about the Harley owners and crotch-rocketeers: I've met a few Harley guys (bikes always seem to be at home) who absolutely believe that Harleys are the best, fastest, only real bikes on the planet. (Nevermind that my little EX500 twin will walk away from every Harley but the V-rod.) And most of the sport-squids with whom I've ridden/spoken are under the mistaken impression that all their bikes will last at least 100,000 miles--it certainly helps their own resale value to believe that myth, because I seldom see one with 50K miles.

Strange to me that you prefer a louder exhaust. I love a quiet bike. I used to get frustrated with everyone getting the loudest aftermarket exhaust possible, thinking they were "creating a bad name for motorcyclists", but that was a dumb thing to think. I've decided it's entirely to my benefit: I didn't spend a penny, and now I have a garage full of stealth bikes. It's true! I regularly travel at ~15 over the speed limit, and I never get tickets.
LEO’s have become so utterly conditioned to equate speed with noise that I regularly ride past speed traps at illegal speeds, and the cops just nod at me. It’s as if all the other gazelles have voluntarily donned belled collars to let the lion know that dinner is on the way.

My first bike was a '93 Harley Sportster. I rode it all over Colorado, all over California, and even out to Key West once. I put 70,000+ miles on it in less than 3 years, but it was stolen. I cracked the rear cylinder at about 50K, and it wept a little bit of oil, but that bike got 50mpg no matter how easy or hard I rode it. Fun little bike, until I rode a Japbike and got addicted to the power & efficiency.



Peace & safe riding.
[/quote]
My first couple of years with the Hawk, I probably spent as much time with it out in the garage as I did out on the road. Not that I really had to (I went through and replaced a lot of parts simply due to age), but I truly enjoyed the experience. Pretty much everything I've learned from my Hawk, I can apply to my CB, except for rebuilding carbs and that's okay by me.

[quote="calamarichris_imp" pid="112302" dateline="1392059040"]
Everything designed by the hand of man has its advantages and disadvantages. As PeeWee Herman says, "Everyone I know in life has a big but(t)...":
~Harleys sound great and you never have to adjust the valves, BUT they're slow, inefficient, and the rear cylinder does not get as much cooling air as the front. (That, and you have to ride everywhere with a serious scowl of determination on your face, as if you are on your way to commit your third-strike felony.)
~Crotch-rockets are light & fast, but the cylinders are bored into the top half of the crankcase (disposabike) and being stuck behind an RV on a twisty road sucks even worse when you're on one of them.
~Vertical Twins (one piston goes up while the other goes down) can rev higher and are generally more efficient overall, but they get lumpy and weak at low rpm.
~Parallel twins (both pistons rise & fall together) are terrific at lower rpm and have a sweet, balanced sound, but they create a pressure maelstrom in the crankcase which inhibits higher rpm power.

So what are some of the advantages and disadvantages of the CB11's engine? Not interested in the smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day advantages. Every design has its disadvantages, what are the CB11's?
Heavy weight?
Plastic bits?
Throttle governor?
Less cooling air for #2 & 3 cylinders? (Are they jetted identically with #1 & 4, or richer/cooler?)

Of course, the advantages of and disadvantages of those things designed by the hand of man pale in comparison to the advantages and disadvantages of man himself. In this case, I'd ask what exactly is it that you're looking for from this engine? Only by answering this question can you begin to address advantages and disadvantages when it comes to the CB1100. (i.e. If your not inclined to ride over 110 mph, then the speed-limiter isn't a disadvantage.)

How many Harley owners are concerned about riding overly fast or how much cooling their rear cylinder is getting compared to the front? Chances are it's a very small percentage. Conversely, what percentage of supersport class bike owners are concerned with how sedately their bike cruises when not being pushed or even have thoughts of long-term ownership? How many guys with twins are really worried about the lack of low-end or high-end power of their respective machines? For most, these disadvantages from a purely technical sense aren't disadvantages at all. Those who consider such items as disadvantages are more than likely those who didn't properly consider their own needs.

In my mind, you have to have something to measure against (in this case the desired use for the bike) to try and identify the respective disadvantages. My needs are bound to be different from yours and therefore what I see as an advantage or disadvantage might vary quite a bit from you, especially if your not concerned about the "smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day" type of stuff. It's honestly hard for me give you much feedback as one of my actual requirements was for a bike that I got as much enjoyment from looking at it when I was off of the bike as I did from actually riding it. What can I say, I went to school for engineering and ended up working for a number of years as a graphic designer, I'm a bit skewed.

I quickly identified two issues with the bike that were a disappointment to me. Thus far these are my only real gripes:

1.) The weight of the bike when moving it around in the garage and so forth. Obviously this can't be chalked up just to the engine, but the size of the engine surely plays a part in this. I'll simply live with this and won't be addressing it further. Once the bike starts rolling, however slowly, I'm good with it.

2.) The tone of the factory exhaust. Simply too peaceful for me. I'm not a fan of loud exhausts, but I do like an exhaust note with a bit of soul if you will. I addressed this by adding a slip-on exhaust from Staintune and I've been very pleased with the result.

Some issues, such as engine longevity, will only be answered in time. People can theorize as much as they want, but until enough units have withstood the test of time and miles (or not), theories will remain just that.

At this point, I can't tell you much at this point about working on the bike. That will change over time as I plan on doing pretty much everything on my own. I'm no expert mechanic by any means, but I've learned a heck of a lot by doing all of my own work on my Hawk GT (the only other street bike I've ever owned) over the past 7 years, and I like the feeling of satisfaction that I've received from that experience. No reason to change things up at this point. If I fail at something, then I can pay somebody else, but until that time comes, I'll keep turning my own wrenches.

With all that said, as mentioned, my Hawk GT is the only other street bike I've ever owned. A 647cc V-Twin and an 1140cc Inline Four don't exactly make for a wealth of experience. Therefore, for better or worse, my expectations are probably far different than many guys here who have owned a wealth of bikes over the years and have a lot more comparables to draw from.

Hmm... thanks Guth.
I'm looking for the balance, symmetry, quietness, and smoothness of an I-4; also conservative engineering (therefore I don't mind extra weight), a long service life. I like the simplicity of air-cooling, because all the additional plumbing, gaskets, & O-rings wear out more quickly than aluminum cooling fins do. And when those little gaskets start leaking, sometimes they can damage other components.

Your Hawk was as great a bike as my Superhawk was a POS. And it's not the number of bikes that makes for a wealth of experience. I know guys who buy a new bike every 18 months who still don't know the first thing about maintaining (heh--or riding) a bike well.

I disagree about the Harley owners and crotch-rocketeers: I've met a few Harley guys (bikes always seem to be at home) who absolutely believe that Harleys are the best, fastest, only real bikes on the planet. (Nevermind that my little EX500 twin will walk away from every Harley but the V-rod.) And most of the sport-squids with whom I've ridden/spoken are under the mistaken impression that all their bikes will last at least 100,000 miles--it certainly helps their own resale value to believe that myth, because I seldom see one with 50K miles.

Strange to me that you prefer a louder exhaust. I love a quiet bike. I used to get frustrated with everyone getting the loudest aftermarket exhaust possible, thinking they were "creating a bad name for motorcyclists", but that was a dumb thing to think. I've decided it's entirely to my benefit: I didn't spend a penny, and now I have a garage full of stealth bikes. It's true! I regularly travel at ~15 over the speed limit, and I never get tickets.
LEO’s have become so utterly conditioned to equate speed with noise that I regularly ride past speed traps at illegal speeds, and the cops just nod at me. It’s as if all the other gazelles have voluntarily donned belled collars to let the lion know that dinner is on the way.

My first bike was a '93 Harley Sportster. I rode it all over Colorado, all over California, and even out to Key West once. I put 70,000+ miles on it in less than 3 years, but it was stolen. I cracked the rear cylinder at about 50K, and it wept a little bit of oil, but that bike got 50mpg no matter how easy or hard I rode it. Fun little bike, until I rode a Japbike and got addicted to the power & efficiency.



Peace & safe riding.
[/quote]
It sounds to me like we're actually saying the same thing when it comes to many Harley owners. For whatever reason, I've been under the impression that sportbike guys are far more interested in moving on to the latest/fastest option that they can obtain as opposed to hanging on to what the have. I'm willing to admit that I might be wrong about that.

[quote="calamarichris_imp" pid="112302" dateline="1392059040"]
Everything designed by the hand of man has its advantages and disadvantages. As PeeWee Herman says, "Everyone I know in life has a big but(t)...":
~Harleys sound great and you never have to adjust the valves, BUT they're slow, inefficient, and the rear cylinder does not get as much cooling air as the front. (That, and you have to ride everywhere with a serious scowl of determination on your face, as if you are on your way to commit your third-strike felony.)
~Crotch-rockets are light & fast, but the cylinders are bored into the top half of the crankcase (disposabike) and being stuck behind an RV on a twisty road sucks even worse when you're on one of them.
~Vertical Twins (one piston goes up while the other goes down) can rev higher and are generally more efficient overall, but they get lumpy and weak at low rpm.
~Parallel twins (both pistons rise & fall together) are terrific at lower rpm and have a sweet, balanced sound, but they create a pressure maelstrom in the crankcase which inhibits higher rpm power.

So what are some of the advantages and disadvantages of the CB11's engine? Not interested in the smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day advantages. Every design has its disadvantages, what are the CB11's?
Heavy weight?
Plastic bits?
Throttle governor?
Less cooling air for #2 & 3 cylinders? (Are they jetted identically with #1 & 4, or richer/cooler?)

Of course, the advantages of and disadvantages of those things designed by the hand of man pale in comparison to the advantages and disadvantages of man himself. In this case, I'd ask what exactly is it that you're looking for from this engine? Only by answering this question can you begin to address advantages and disadvantages when it comes to the CB1100. (i.e. If your not inclined to ride over 110 mph, then the speed-limiter isn't a disadvantage.)

How many Harley owners are concerned about riding overly fast or how much cooling their rear cylinder is getting compared to the front? Chances are it's a very small percentage. Conversely, what percentage of supersport class bike owners are concerned with how sedately their bike cruises when not being pushed or even have thoughts of long-term ownership? How many guys with twins are really worried about the lack of low-end or high-end power of their respective machines? For most, these disadvantages from a purely technical sense aren't disadvantages at all. Those who consider such items as disadvantages are more than likely those who didn't properly consider their own needs.

In my mind, you have to have something to measure against (in this case the desired use for the bike) to try and identify the respective disadvantages. My needs are bound to be different from yours and therefore what I see as an advantage or disadvantage might vary quite a bit from you, especially if your not concerned about the "smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day" type of stuff. It's honestly hard for me give you much feedback as one of my actual requirements was for a bike that I got as much enjoyment from looking at it when I was off of the bike as I did from actually riding it. What can I say, I went to school for engineering and ended up working for a number of years as a graphic designer, I'm a bit skewed.

I quickly identified two issues with the bike that were a disappointment to me. Thus far these are my only real gripes:

1.) The weight of the bike when moving it around in the garage and so forth. Obviously this can't be chalked up just to the engine, but the size of the engine surely plays a part in this. I'll simply live with this and won't be addressing it further. Once the bike starts rolling, however slowly, I'm good with it.

2.) The tone of the factory exhaust. Simply too peaceful for me. I'm not a fan of loud exhausts, but I do like an exhaust note with a bit of soul if you will. I addressed this by adding a slip-on exhaust from Staintune and I've been very pleased with the result.

Some issues, such as engine longevity, will only be answered in time. People can theorize as much as they want, but until enough units have withstood the test of time and miles (or not), theories will remain just that.

At this point, I can't tell you much at this point about working on the bike. That will change over time as I plan on doing pretty much everything on my own. I'm no expert mechanic by any means, but I've learned a heck of a lot by doing all of my own work on my Hawk GT (the only other street bike I've ever owned) over the past 7 years, and I like the feeling of satisfaction that I've received from that experience. No reason to change things up at this point. If I fail at something, then I can pay somebody else, but until that time comes, I'll keep turning my own wrenches.

With all that said, as mentioned, my Hawk GT is the only other street bike I've ever owned. A 647cc V-Twin and an 1140cc Inline Four don't exactly make for a wealth of experience. Therefore, for better or worse, my expectations are probably far different than many guys here who have owned a wealth of bikes over the years and have a lot more comparables to draw from.

Hmm... thanks Guth.
I'm looking for the balance, symmetry, quietness, and smoothness of an I-4; also conservative engineering (therefore I don't mind extra weight), a long service life. I like the simplicity of air-cooling, because all the additional plumbing, gaskets, & O-rings wear out more quickly than aluminum cooling fins do. And when those little gaskets start leaking, sometimes they can damage other components.

Your Hawk was as great a bike as my Superhawk was a POS. And it's not the number of bikes that makes for a wealth of experience. I know guys who buy a new bike every 18 months who still don't know the first thing about maintaining (heh--or riding) a bike well.

I disagree about the Harley owners and crotch-rocketeers: I've met a few Harley guys (bikes always seem to be at home) who absolutely believe that Harleys are the best, fastest, only real bikes on the planet. (Nevermind that my little EX500 twin will walk away from every Harley but the V-rod.) And most of the sport-squids with whom I've ridden/spoken are under the mistaken impression that all their bikes will last at least 100,000 miles--it certainly helps their own resale value to believe that myth, because I seldom see one with 50K miles.

Strange to me that you prefer a louder exhaust. I love a quiet bike. I used to get frustrated with everyone getting the loudest aftermarket exhaust possible, thinking they were "creating a bad name for motorcyclists", but that was a dumb thing to think. I've decided it's entirely to my benefit: I didn't spend a penny, and now I have a garage full of stealth bikes. It's true! I regularly travel at ~15 over the speed limit, and I never get tickets.
LEO’s have become so utterly conditioned to equate speed with noise that I regularly ride past speed traps at illegal speeds, and the cops just nod at me. It’s as if all the other gazelles have voluntarily donned belled collars to let the lion know that dinner is on the way.

My first bike was a '93 Harley Sportster. I rode it all over Colorado, all over California, and even out to Key West once. I put 70,000+ miles on it in less than 3 years, but it was stolen. I cracked the rear cylinder at about 50K, and it wept a little bit of oil, but that bike got 50mpg no matter how easy or hard I rode it. Fun little bike, until I rode a Japbike and got addicted to the power & efficiency.



Peace & safe riding.
[/quote]
I was commenting primarily on the tone of the exhaust. As I said, I'm not a fan of loud exhausts. I don't consider the Staintune to be loud at all, neither have any of my buddies who ride when they've heard it. It does however sound a fair amount deeper and throatier than the stock can and I much prefer the sound it makes to the stock exhaust note. I realize that exhaust tone has little to do with a technical deficiency of any sort, but they way my bike sounds now is simply one more facet that makes my ride that much more enjoyable (more of that subjective stuff).
[/quote] Just get a louder aftermarket exhaust. I'm convinced that the reason they sell so well is because:
a) We're afraid of looking like a newbie who doesn't know how to work on bikes. and
b) Because the louder exhaust noise drowns out the troubling mechanical noise going on between our legs.

[quote="Guth_imp" pid="112317" dateline="1392076200"]
[quote="calamarichris_imp" pid="112302" dateline="1392059040"]
Everything designed by the hand of man has its advantages and disadvantages. As PeeWee Herman says, "Everyone I know in life has a big but(t)...":
~Harleys sound great and you never have to adjust the valves, BUT they're slow, inefficient, and the rear cylinder does not get as much cooling air as the front. (That, and you have to ride everywhere with a serious scowl of determination on your face, as if you are on your way to commit your third-strike felony.)
~Crotch-rockets are light & fast, but the cylinders are bored into the top half of the crankcase (disposabike) and being stuck behind an RV on a twisty road sucks even worse when you're on one of them.
~Vertical Twins (one piston goes up while the other goes down) can rev higher and are generally more efficient overall, but they get lumpy and weak at low rpm.
~Parallel twins (both pistons rise & fall together) are terrific at lower rpm and have a sweet, balanced sound, but they create a pressure maelstrom in the crankcase which inhibits higher rpm power.

So what are some of the advantages and disadvantages of the CB11's engine? Not interested in the smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day advantages. Every design has its disadvantages, what are the CB11's?
Heavy weight?
Plastic bits?
Throttle governor?
Less cooling air for #2 & 3 cylinders? (Are they jetted identically with #1 & 4, or richer/cooler?)

Of course, the advantages of and disadvantages of those things designed by the hand of man pale in comparison to the advantages and disadvantages of man himself. In this case, I'd ask what exactly is it that you're looking for from this engine? Only by answering this question can you begin to address advantages and disadvantages when it comes to the CB1100. (i.e. If your not inclined to ride over 110 mph, then the speed-limiter isn't a disadvantage.)

How many Harley owners are concerned about riding overly fast or how much cooling their rear cylinder is getting compared to the front? Chances are it's a very small percentage. Conversely, what percentage of supersport class bike owners are concerned with how sedately their bike cruises when not being pushed or even have thoughts of long-term ownership? How many guys with twins are really worried about the lack of low-end or high-end power of their respective machines? For most, these disadvantages from a purely technical sense aren't disadvantages at all. Those who consider such items as disadvantages are more than likely those who didn't properly consider their own needs.

In my mind, you have to have something to measure against (in this case the desired use for the bike) to try and identify the respective disadvantages. My needs are bound to be different from yours and therefore what I see as an advantage or disadvantage might vary quite a bit from you, especially if your not concerned about the "smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day" type of stuff. It's honestly hard for me give you much feedback as one of my actual requirements was for a bike that I got as much enjoyment from looking at it when I was off of the bike as I did from actually riding it. What can I say, I went to school for engineering and ended up working for a number of years as a graphic designer, I'm a bit skewed.

I quickly identified two issues with the bike that were a disappointment to me. Thus far these are my only real gripes:

1.) The weight of the bike when moving it around in the garage and so forth. Obviously this can't be chalked up just to the engine, but the size of the engine surely plays a part in this. I'll simply live with this and won't be addressing it further. Once the bike starts rolling, however slowly, I'm good with it.

2.) The tone of the factory exhaust. Simply too peaceful for me. I'm not a fan of loud exhausts, but I do like an exhaust note with a bit of soul if you will. I addressed this by adding a slip-on exhaust from Staintune and I've been very pleased with the result.

Some issues, such as engine longevity, will only be answered in time. People can theorize as much as they want, but until enough units have withstood the test of time and miles (or not), theories will remain just that.

At this point, I can't tell you much at this point about working on the bike. That will change over time as I plan on doing pretty much everything on my own. I'm no expert mechanic by any means, but I've learned a heck of a lot by doing all of my own work on my Hawk GT (the only other street bike I've ever owned) over the past 7 years, and I like the feeling of satisfaction that I've received from that experience. No reason to change things up at this point. If I fail at something, then I can pay somebody else, but until that time comes, I'll keep turning my own wrenches.

With all that said, as mentioned, my Hawk GT is the only other street bike I've ever owned. A 647cc V-Twin and an 1140cc Inline Four don't exactly make for a wealth of experience. Therefore, for better or worse, my expectations are probably far different than many guys here who have owned a wealth of bikes over the years and have a lot more comparables to draw from.

Hmm... thanks Guth.
I'm looking for the balance, symmetry, quietness, and smoothness of an I-4; also conservative engineering (therefore I don't mind extra weight), a long service life. I like the simplicity of air-cooling, because all the additional plumbing, gaskets, & O-rings wear out more quickly than aluminum cooling fins do. And when those little gaskets start leaking, sometimes they can damage other components.

Your Hawk was as great a bike as my Superhawk was a POS. And it's not the number of bikes that makes for a wealth of experience. I know guys who buy a new bike every 18 months who still don't know the first thing about maintaining (heh--or riding) a bike well.

I disagree about the Harley owners and crotch-rocketeers: I've met a few Harley guys (bikes always seem to be at home) who absolutely believe that Harleys are the best, fastest, only real bikes on the planet. (Nevermind that my little EX500 twin will walk away from every Harley but the V-rod.) And most of the sport-squids with whom I've ridden/spoken are under the mistaken impression that all their bikes will last at least 100,000 miles--it certainly helps their own resale value to believe that myth, because I seldom see one with 50K miles.

Strange to me that you prefer a louder exhaust. I love a quiet bike. I used to get frustrated with everyone getting the loudest aftermarket exhaust possible, thinking they were "creating a bad name for motorcyclists", but that was a dumb thing to think. I've decided it's entirely to my benefit: I didn't spend a penny, and now I have a garage full of stealth bikes. It's true! I regularly travel at ~15 over the speed limit, and I never get tickets.
LEO’s have become so utterly conditioned to equate speed with noise that I regularly ride past speed traps at illegal speeds, and the cops just nod at me. It’s as if all the other gazelles have voluntarily donned belled collars to let the lion know that dinner is on the way.

My first bike was a '93 Harley Sportster. I rode it all over Colorado, all over California, and even out to Key West once. I put 70,000+ miles on it in less than 3 years, but it was stolen. I cracked the rear cylinder at about 50K, and it wept a little bit of oil, but that bike got 50mpg no matter how easy or hard I rode it. Fun little bike, until I rode a Japbike and got addicted to the power & efficiency.



Peace & safe riding.
[/quote]
I find the engine on the CB1100 to be rather fascinating in this regard. While quiet, it does create a plethora of minor mechanical noises, a machine-made symphony of sorts. I have rather sensitive ears and very early on this was somewhat a cause of concern for me. Now I don't really think about it. I certainly find the engine very smooth, then again, my comparable is the V-Twin of my Hawk. Before purchasing the CB, I had read countless times how "boring" I-4s are. I wouldn't necessarily call the CB1100's engine boring. However, I would call it predictable. Due to the broad powerband, propulsion always seems so effortless. It's easily able to launch itself forward from a dead stop, by just letting out the clutch lever without applying any throttle. Going down the open road, needing to pass another vehicle, rolling on the throttle always yields some nice solid grunt when needed.

[quote="calamarichris_imp" pid="112302" dateline="1392059040"]
Everything designed by the hand of man has its advantages and disadvantages. As PeeWee Herman says, "Everyone I know in life has a big but(t)...":
~Harleys sound great and you never have to adjust the valves, BUT they're slow, inefficient, and the rear cylinder does not get as much cooling air as the front. (That, and you have to ride everywhere with a serious scowl of determination on your face, as if you are on your way to commit your third-strike felony.)
~Crotch-rockets are light & fast, but the cylinders are bored into the top half of the crankcase (disposabike) and being stuck behind an RV on a twisty road sucks even worse when you're on one of them.
~Vertical Twins (one piston goes up while the other goes down) can rev higher and are generally more efficient overall, but they get lumpy and weak at low rpm.
~Parallel twins (both pistons rise & fall together) are terrific at lower rpm and have a sweet, balanced sound, but they create a pressure maelstrom in the crankcase which inhibits higher rpm power.

So what are some of the advantages and disadvantages of the CB11's engine? Not interested in the smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day advantages. Every design has its disadvantages, what are the CB11's?
Heavy weight?
Plastic bits?
Throttle governor?
Less cooling air for #2 & 3 cylinders? (Are they jetted identically with #1 & 4, or richer/cooler?)

Of course, the advantages of and disadvantages of those things designed by the hand of man pale in comparison to the advantages and disadvantages of man himself. In this case, I'd ask what exactly is it that you're looking for from this engine? Only by answering this question can you begin to address advantages and disadvantages when it comes to the CB1100. (i.e. If your not inclined to ride over 110 mph, then the speed-limiter isn't a disadvantage.)

How many Harley owners are concerned about riding overly fast or how much cooling their rear cylinder is getting compared to the front? Chances are it's a very small percentage. Conversely, what percentage of supersport class bike owners are concerned with how sedately their bike cruises when not being pushed or even have thoughts of long-term ownership? How many guys with twins are really worried about the lack of low-end or high-end power of their respective machines? For most, these disadvantages from a purely technical sense aren't disadvantages at all. Those who consider such items as disadvantages are more than likely those who didn't properly consider their own needs.

In my mind, you have to have something to measure against (in this case the desired use for the bike) to try and identify the respective disadvantages. My needs are bound to be different from yours and therefore what I see as an advantage or disadvantage might vary quite a bit from you, especially if your not concerned about the "smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day" type of stuff. It's honestly hard for me give you much feedback as one of my actual requirements was for a bike that I got as much enjoyment from looking at it when I was off of the bike as I did from actually riding it. What can I say, I went to school for engineering and ended up working for a number of years as a graphic designer, I'm a bit skewed.

I quickly identified two issues with the bike that were a disappointment to me. Thus far these are my only real gripes:

1.) The weight of the bike when moving it around in the garage and so forth. Obviously this can't be chalked up just to the engine, but the size of the engine surely plays a part in this. I'll simply live with this and won't be addressing it further. Once the bike starts rolling, however slowly, I'm good with it.

2.) The tone of the factory exhaust. Simply too peaceful for me. I'm not a fan of loud exhausts, but I do like an exhaust note with a bit of soul if you will. I addressed this by adding a slip-on exhaust from Staintune and I've been very pleased with the result.

Some issues, such as engine longevity, will only be answered in time. People can theorize as much as they want, but until enough units have withstood the test of time and miles (or not), theories will remain just that.

At this point, I can't tell you much at this point about working on the bike. That will change over time as I plan on doing pretty much everything on my own. I'm no expert mechanic by any means, but I've learned a heck of a lot by doing all of my own work on my Hawk GT (the only other street bike I've ever owned) over the past 7 years, and I like the feeling of satisfaction that I've received from that experience. No reason to change things up at this point. If I fail at something, then I can pay somebody else, but until that time comes, I'll keep turning my own wrenches.

With all that said, as mentioned, my Hawk GT is the only other street bike I've ever owned. A 647cc V-Twin and an 1140cc Inline Four don't exactly make for a wealth of experience. Therefore, for better or worse, my expectations are probably far different than many guys here who have owned a wealth of bikes over the years and have a lot more comparables to draw from.

Hmm... thanks Guth.
I'm looking for the balance, symmetry, quietness, and smoothness of an I-4; also conservative engineering (therefore I don't mind extra weight), a long service life. I like the simplicity of air-cooling, because all the additional plumbing, gaskets, & O-rings wear out more quickly than aluminum cooling fins do. And when those little gaskets start leaking, sometimes they can damage other components.

Your Hawk was as great a bike as my Superhawk was a POS. And it's not the number of bikes that makes for a wealth of experience. I know guys who buy a new bike every 18 months who still don't know the first thing about maintaining (heh--or riding) a bike well.

I disagree about the Harley owners and crotch-rocketeers: I've met a few Harley guys (bikes always seem to be at home) who absolutely believe that Harleys are the best, fastest, only real bikes on the planet. (Nevermind that my little EX500 twin will walk away from every Harley but the V-rod.) And most of the sport-squids with whom I've ridden/spoken are under the mistaken impression that all their bikes will last at least 100,000 miles--it certainly helps their own resale value to believe that myth, because I seldom see one with 50K miles.

Strange to me that you prefer a louder exhaust. I love a quiet bike. I used to get frustrated with everyone getting the loudest aftermarket exhaust possible, thinking they were "creating a bad name for motorcyclists", but that was a dumb thing to think. I've decided it's entirely to my benefit: I didn't spend a penny, and now I have a garage full of stealth bikes. It's true! I regularly travel at ~15 over the speed limit, and I never get tickets.
LEO’s have become so utterly conditioned to equate speed with noise that I regularly ride past speed traps at illegal speeds, and the cops just nod at me. It’s as if all the other gazelles have voluntarily donned belled collars to let the lion know that dinner is on the way.

My first bike was a '93 Harley Sportster. I rode it all over Colorado, all over California, and even out to Key West once. I put 70,000+ miles on it in less than 3 years, but it was stolen. I cracked the rear cylinder at about 50K, and it wept a little bit of oil, but that bike got 50mpg no matter how easy or hard I rode it. Fun little bike, until I rode a Japbike and got addicted to the power & efficiency.



Peace & safe riding.
[/quote]
My first couple of years with the Hawk, I probably spent as much time with it out in the garage as I did out on the road. Not that I really had to (I went through and replaced a lot of parts simply due to age), but I truly enjoyed the experience. Pretty much everything I've learned from my Hawk, I can apply to my CB, except for rebuilding carbs and that's okay by me.

[quote="calamarichris_imp" pid="112302" dateline="1392059040"]
Everything designed by the hand of man has its advantages and disadvantages. As PeeWee Herman says, "Everyone I know in life has a big but(t)...":
~Harleys sound great and you never have to adjust the valves, BUT they're slow, inefficient, and the rear cylinder does not get as much cooling air as the front. (That, and you have to ride everywhere with a serious scowl of determination on your face, as if you are on your way to commit your third-strike felony.)
~Crotch-rockets are light & fast, but the cylinders are bored into the top half of the crankcase (disposabike) and being stuck behind an RV on a twisty road sucks even worse when you're on one of them.
~Vertical Twins (one piston goes up while the other goes down) can rev higher and are generally more efficient overall, but they get lumpy and weak at low rpm.
~Parallel twins (both pistons rise & fall together) are terrific at lower rpm and have a sweet, balanced sound, but they create a pressure maelstrom in the crankcase which inhibits higher rpm power.

So what are some of the advantages and disadvantages of the CB11's engine? Not interested in the smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day advantages. Every design has its disadvantages, what are the CB11's?
Heavy weight?
Plastic bits?
Throttle governor?
Less cooling air for #2 & 3 cylinders? (Are they jetted identically with #1 & 4, or richer/cooler?)

Of course, the advantages of and disadvantages of those things designed by the hand of man pale in comparison to the advantages and disadvantages of man himself. In this case, I'd ask what exactly is it that you're looking for from this engine? Only by answering this question can you begin to address advantages and disadvantages when it comes to the CB1100. (i.e. If your not inclined to ride over 110 mph, then the speed-limiter isn't a disadvantage.)

How many Harley owners are concerned about riding overly fast or how much cooling their rear cylinder is getting compared to the front? Chances are it's a very small percentage. Conversely, what percentage of supersport class bike owners are concerned with how sedately their bike cruises when not being pushed or even have thoughts of long-term ownership? How many guys with twins are really worried about the lack of low-end or high-end power of their respective machines? For most, these disadvantages from a purely technical sense aren't disadvantages at all. Those who consider such items as disadvantages are more than likely those who didn't properly consider their own needs.

In my mind, you have to have something to measure against (in this case the desired use for the bike) to try and identify the respective disadvantages. My needs are bound to be different from yours and therefore what I see as an advantage or disadvantage might vary quite a bit from you, especially if your not concerned about the "smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day" type of stuff. It's honestly hard for me give you much feedback as one of my actual requirements was for a bike that I got as much enjoyment from looking at it when I was off of the bike as I did from actually riding it. What can I say, I went to school for engineering and ended up working for a number of years as a graphic designer, I'm a bit skewed.

I quickly identified two issues with the bike that were a disappointment to me. Thus far these are my only real gripes:

1.) The weight of the bike when moving it around in the garage and so forth. Obviously this can't be chalked up just to the engine, but the size of the engine surely plays a part in this. I'll simply live with this and won't be addressing it further. Once the bike starts rolling, however slowly, I'm good with it.

2.) The tone of the factory exhaust. Simply too peaceful for me. I'm not a fan of loud exhausts, but I do like an exhaust note with a bit of soul if you will. I addressed this by adding a slip-on exhaust from Staintune and I've been very pleased with the result.

Some issues, such as engine longevity, will only be answered in time. People can theorize as much as they want, but until enough units have withstood the test of time and miles (or not), theories will remain just that.

At this point, I can't tell you much at this point about working on the bike. That will change over time as I plan on doing pretty much everything on my own. I'm no expert mechanic by any means, but I've learned a heck of a lot by doing all of my own work on my Hawk GT (the only other street bike I've ever owned) over the past 7 years, and I like the feeling of satisfaction that I've received from that experience. No reason to change things up at this point. If I fail at something, then I can pay somebody else, but until that time comes, I'll keep turning my own wrenches.

With all that said, as mentioned, my Hawk GT is the only other street bike I've ever owned. A 647cc V-Twin and an 1140cc Inline Four don't exactly make for a wealth of experience. Therefore, for better or worse, my expectations are probably far different than many guys here who have owned a wealth of bikes over the years and have a lot more comparables to draw from.

Hmm... thanks Guth.
I'm looking for the balance, symmetry, quietness, and smoothness of an I-4; also conservative engineering (therefore I don't mind extra weight), a long service life. I like the simplicity of air-cooling, because all the additional plumbing, gaskets, & O-rings wear out more quickly than aluminum cooling fins do. And when those little gaskets start leaking, sometimes they can damage other components.

Your Hawk was as great a bike as my Superhawk was a POS. And it's not the number of bikes that makes for a wealth of experience. I know guys who buy a new bike every 18 months who still don't know the first thing about maintaining (heh--or riding) a bike well.

I disagree about the Harley owners and crotch-rocketeers: I've met a few Harley guys (bikes always seem to be at home) who absolutely believe that Harleys are the best, fastest, only real bikes on the planet. (Nevermind that my little EX500 twin will walk away from every Harley but the V-rod.) And most of the sport-squids with whom I've ridden/spoken are under the mistaken impression that all their bikes will last at least 100,000 miles--it certainly helps their own resale value to believe that myth, because I seldom see one with 50K miles.

Strange to me that you prefer a louder exhaust. I love a quiet bike. I used to get frustrated with everyone getting the loudest aftermarket exhaust possible, thinking they were "creating a bad name for motorcyclists", but that was a dumb thing to think. I've decided it's entirely to my benefit: I didn't spend a penny, and now I have a garage full of stealth bikes. It's true! I regularly travel at ~15 over the speed limit, and I never get tickets.
LEO’s have become so utterly conditioned to equate speed with noise that I regularly ride past speed traps at illegal speeds, and the cops just nod at me. It’s as if all the other gazelles have voluntarily donned belled collars to let the lion know that dinner is on the way.

My first bike was a '93 Harley Sportster. I rode it all over Colorado, all over California, and even out to Key West once. I put 70,000+ miles on it in less than 3 years, but it was stolen. I cracked the rear cylinder at about 50K, and it wept a little bit of oil, but that bike got 50mpg no matter how easy or hard I rode it. Fun little bike, until I rode a Japbike and got addicted to the power & efficiency.



Peace & safe riding.
[/quote]
It sounds to me like we're actually saying the same thing when it comes to many Harley owners. For whatever reason, I've been under the impression that sportbike guys are far more interested in moving on to the latest/fastest option that they can obtain as opposed to hanging on to what the have. I'm willing to admit that I might be wrong about that.

[quote="calamarichris_imp" pid="112302" dateline="1392059040"]
Everything designed by the hand of man has its advantages and disadvantages. As PeeWee Herman says, "Everyone I know in life has a big but(t)...":
~Harleys sound great and you never have to adjust the valves, BUT they're slow, inefficient, and the rear cylinder does not get as much cooling air as the front. (That, and you have to ride everywhere with a serious scowl of determination on your face, as if you are on your way to commit your third-strike felony.)
~Crotch-rockets are light & fast, but the cylinders are bored into the top half of the crankcase (disposabike) and being stuck behind an RV on a twisty road sucks even worse when you're on one of them.
~Vertical Twins (one piston goes up while the other goes down) can rev higher and are generally more efficient overall, but they get lumpy and weak at low rpm.
~Parallel twins (both pistons rise & fall together) are terrific at lower rpm and have a sweet, balanced sound, but they create a pressure maelstrom in the crankcase which inhibits higher rpm power.

So what are some of the advantages and disadvantages of the CB11's engine? Not interested in the smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day advantages. Every design has its disadvantages, what are the CB11's?
Heavy weight?
Plastic bits?
Throttle governor?
Less cooling air for #2 & 3 cylinders? (Are they jetted identically with #1 & 4, or richer/cooler?)

Of course, the advantages of and disadvantages of those things designed by the hand of man pale in comparison to the advantages and disadvantages of man himself. In this case, I'd ask what exactly is it that you're looking for from this engine? Only by answering this question can you begin to address advantages and disadvantages when it comes to the CB1100. (i.e. If your not inclined to ride over 110 mph, then the speed-limiter isn't a disadvantage.)

How many Harley owners are concerned about riding overly fast or how much cooling their rear cylinder is getting compared to the front? Chances are it's a very small percentage. Conversely, what percentage of supersport class bike owners are concerned with how sedately their bike cruises when not being pushed or even have thoughts of long-term ownership? How many guys with twins are really worried about the lack of low-end or high-end power of their respective machines? For most, these disadvantages from a purely technical sense aren't disadvantages at all. Those who consider such items as disadvantages are more than likely those who didn't properly consider their own needs.

In my mind, you have to have something to measure against (in this case the desired use for the bike) to try and identify the respective disadvantages. My needs are bound to be different from yours and therefore what I see as an advantage or disadvantage might vary quite a bit from you, especially if your not concerned about the "smile-on-your-face while riding on a sunny day" type of stuff. It's honestly hard for me give you much feedback as one of my actual requirements was for a bike that I got as much enjoyment from looking at it when I was off of the bike as I did from actually riding it. What can I say, I went to school for engineering and ended up working for a number of years as a graphic designer, I'm a bit skewed.

I quickly identified two issues with the bike that were a disappointment to me. Thus far these are my only real gripes:

1.) The weight of the bike when moving it around in the garage and so forth. Obviously this can't be chalked up just to the engine, but the size of the engine surely plays a part in this. I'll simply live with this and won't be addressing it further. Once the bike starts rolling, however slowly, I'm good with it.

2.) The tone of the factory exhaust. Simply too peaceful for me. I'm not a fan of loud exhausts, but I do like an exhaust note with a bit of soul if you will. I addressed this by adding a slip-on exhaust from Staintune and I've been very pleased with the result.

Some issues, such as engine longevity, will only be answered in time. People can theorize as much as they want, but until enough units have withstood the test of time and miles (or not), theories will remain just that.

At this point, I can't tell you much at this point about working on the bike. That will change over time as I plan on doing pretty much everything on my own. I'm no expert mechanic by any means, but I've learned a heck of a lot by doing all of my own work on my Hawk GT (the only other street bike I've ever owned) over the past 7 years, and I like the feeling of satisfaction that I've received from that experience. No reason to change things up at this point. If I fail at something, then I can pay somebody else, but until that time comes, I'll keep turning my own wrenches.

With all that said, as mentioned, my Hawk GT is the only other street bike I've ever owned. A 647cc V-Twin and an 1140cc Inline Four don't exactly make for a wealth of experience. Therefore, for better or worse, my expectations are probably far different than many guys here who have owned a wealth of bikes over the years and have a lot more comparables to draw from.

Hmm... thanks Guth.
I'm looking for the balance, symmetry, quietness, and smoothness of an I-4; also conservative engine

[rboe]

The old UJM's are a style I was glad to see go back then when the partially faired sport bikes first started appearing. I thought they were the bee's knee's (e.g. Honda Interceptor, CX500T, Kawasaki Ninja's etc.). But I think they have gone too far and the UJM represented by the CB1100 looks great and brings back the glory years without all the "problems" the originals had. Like carbs.

I have a '73 CB350F (the four cylinder version), which was fairly well thought of in some circles back in the day but I'll tell you, carbs suck. The brakes are not even threatening to bend the forks. I converted to electronic ignition so that issue is behind me, but rose coloured glasses are a cuss.

The CB1100 brings back all the good things we remember with few of the bad. Naturally there is a weight penalty, but hey, if you want good handling you're going to need a better frame which means a bit more metal. If you want (mandated by Federal Law) an exhaust system that won't rust out in less than 8000 miles the can is going to have be more robust. All in all, Honda did an excellent job and like most you I put my money where my mouth was and bought one.

[HondaJon_imp]

1. Looks. It "gets" the retro thing down perfectly. How many times have you been asked what year the bike is? Stone cold perfect, in my view.

2. Brakes. 10/10 here. They are superb, sourced from an earlier CBR1000RR. Terrific power, great modulation, well-matched to the mission. (Non-ABS owner here)

3. Chassis. For this type of bike, the steel frame is hell-for-strong and doesn't really exhibit much flex until pushed hard. By that time you'd be wanting another bike anyway as you're running out of cornering clearance. Forks are pretty massive, swing arm is stout.

4. Engine. Runs like a Swiss watch. Power band as flat as they come, but pulls hard to redline, and will get you out of harm's way whilst stretching your arms pretty well. Smooth, substantial, and just looks right. It's the centerpiece of a damned fine motorcycle.

5. Feel. This thing feels like a real motorcycle ought to. Ergos are good, but easily tailored to most riders. All-day freeway rides are cake. Slamming through the rough, tight twisties is no issue if you know what you are about.

6. Instrumentation. Just the facts, ma'am. Nice big analog clocks up there, don't need no stinking gear position indicator. Love to zing that needle into the red zone; the bike loves that.

Feel free to add to this list.

7. Centerstand

[rmack_imp]

Could not agree more after many years of modifying gsx1100s, cbs spent $800 on one gsx frame and it still didn't handle any better than the cb , all types of twin shock bikes not one was as better bike all round than the cb1100 they were quicker but that was about it, great frame excellent suspension a ripper engine , the perfect blank canvas to build a twin shock scratcher in the old mould .
gazi shocks
power commander
auto tune
fork brace
no cat in exhaust
modified exhaust
tsr air funnel
10 mm lift on rear
12 mm drop in front
conti attack cr tyres
flatter bars