Posts: 1,209
Threads: 71
Likes Received: 88 in 25 posts
Likes Given: 14
Joined: Apr 2025
I think the low compression ratio and modest power output is a tribute to the air cooling. This helps to keep low the absolute amount of thermal dissipation loss.
However, the disadvantage of low compression is mpg. The more compression, the better mpg. But then, if you'd like to go for economics, you might have bought a CBF1000F.
Last Sunday on tour with my friends I really enjoyed the smooth ride on my CB. There was no issue, floating around with my friends on their 163 HP BMW.
Posts: 23,403
Threads: 697
Likes Received: 482 in 220 posts
Likes Given: 597
Joined: Apr 2025
Nightrider said:
Most, if not all 4 into 2 pictures I see, are aftermarket on those old bikes.
You are simply wrong on this. From the factory they came with 4 into 2's. There were only 4 models that came with a 4 into 1 as I stated above, the 400 Supersport the 550 Supersport and the 750 Supersport. The 4th was the 750 Automatic. In 1979 when Honda went to the DOHC motor, the Supersports (750, 900, 1100) all came with 4 into 2's. The 4 cyl CB 650 Nighthawks and the 4 cyl CB 700 Nighthawks from 83 on all had 4 into 2's and the CB 750 Nighthawks from 1991-2003 all had 4 into 2's. I sold Hondas from 1974 to 1989. Trust me or better yet look it up.
Honda carried the 4 into 4 on the CB 750K's thru 81 and on the 900 and 1000 customs thru 86 I believe.
But there were no DOHC Hondas of any displacement with a factory 4 into 1 up until the 2010 CB1100 was released in Japan, Australia and New Zealand.
Nightrider said:
The single appears on the right side leaving no hot pipe on the traditional left mount side.
Yes, and above you said it was on the left, but apparently edited it to say "correct" side.
Nightrider said:
If the rider of a 4 into 2 CB 1100 weighs 50 lbs more than the rider of a 4 into 1, which is (itself) 30 lbs lighter, the rider on the 4 into 2 will have a much much higher GVWR (50 + 30 = 80!!!), his 4 into 2 bike will be slower run and the rider (non-sexist) will get worse mileage. But what's the point? The 4 into 1 is 30 lbs lighter just from the pipes and smaller size tank and even lighter still with both bikes topped off since it's tank is smaller and the higher weight 4 into 2 must carry more gas because it is heavier. So...a bike being 30 lbs lighter is not a small thing, it is a great advantage which is why the bike was designed this way to begiin with.
My reply:
You are correct I should have said 35 pound lighter rider not 20 pound lighter rider.
But what's the point?
Just having a 4 into 1 pipe will not necessarily translate into an advantage, nor will having a bike that weighs 30 pounds less than someone else's bike.
The lightest rider and bike COMBO will run fastest, and get the best mileage if riders are of equal riding ability. Hard to buck physics. If I weigh 180 on my 570 pound DLX race someone that weighs 240 on a 540 pound std who is going to be fastest and get the best mileage? I think physics would suggest I would, so the 4 into 1 was not an advantage in that case. If both riders weighed 180 then the guy with the lighter bike would obviously have the advantage.
The bike was designed with the 4 into 1 to honor the Supersport 400, 550 and 750s from 75 to 78. Weight was not a consideration by the engineers. They have said so in the history and design of the CB1100 as published by Honda. They didn't design the 4 into 1 for any kind of advantage. It was simply a styling nod to some past 70's models.
Posts: 274
Threads: 6
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Aug 2013
Ahhh...gotta love a little generational ribbing! Brothers of the Original design unite!! 
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posts: 171
Threads: 6
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Jun 2014
The 1142cc engine was built for reliability, and the engineers deemed that this was the best possible solution. Hence, why it only has 87 horsepower.
The entire engine article can be found here:
http://world.honda.com/CB1100/engineer-talk/episode1/
There is some sick engineering that went into it.
Posts: 2,590
Threads: 28
Likes Received: 6 in 2 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Mar 2013
(03-25-2015, 09:41 AM)The ferret_imp Wrote: Nightrider said:
Most, if not all 4 into 2 pictures I see, are aftermarket on those old bikes.
You are simply wrong on this. From the factory they came with 4 into 2's. There were only 4 models that came with a 4 into 1 as I stated above, the 400 Supersport the 550 Supersport and the 750 Supersport. The 4th was the 750 Automatic. In 1979 when Honda went to the DOHC motor, the Supersports (750, 900, 1100) all came with 4 into 2's. The 4 cyl CB 650 Nighthawks and the 4 cyl CB 700 Nighthawks from 83 on all had 4 into 2's and the CB 750 Nighthawks from 1991-2003 all had 4 into 2's. I sold Hondas from 1974 to 1989. Trust me or better yet look it up.
Honda carried the 4 into 4 on the CB 750K's thru 81 and on the 900 and 1000 customs thru 86 I believe.
But there were no DOHC Hondas of any displacement with a factory 4 into 1 up until the 2010 CB1100 was released in Japan, Australia and New Zealand.
Nightrider said:
The single appears on the right side leaving no hot pipe on the traditional left mount side.
Yes, and above you said it was on the left, but apparently edited it to say "correct" side.
Nightrider said:
If the rider of a 4 into 2 CB 1100 weighs 50 lbs more than the rider of a 4 into 1, which is (itself) 30 lbs lighter, the rider on the 4 into 2 will have a much much higher GVWR (50 + 30 = 80!!!), his 4 into 2 bike will be slower run and the rider (non-sexist) will get worse mileage. But what's the point? The 4 into 1 is 30 lbs lighter just from the pipes and smaller size tank and even lighter still with both bikes topped off since it's tank is smaller and the higher weight 4 into 2 must carry more gas because it is heavier. So...a bike being 30 lbs lighter is not a small thing, it is a great advantage which is why the bike was designed this way to begiin with.
My reply:
You are correct I should have said 35 pound lighter rider not 20 pound lighter rider.
But what's the point?
Just having a 4 into 1 pipe will not necessarily translate into an advantage, nor will having a bike that weighs 30 pounds less than someone else's bike.
The lightest rider and bike COMBO will run fastest, and get the best mileage if riders are of equal riding ability. Hard to buck physics. If I weigh 180 on my 570 pound DLX race someone that weighs 240 on a 540 pound std who is going to be fastest and get the best mileage? I think physics would suggest I would, so the 4 into 1 was not an advantage in that case. If both riders weighed 180 then the guy with the lighter bike would obviously have the advantage.
The bike was designed with the 4 into 1 to honor the Supersport 400, 550 and 750s from 75 to 78. Weight was not a consideration by the engineers. They have said so in the history and design of the CB1100 as published by Honda. They didn't design the 4 into 1 for any kind of advantage. It was simply a styling nod to some past 70's models.
I didn't know that. I always assumed that they went with the 4 into 1 because the first thing that everybody did with their 70s/80s UJM 4s was to slap an aftermarket pipe on them. Stock pipes were passe' back then. 
Posts: 2,542
Threads: 125
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Mar 2013
As I've said in the past, for me the attraction to the CB1100 is mostly about the looks. All other positives are just icing on the cake and I'm probably less worried about horsepower than a lot of guys shopping for bikes today. I have to admit that I got a chuckle out of the author's comment about the boxy tank on the Deluxe. Boxy tank and all, the first photo featured in the article header is a great shot.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posts: 16,123
Threads: 342
Likes Received: 668 in 367 posts
Likes Given: 779
Joined: Apr 2025
Posts: 23,403
Threads: 697
Likes Received: 482 in 220 posts
Likes Given: 597
Joined: Apr 2025
Notice the two bikes in the picture here with designer . Clearly the two bikes pictured were the primary inspiration for the CB1100. The CB 750K ( with rlets and gaiters btw) and the CB 400 supersport. Original design had a 4 into 4 system. Updated designs had the snaky headpipes from the CB400 fours 4 into 1.
http://world.honda.com/design/designers-talk/cb1100/
With regards to tank shape, for the EX/DLX they wanted to increase capacity. One of the design goals was to let the rider view the engine from the riders seat, so it couldn't be wider. Going longer would mean less room in the rider/passenger area, so it couldn't be longer. Only 1 way to go and that was up, hence the boxier look. I think the 13 tank is probably a better looking tank, but I don't find the tank shape of the DLX objectionable, just different, and maybe closer in shape to the original CB750. It goes with the 4 into 2. It would not look as good on a 4 into 1 model, as it is not as sporty.
On another note I must correct a mistake I made above when I said no DOHC I4 had a 4 into 1. That was wrong. I was thinking about this as I went to sleep last night. Honda did put a 4 into 1 on a couple of models. The 600, 900 and 1000 cc fully faired sport models called Hurricanes and models designated RR's (road race) but most relevant, the naked Honda 599 and 919s. I was still working for Honda when the first 600 and 1000 Hurricanes were released, but not when the later RRs or 599/919s were released so they didn't readily come to mind. Sorry about that.
Posts: 5,024
Threads: 136
Likes Received: 135 in 57 posts
Likes Given: 66
Joined: May 2013
The most important question from the article is what boots is he wearing? The article says Redwing 84206, but I can't find that number on Redwing's website and the link provided takes me to a boot on Amazon that is clearly not what is in the photo.
Posts: 23,403
Threads: 697
Likes Received: 482 in 220 posts
Likes Given: 597
Joined: Apr 2025
Looks like about a 10" dark brown leather lace up Sea.
I am amazed looking at the pic that Cormanus et al posted, that a 6'5" 210 lb guy has that much space on the seat behind him.
|
