Are there still VFR faithful out there? Honda has not forgotten you. A new VFR800F went on display in Milan today. Featuring new styling, including a single, underslung exhaust and new bodywork. The new VFR800F has a much simplier, cleaner look, and it loses 22 pounds in the process versus last year’s European model. Claimed wet weight (fully fueled) is now down to 525 pounds. Peak horsepower is 106.
A new fork, new swingarm, and wheels go along with adjustable seat height and a standard traction control system. Also standard is ABS, heated grips and self-cancelling turn signals.
The v-4 soul gets tweaked for an increase in low and mid-range power. Revised ergonomics, including a “significantly slimmer waist”, together with the weight loss, should make the bike feel more nimble.
The headlights are LEDs, as is the tail light. Instrumentation is also new, and now includes a gear position indicator, ambient temperature and fuel consumption information.
We do not know at this time if the new VFRR800F is headed for the U.S. market for 2014. Stay tuned.
As a VFR rider since 1996, 750 ,800 VTEC x2. I like the look of the new machine, the styling looks more like the last of the 750s, which is good. What I want from my next bike is, a VFR with more power and torque from a none VTEC engine and less weight, I.e a new, updated VFR! It looks like Honda may have succeeded overall but I will have to have a look in the flesh and a test ride. I tried a 1200 but all that weight is just wrong.
Just when i get my 2011 VFR800 sorted (fueling and handling), along comes the 2014 VFR800. Honda Australia lowered the price of the VFR800 some years ago to a level that made them a bargain, i assume, to move stock. For me to entertain an upgrade (?) to the 2014 model, pricing and/or change over will have to comparable. No way am i going to fork out lots of $’s to change should Honda want to charge ‘normal’ retail price for the 2014 model.
As for my current VFR. It is an excellent bike for both hills riding and touring. I ride reasonably quickly (relying on corner speed) and with the bike setup i have i rarely get into Vtech territory and the racket that comes with it. The Vtech works well when going for it and passing though. I have owned lots of sport bikes in previous years but the VFR is the best and easiest bike i have ridden. I dare say the 2014 VFR800 will be an improvement in both power delivery and handling with the new features more a marketing ploy than being essential. Traction control on a V4 with not a lot of power and plenty of weight is not essential or i would argue, necessary. For touring, i would gladly swap for a full-on cruise control like the new Yamaha FJR1300.
I like the red color. Honda’s should be red. Red bikes are faster.
Huh, more horse power they`ve said . Mine is 2008 and has got 109HP. The new one has 106.Yesss, that is big improvement HONDA.:(
I would expected at least 120HP, at least 95Nm of torque, with the same engine. And 80 lbs wait downsizing to satisfy todays market needs.
I`m thinking this is facelifted old one, but facelift looks cheaply done(it doesn`t look and feel something special like the old one, it looks now just like an everage bike).
HONDA I`m once again dissapointed.
You are joking, yes?
My 2006 Gunmetal black VFR 800 was a much better looking bike. Seems like Honda needs to hire some Italian designers to dress up the ugly bikes they are putting out. VFR used to be the most stylistic model around. Compare the new VFR to the new MV800. Wow what a difference.
Maybe Honda should give up the bike business and make some Minivans.
Couldn’t agree more. All Honda’s new models look totaly uninspired and dull. Italian/non italian, not sure what, but they do need to hire a new designer.
I agree too. It doen`t have character no more. Better would be, if the face would stay preety the same, only new accesories would be added. And yes, it should have more power. At least 120HP. How is it posibble for 20 years that Honda can`t improve 800cc engine for at least 10%. Even Volkswagen can do it.
V-TEC on no gear-driven cams makes this bike a loser right out of the gate.
What’ the benefit of gear driven cams, a neat noise?
The use of gear driven cams as opposed to belt, chain, or hybrid types of systems provide more can timing stability especially at high rpm’s, and are therefore(or were) in high performance and racing applications.
But I highly disagree with what “Gronde” posted. Vtec has been sorted out now for a number of years. After all it has been 10-12 years since the initial implementation, which we all agree, sucked. I’m not saying I like the technolgy, which I think was pretty primative by Honda’s standards. But they has smoothed out the transition between running on two valves per cylinder to four. But iut is fuctionbal and reliable. This bike/motor is not a “looser”.
So gear drive is really overkill for such a conservatively tuned engine.
Anything that revs past 8000rpms could benefit from gear-driven cams. Even conservatively tuned engines could benefit from it due to the reduced friction they provide. The reason you don’t see them used is because of cost – they are very expensive compared to a chain and tensioner setup. I think most, if not all, of the current sport bikes even use timing chains for this reason.
There is also the issue that gear driven cam engines produce more “noise” as ass the EPA has noise regulations to follow, cannot be implemented for reasonable costs nowadays.
But technology has progressed to the point where new methods for cam profiling and high rev stability can be enhanced by different methods. The most extreme I have heard of is of a pneumatic or hydraulic system that actuates the valves instead of an actual can, and with the advent of faster computing, can actually change lift and duration on the fly depending on road conditions and demands on the motor. Of course in racing this means that a team could “profile” the race course into how the motor operates. Think more torque out of corners and more horsepower for straights.
It’s a loser because most every VFR rider that I know would have rather just had an increase to 1000cc’s and gear-driven cams w/ no V-TEC. Might have even been simpler and cheaper to build, too. This bike is probably not coming to the USA anyway, so it’s all a moot point.
I have had 5 VFR’s 1984, 86′, 90′, 98′ and 2001(none w/V-TEC). Back in 2002, all I wished for was a bump to 1000cc’s and reduced weight. I fell out-of-love with VFR’s in 2002. Never was a fan of underseat exhaust. This new VFR looks good to me and I think it’ll come to the US. I’ll keep an open mind about the V-TEC motor, because I miss the versatility of the VFR’s as a great all-around, sporty-tourer. Sell price will be “key”.
I see that by “loser”, you mean a bike that won’t sell rather than one that under performs if I can take your last comment so.
But I whole hardidly agree about the displacement increase. Ever since the VTEC change I was hoping for a more substantial evolvement from Honda as in going to a full liter design, upgrading to the latest or even innovating new electronics( This is/was Honda’s platform for innovation), and whatever might enhance the ride experience. It’s not like they couldn’t make plenty of horsepower and torque from 1000cc. But they had to go with 1200cc, an automatic transmission, that most saw as technology for technologies sake, and heavy weight with no real travel range. I mean. a 4.5 gallon tank for 1200cc motor!!!!
Let’s try this whole VFR again, please.
They did increase the displacement- the VFR1200. It is obviously a very different motorcycle.
Vtec may be “sorted” but it still requires a massive service to check the system. Many dealers actually pull the engine for this one. Vtec doesn’t do anything and needs to go away.
We are not going to see gear-driven cams on anything short of the most high performance bikes available ever again. It is time the VFR faithful accept that. I’ll hold my opinion on the VTEC until I ride one, but I highly doubt it is anywhere near as big a deal as people make it out to be and is probably a pretty good system by now, or else surely Honda would have ditched it.
To me, the big question is why Honda couldn’t produce an 800cc sport touring bike under 500lbs. If Yamaha moves quickly to expand it’s FZ-09 platform and the remarkably low manufacturing costs apparently associated with it to sport, sport-touring and adventure platforms, they are going to have a lot of their competitors burning the midnight oil for a while.
That’s one of the best things it could happen, a player to come with such a product that no one else could do but innovate.
Wow, here’s my replacement for my sv650s. I had ’83 and ’85 interceptors. Looks like
Honda has nailed the update. Please bring this one stateside !
nice job honda !
I like the look. I am definitely an old timer having been riding over 40 years, but I think the latest styles try to push the style envelope too far just for change sake. This clean design is refreshing and functional. Now if they would only make a fill litre size one of these…..
OMG Miguel on vfrdiscussion must of creamed his shorts when he saw those pictures of the new VFR. Now he just has to crash the free VFR he got so he can get this one!
I’ve owned six other variations of VFR’s,I currently ride a 2006 VFR with ABS all year round, it’s been flawless for my needs. I looked at and rode the current 1200, I didn’t dislike it, just didn’t have that connection with the bike to want to buy it. Has alot of the things that I would like to have on a smaller bike. looks like someone at Honda had the same idea. I would certainly buy this new VFR800F if it became available in Canada.
Nice Honda! If it comes to Canada, I will, for sure, have a look at it.
What can I say, I like the Honda’s V4 ! I’ve had so many (1983 & 85 Interceptor750 – 1986 Interceptor750 – 1990 VFR750 – 2005 VFR800 – 2010 VFR1200).
As an owner of an ’01 and an ’07 Red/ White/ Blue Anniversary, I am glad to see Honda give the Interceptor a new face lift.
I love the wheels and the nod to the old Interceptors/ VFRs with the NACA duct on the side. There’s a bit of the Gen 5 (’98-’01) look in the front as well. Thankfully they didn’t use too much of the VFR 1200 “Shamu” styling.
Everyone always complains about the VTEC. I didnt realize that almost every rider out there has actually tried it for themselves. Maybe because I used to ride two stroke sportbikes the VTEC valve doesn’t bother me much. A Power Commander, pulling the emissions garbage and a set of pipes later-its barely noticeable and I can get over 200 miles out of the 5.8 gallon tank.
Its easy to see how Honda lost 22 pounds- the under tail exhausts from the last generation weigh at least 50 lbs! I like the look of them better though.
Hopefully Honda will change their mind and bring this new ‘Ceptor to the states. There seems to be a big hole in the “lightweight” sport touring segment right now with Triumph dropping the Sprint ST/ GT.
Hmmm, Increased low and mid-range power. I wonder if they chucked the V-Tec. I always thought that set up ruined the seamless power of the earlier models.
Beautiful!
Loved my 1991 VFR red with the gold accents. This bike has a similar (updated) look.
I would buy one…come on Honda.
I’m liking this, a simple and clean design. There’s something cool about black right-side-up forks with radial calipers too.
Bring it to North America! Wish I’d never sold my old ’91, but this has it’s nostalgic look. Had many bikes since but nothing really compares.
I’m tempted……rode the earlier model and thought it was……..shite. this looks far better.As always, need to see it in the metal, but, this or the MT 09…….hmmmmmm
Thank goodness a normal looking motorcycle. I like it. The Interceptor name still resonates with me and has since 1983.
No thanks (again) I’ll just keep my 86 VFR750F the oldest and best, in my opinion……….
In 1986 I bought a brand spankin new VFR750F and would agree with your statement. I also woned a 2002 for 5 years also but I do say I like what I see here.
This bike must be for balding, middle aged pirates since the windshield is so short…
Yeah? I’m a balding VFR pirate (95 VFR 750F) and this bike looks pretty good to me. So what if it has a lot of shortcomings? If you don’t like it, vote with your wallet. At least it has a vestigial NACA duct.
To answer some questions. the 2001 mileage improves as it gets older. i started out at 35 mpg up to 18K around 25K it went into the mid 40s, then now at 40K it is 45-55 mpg on regular. It is an easy bike to live with. Once a year i take it in for a checkup and it comes out with very little maintenance. i run AMSOIL full synthetic. it likes that the best, no paraffin based oils. I run PR3s. i have an Ohlins suspension, HID lights, heated grips, HH+ brakes, three GIVI bags, and a custom windscreen. It is a Very Fine Ride. There are faster, better handling, but this still brings smiles to my face every time i ride it.
AS far as i am concerned all bikes are keepers in the eyes of the one who loves to ride them.
MCN said:” The best model variant of the best bike ever. Bold words but this VRFs a stunner and preferred by many to the heavier VTEC model that followed. The V-four engine’s race derived, six figure mileage reliable and has a lovable roguish character. the ultimate all a rounder, track days, commuting, touring, posing all delivered with aplomb. Some people moan about the linked brakes but in the real world, the are as good system for all but the fastest riders. they can be complex to work on though. Depreciation is low(which is a double edged sword when buying used) and build quality high. ”
I found the brakes very good and near ABS like in performance. In all weather it is very stable. I would recommend stoking the engine to the 900-1000cc level ie the 2001 engine, put in the ABS, a set of Erica LED lights for low and high beam, and allow GIVI bags for touring like mine. Keep the price below 10K and they will sell big time. As for the VTEC, it is a good engine but the non-linear torque curve is a curse in the curves. The 2001 has a flat torque and hp curve. A dream to drive, and the sound is mid-range not tiring like some cruisers or high rpm bikes.
For what it was designed for it works…….I have had mine since 2003, with the only maintenance is fluids, adjust the valves once, and change/service the shocks and brakes once.
So I wish Honda luck with this. ….Ride Safe my friends…..
.
With linked brakes you definitely should have ABS, I’ve seen careful guys lock up the front and go down with ice/snow conditions. Rear brake only helps with that.
Jeremy, when the Vtec 800 came out in 2002, the Honda press kit made reference to the engine running in 2-valve mode in the lower RPM range and specifically mentioned “reduced sound pressure levels” in the combustion chambers.
It also spelled out reduced noise from the cam chains Vs the gears.
The thing Honda was up against was trying to meet more stringent Euro noise regulations with the Vtec model.
Then, to get people excited about it, they touted it as a performance enhancing system, when really, if you overlaid dyno graphs of a 2001 geardrive VFR800 and a 2002 Vtec 800, the old Geardrive cam bike had more area under the graph on the dyno chart.
It’s the same reason for the flapper and snorkel in the airbox. It’s there for government slow-speed drive -by noise testing, and then they make claims about better velocity flow through the airbox, and low RPM torque, etc.
I’ve seen de-snorkelled and de-flappered 800’s tested on the dyno, and there was actually slight increases in torque, and no losses either.
When the Mfgr’s get clamoed down by gov’t regulations, they will be sure to spin it off as something good in markering-speak.
Nobody wants a “2014 Strangulo-Glide with “Soda-straw” mufflers and new, lower horsepower. Increased weight from pollution junk, and nanny-state electroics that hobble the bike when you’re having fun!” Nope, bike mfgr’s will find a way to make each of those legislated fun-sponge additions sound like the next greatest thing.
I kinda like it. It looks very refined, gentleman’s express and all that. However, if one were to ride this back to back with the ’14 Ninja 1000 abs I can’t image it would be much of contest.
Honda : Since we are the customers, we get to ask for what we want. For me, the perfect replacement for my 94 VFR would be this exact bike, EXCEPT for that bloody motor. Are there many fellow readers out there that do not think this would be a far better bike (and worth a higher price) if this had a +/- 900 cc motor with the VFR1200 V4 architecture? What is so hard about doing this? Yamaha and others seem to be able to make such moves.
Having never ridden or owned a VFR with VTEC, I am always surprised at the gush of vitriol concerning VTEC whenever the VFR is mentioned. Do all of these anti-VTEC posts come from people who have actually owned the bike, or is this just virtual prejudice against the system?
So VTEC owners – Is VTEC really that bad, and why?
Ever ridden an old Yamaha V-Max with V-Boost? How about a pre-V-Tech VFR?
Here’s the drill…
Step one: Take one of the world’s coolest feeling/sounding/performing motors, one with a dead linear power delivery that never fails to inspire, and…
Step two: Remove its iconic gear-driven cams turbine whine, replacing it with a conspicuous lack of bottom-end torque and an abrupt, unnerving V-Max-style hit of power smack dab in the middle of a corner, right where you least want it. Oh, and accompany that bizarre hit with an equally sudden and thoroughly awful clattering noise that sounds like your engine just lunched itself. Lastly, make sure that for all of that, it still makes no more power than the previous mill.
Welcome to V-Tech, VFR-style. Yes, they smoothed the transition a bit in the last iteration, but as with so many things Honda-related these past few years, the entire concept is an exercise in answering a question no one was asking. It’s simply tech for tech’s sake, to no discernible benefit.
I just realized that it’s ‘VTEC,’ not ‘V-Tech,’ as I’ve been mistakenly referring to it over and over here. Doh!
Sorry, but with that “-“, you have just lost all credibility on the matter. 🙂
Wait. So you’re saying I once had some credibility?
Sweet! Mom would be so proud. (I mean my mom.)
This ould be a replacement for my ’99 VFR, but at less than $9K, the new Yamahammer 800 triple is super tempting.
I have only owned sport bikes with “Old school” forks and old school non radial mounted brakes and old school carbs. I was into riding the corners hard and fast. My tires never had chicken strips. I never thought the suspension or brakes seemed low end but then again I have never rode a modern sport bike with fuel injection, inverted forks and radial mounted brakes. Am I missing out on something?
No, you’re not missing out on anything, at least as far as street riding is concerned. Assuming your suspension is sprung for your weight, you have good tires on the bike and the brakes have good pads and fresh fluid, I’m not surprised you’re happy with what you’re riding.
I just built a monstrous track bike with modern flatslide carbs on it and was amazed to find they perform better than any fuel injection I’ve ever used! So yeah, carbs can work great too 😉
I put 10,000 miles on my 2003 VFR800 and overall I was disappointed in the performance. Lack of midrange power was my main gripe. I wonder if this version will be better? Time will tell.
I felt the same about my 2001 (the last of the gear-driven cam models).
The Honda v-4 motor is smoother at 80 than the Kawasaki 1000 is when it’s not running. For the purpose’s and rider’s this bike was built to serve, the daily commuter and longer distance sporty types, the bike will work…always has, and should cost much less than the larger more expensive sport tourers on the market now. The ‘weight’ and ‘old school’ forks will be a non-issue for most of those folks. Styling is bland, but I’m sure will not be a deal breaker for those considering this mount. And yes, gear driven cams would have been nice…but throw on some higher bars and small bags for overnights, and I doubt you’ll spend much time missing them.
It’s always been the Honda I lusted for but had reservations on the extra crap it was saddled with and no bags standard. 100+hp, no linked brakes, no VTEC, Givi style bags, decent 5gal fuel tank, and 12K price and it’d be a tossup with MV, and dearly departed ST4 and Sprint.
where’s the story on the new 500cc, 750cc Harleys?
or the (alphabet soup) CBR1000RR-SP.
Maybe you should write it and put in YOUR blog. It will show up here when it shows up here.
I’ll keep riding my 98′ VFR. If this had the gear-driven cams, I might be interested.
As far as weight, I have owned multiple VFR’s and for the sporty-touring I do, it was never an issue. I also think the “sweet-spot” for displacement has always been 750-900cc.
I hope this new VFR does come to the USA. I never considered the 1200 (too weird/expensive).
That bodywork and gold wheels are a clear Ducati ripoff, which make it look sexy. Still don’t think its enough for me to give up my 1050 Sprint.
Actually, Honda’s 1991 VFR750 was red w/gold wheels. This one sorta reminds me of that one.
Too bad Ducati hasn’t done a Ducati rip off with their hideous Monster.
I like it. A nice, needed improvement that looks svelte and even a little elegant, if still a bit techno cold. I rode the previous model a couple of times. It was surprisingly non-involving and the motor ran hot. I bet it’s priced closer to $13K than the $9K or so I’d like.
No, Honda did NOT listen to the “VFR faithful” on this one, or they would have heard us asking for 1000CC’s and NO VTEC.
What we really wanted is a return to geardriven cams, which had been the signature of the VFR line since 1986 until 2001.
And two entirely different models, an F and an R, both 1000CC’s. Optional hard bags for the F, and racetrack tech for the R.
And how about some USD forks please???
The heated grips and adjustable seat height, ABS and Traction Control would have been fine for a VFR1000F model, but for the R model, give us something more reminiscent of the RC30 and RC45, or VF1000R perhaps.
I can see that I’ll be riding my 1999 VFR800 for a few more years yet, and it will be well over 100,000 km soon.
http://i.imgur.com/Vtd1evS.jpg
I haven’t heard the VFR faithful ask for anything more than a return to the simplicity/weight of the pre-2002 model.
You are describing Adventure category bikes (adjustable seat? heated grips?) and the CBR series. FWIW, Honda has confirmed that a 1000cc V-4 superbike is on the way. Will be too expensive for most.
I like the looks of it but I’ve always liked the VFR,especially that Red/White/Blue edition from a couple years back!
Yeah, nobody does red/white/blue paint jobs like Honda. The particular VFR you’re talking about (was it the 2007 model maybe?) was beautiful. I had a new baby on the way at the time, so i couldn’t justify the expense, but I still have serious lust for it. I haven’t seen any used ones on the market here lately either.
I really like this new VFR though. Hopefully it comes stateside and doesn’t cost too much. I’ve been saving up for a CB1100, but this might very well change my mind.
Great job Honda!…ignore all the picky naysayers who seem to revel in being negative and critical on almost everything here. The rest of your customers and potential customers love our sport and living in this great age of high technology and quality products from you and the other bike makers. Thanks for working hard to make these great machines.
What Spider said
+1
Many of the bike showcased here get very positive responses from the commenters. The reason why this bike is not enjoying such a response is due to its 1990s specifications. It weighs 525 pounds, makes 106 horsepower, and has old-school forks (rather than male slider forks). It seems like a less comfortable version of my long-ago sold 1999 Suzuki Bandit 1200S.
Compare this to Yamaha’s new FZ-09, which has a 50cc greater displacement, 109 pounds lighter weight, and nine more horsepower. And unlike the Honda VFR, the Yamaha has modern forks.
Actually Fred, The new VFR features Honda’s all new “Multi-Action system Fork” which also has radial mount callipers. Which other “old school fork” has that? Sure its not Ohlins, but I bet the forks work perfectly well for a sports touring bike.
Also, how can you say it “seems like a less comfortable version” when you havnt even ridden the bike? Dig a bit deeper and it is far from a “1990’s spec” bike as you would sugest. Traction control, combinded ABS, LED head lights, radial mount brakes, the list goes on….
If only the Ninja 1000 (stateside model name) offered a CENTER STAND..(move “cats” into the big “dustpan” silencers) allowing room for center stand, Kawasaki could persuade me to open my wallet for the sweetest sounding in line four ever…
Still a bit heavy but…if low-mid range torque have substantially improved, 106 HP is enough, I think. Hopefully we’ll see considerably better “suspenders” front and rear, a minimum 5-gal.tank with sans V-Tec…would have preferred a 900-1000cc mill though.
If I was still in my 30’s this would be on my list of next bike!
one word… wonky.
so many weird design cues. almost looks like what would happen if Honda sold off the manufacturing rights completely…? perhaps this shouldn’t even be badged a Honda…? and what’s with that front end…? 1995 called, they want their forks back.
If they can build a CBR1000RR at 440 lbs or so, why does this have to come in at 525 lbs?
Why does this new VFR800 weigh more than a Ninja 1000? Seat looks comfy though…
re: “Why does this new VFR800 weigh more than a Ninja 1000?”
’cause 90% of it’s the old VFR800.
The VFR’s centerstand, gear-indicator and ambient temp gauge (three things missing on the Kawi) combine to weigh ONE MILLION pounds!
Hmmm and reading thru the comments it looks like this is still VTEC. BOOOOO Honda. I’ve been pondering what might be my next bike (have FZ6, am thinking C-14, V-Strom 1k) and then this comes along.
VTEC, no f—ing thanks.
Plus VLJ is SOOO right, once you see it you can’t shake how it looks like the CBR500R.
It’s like the CBR, the VRF1200, and perhaps that ST1300 thing got in some reproductive action.
If it incorporates VTEC it is quite possible, if not probable, that Honda has improved it? Time marches on and things do change,
It is still the same old VTEC, not the more sophisticated automotive flavor of VTEC. Whether they revised the initiating mechanism or anything else that may affect the overall VTEC “experience”, I have no idea.
“Its still the old VTEC” um no its not! MD just left out the bit that says it has been revised. Acording to Honda it has been softened which will no doubt make it nicer to ride.
By old, I just meant that it is still the old-tech vtec. As I said in the post, I had no idea whether or not it had been tweaked.
The more I look at it, the more it reminds me (much too closely) of that CBR500R budget bike.
And that’s not a good thing.
I TOTALLY concur. I was looking at this at work and now opened it to read in detail. And that was my first thought – it does NOT look as good as I first thought, not even close. But I was still like “what’s not quite right about it” – you nailed it.
Is that because it’s red and doesn’t look like oragami, or…
Look at the seat, tailsection and exhaust pipe: very similar to the CBR500R. Check out the leading edge of the fairing in profile. Same thing.
The VFR always used to represent the flagship for Honda; as such, it was set apart with a uniquely high-end finish. Does this VFR carry on that tradition? I’d say that the VFR1200 does, as goofy-looking as it is, but I just don’t see it with this one…at all.
You won’t know about the quality until you handle it in person. As for the look, I like it. I think the VFR went off the rails in 2002/3. It stands to reason that this and the 500 were on the design table at the same time and the similarities aren’t an accident. Perhaps it’d be more appealing if you’d seen the VFR 1st.
Perhaps, but that exhaust can still would have struck me as wildly uninspired, fairly screaming, “Budget bike!”
I completely agree with you that the VFR went off the rails starting with the 2002 model. The 2001 was the last great (and true) VFR.
With time having marched on, a 2014-spec VFR ought to look vaguely similar to that iconic gear-driven cams/no V-Tech ’97-’01 model, only it should incorporate these improvements:
-Twenty-five more hp and at least ten more foot lbs of torque, probably from a 1000cc motor. Basically, Ninja 1000 power, or fairly close.
-More sport-touring-friendly ergos, with higher/closer (adjustable, perhaps?) bars
-ABS, traction control, TPS, heated grips, and a gear-position indicator.
-Upside down forks
-Radial brakes
-A 510-lb wet weight
-A pricetag not in excess of $12,999
Had they done that, I’d already be making plans for my third VFR.
I like all of your ideas for it.
As for the “can”, perhaps it’s a loud hint to remind VFR buyers, “hey, you can put a sweet sounding aftermarket slip-on here..” 😉 It definitely saves $$ and likely saves a bit of weight too over the under-seat setup on the last one.
As VFR fans know, it is about the ride and the things ride very nice indeed. Really easy to go fast. Amazing on the brakes. Great in the rain. Shifts like butter. It looks like the CBR500 but that’s ok. They sit down with a design sheet and they can do anything. They draw this. They draw that. It’s not supposed to look like other brands. It’s not the past. I rode my 96 VFR more miles than any other bike I had. It just asked to be ridden and then ridden some more. Cold. Rain. Heat. Whatever. I kept riding. I only sold it to pay off my credit card. Now I am simply past fifty and need to be more comfy like the CB1100 which I took an extra test ride around the block on before bringing it back on my test ride. Motor – Cycle. I like this VFR though.
My impression is that VFR’s get poor gas mileage, which is a deal breaker for me. Is this the case?
1981-ish, first VFR750, circa 535 lbs soaking wet IIRC. Fast forward 33 years and ten lbs lighter? WTH?
Other than that, it’s appealing at many levels.
Given how much stronger, better, and more equipped this is, -10lbs is a triumph.
Where is everyone getting such unrealistic expectations for weight on this site? Every new bike that comes out…
re: “Where is everyone getting such unrealistic expectations for weight on this site?”
’cause they haven’t been around for more than a minute and don’t know what they’re looking at. like the crossrunner, they can’t see that’s it’s same old 6th gen.
Perhaps they are lamenting that, unfortunately, it IS essentially the same as the previous generation. Manufacturers CAN make bikes lighter so they handle better, are more fun, accelerate better, and achieve better fuel-economy. Who doesn’t want that? When they do – it feels like progress. Just look at Yamaha’s FZ-09 and MT-07. When they don’t – it feels like a lazy effort.
They can make bikes lighter, and they do (CB-RR series). Those bikes serve the light and fast set very well, this is for someone else that Honda apparently knows pretty well. The VFR is a unique bike with a long, successful following. People love it and it has never been a 420lb race replica.
Not as attractive as the old gear-driven VFR’s. The styling is too blunt and you can bet they went low budget on a lot of parts as evidenced by the forks. Still to heavy. PASS
This thing will waste away at the dealerships if it’s too expensive like the last one was.
Old school forks are a plus, they’re easier to service than the USD forks. Overall it looks good, they copied the Ducati Panigale front end.
Old-school forks are only a plus if you don’t care about handling. Upside down forks have taken over the industry because they work better. They have less flex and less unsprung weight, which results in far superior performance.
All of that depends on what the motorcycle’s maker decided to spend on them. There are plenty of nonadjustable upside-down forks with heavy steel lowers, noodly axles and cheap, unsophisticated damping circuits out there. If the damping is sorted in this then it’s customers would be perfectly happy. If I recall, some would upgrade their VFR forks with those from the VTR Superhawk, widely recognized as the weakest component on those (VTR) bikes for spongy springs and heavy damping rates.
Then let’s go back to drum brakes, because if you spend a lot of money on a drum brake, then it will perform better than a really cheaply made, poorly engineered disc brake. We can go back to dual rear shocks because really expensive, good rear shocks work better than low-quality single shocks. Slap on a pair of the best bias ply tires, because they are better than the worst radials. We can go back to a pushrod valvetrain because, if you spend enough, you can make it outperform a really cheap, poorly engineered DOHC valve train.
There isn’t a good engineering reason to start out with a substandard design and try to engineer it into submission. This is especially true when designing a fork for a performance bike that weighs 525 pounds.
Now you’re just being silly..
I’ll say it again, there are a ton of USD forks out there, built to a budget that do not deliver on any of the things you believe they do. You do not know how this fork will work until it can be ridden but 95% of it’s performance will be determined by valving and spring, not which end is pointing up or down..
If Honda cut the displacement in half and swapped it into the CBR600RR chassis – to create a new VFR400R at about the same weight as the 600RR (about 412 lbs wet) – and brought back the um…gear-driven cams – this would capture my attention. As it stands…525 lbs wet. Please tell me this is a misprint.
The styling just doesn’t move me. The body work looks dated, the pipe looks like the bought it from a Bandit 1200….Add the sportbike ergos and its not even a bike to think about for me.
Just like the VFR1200 – those ergos don’t seem to match the target audience.
I think you missed something. Those ergos look the same as my 98 VFR. It’s sporty enough, but lets me ride all day in (relative) comfort. This looks like a freshened up 98-01 VFR, it’s as if they’re pretending everything from 2002 onward just didn’t happen. I like!
+1
I didn’t miss a thing – Never Liked the VFR ergos or the Sprint 1050 ST, or Hayabusa or Blackbird etc etc etc.
Part of the success of all the adv bikes is the ergos – period. There is a huge demographic of 40 – 50 year old motorcyclists who still want sporty handing but not the ergos. Honda doesn’t seem to know this.
Yamaha brings out the FZ-09 with upright ergos like a supermoto…even a bit more upright than traditional naked bike. ergos.
I ride a sportbike on track days – on the track for 30 off the track for 30. Thats where sportbike ergos belong. Of course there are zillions of 20 year old who can ride in the sprtbike crouch all day.
On the road I want similar feeling bike but I want to touring ergos, better wind protection hard bags…. all the stuff you see on the new Aprilia…
and hopefully on the new FJR-09 or Speed Triple ST
Exactly, Blackcayman. The ergos really don’t match the bike’s intended buyer/mission.
What would you say is the bike’s intended mission, and how does this deviate from that? I’m curious of your impression.
The reason I’m asking is that they look fairly similar to other VFR800s of the last decade or so, and my impression is that those ergos are about right on. I’ve had a ’99 and ’06 and ridden the crap out of ’em. 600+ mi days? No problemo. Magic carpet compared to, say, 450 mi days on the RC51. Ever the gentleman’s express if you asked me.
Spirited sport-touring is its intended mission, and towards that end higher/closer bars along the lines of the Ninja 1000 fit the design brief much better than the low bars shown here. My 2000 VFR had these same low bars, and how many people wound up going with Helibars to alleviate that issue?
This thing is well over 500 lbs, it includes a centerstand and provisions for factory hard bags, and it only offers roughly 100 rwhp. It’s clearly not a pure sportbike. It’s a Gentleman’s Express. See it for what it really is, and make it comfortable.
Let us be fair to this bike’s ergo package. The Ninja 1000 is not a sport bike. It is a very high performance standard with a full fairing on it. I expect there will be lots of riders that prefer the VFR riding position to the N1000’s.
I still wish I hadn’t traded in my ’98 VFR for a Ducati 999. After 7 years I mistakenly thought I needed a new bike.
Unless this thing is priced remarkably low (meaning a game-changer price for the categroy, like the FZ-09), which VFR’s never are, it’s going to die on the vine. As card-carrying VFR Fanatic, this one just doesn’t hit the marks.
Man, they had the best all-around bike on the planet with the ’94-’97 and, especially, the ’98-’01 models, and they’ve done nothing but screw up a good thing ever since.
Wow! Nice bike. At last a bike designed and built to be ridden in the real world. Right on, Honda.
so you average MD joe with no vtec and gear driven cam… on my notes I would prefer a more CBRrish look for the headlights, inverted not “normal” forks that look like inverted :S and I agree about the exhaust they should have left the clean on the air look of that single side swingarm, looks like vfr1200ish
from hondas desktop:
you still love it so the same back for you… with VTEC we still have plenty of those spares around….
Boring look, boring engine: yes, it’s the much-vaunted and vastely-overblown VFR back again! Get a Ducati ST if you want a Sports Tourer with some character and soul! Oh wait, Ducati stopped making ’em years ago because there’s no call for such bikes anymore. Someone call Bologna, please…
Nick, UK
Still miss my ’93. Bring back the all-white edition, throw in the gear-driven cam whine, and stick a can on it w/ some bark. Tasty.
Close to ideal mid-size. Just wondering – is that seat long enough? Second question, what the weight is? It should not be any more than 420-430 lbs dry.
I believe old VFR800 was 550 lbs wet, and this only claims a 22-lb weight loss. Hopefully, my memory is fuzzy.
No VFR over 700cc has been anywhere near that light.
I thought the VFR line died with the tragic VFR1200. I’ve wanted a VFR (without vtec nonsense) for years and years.
A dream is reborn.
Too bad about the ugly pipe on the side. Has a bit of a cheap suzuki look there to me with that fat can. Still, it beats the bell bottom pipe on the 1200.
This is closer to what “the faithful” have been looking for from Honda. I’ll bet the new exhaust and probably a plastic fuel tank is how most of that weight was lost. I didn’t see this coming at all, interesting.
Seems a shame to cover that beautiful “no swingarm” side with another exhaust can. What a drag!! Under slung or high pipes, I know, I know, that costs more and might cook somebody’s sack. But still, SSSA’s should be visible from the open side!!
Losing 22 lbs still means it weighs around 525 lbs, right? They would have to be pretty aggressive with the asking price for this to make sense against the Ninja 1000 which weighs less and is more powerful. I think an ABS VFR800 from 5 years ago cost about what the N1K ABS costs today.
Still, I do like the design. Looks clean and tight.
Make it 425, then we are talking.
Nothing on this bike looks expensive aside from the mag wheels, which the “China” cheap exhaust can covers. Looks as if this bike was made to a price point, so I expect it to be fairly cheap. Cheaper than the past.
Welcome to the first Thai built VFR.
Not often I find myself agreeing with the majority but yes on both counts. Great to see a new VFR800 and I hope the stupid VTEC valve train is limited to the history books.
Other thoughts, I hope the tail does indicate a saddle bag option will be available. Nice styling, much better than the “Ant’s Head” look of the last VFR800. I’m always please to see a bike loose weight. I wouldn’t miss the whine from the gear driven cams at all, I’d much rather hear a bit more intake or exhaust noise. I hope the non-USD forks mean the bike will be priced well, VFRs were never cheap but it would be great if this one came in in the $11.3K range of the Ninja 1000.
I’ve never owned a V-4 but a friend was into VFRs (he had every VFR until the VTEC came out) let me ride a couple of them. Really nice, a 4 cylinder we twin types can love.
Goose
It still uses VTEC according to the press release at the Milan show.
Is it available to see? I’ve done a quick search and can’t find it. I’ve had a VTEC and spent way to much time and money trying to get it to run smooth. No VTEC and I’d be VERY interested… with VTEC and I won’t even consider it.
Yes. Try one of the other US-based motorcycle web mags. It came through my RSS feed, so I am not exactly sure which one it was.
These things last. Met recently fella and his was 20 years old, this being the original 750. That was his daily use bike part of other 2 he uses for different tasks.
If they do away with VTEC Motor, You bet, I’d have one those But I’d keep 750F
And your right I rode the Blackbird yesterday, its sweet, handles good at high SPEED 1.4plus but at low speeds it can be a handfull.
I will Have a look at the new VFR.
Phil
It’s 22 lbs lighter than what exactly? The old VFR800? Or the current obese VFR1200?
Surprised they retained the rightside-up forks. Hardly ever see those anymore, not on upscale bikes with any real sporting pretensions. Also, with the obvious tailsection provisions for hardbags, I’m surprised that they didn’t raise the bars and bring them closer, a la the Ninja 1000. An awful lot of VFR riders over the years have gone the Helibar route, and I would have expected Honda to address this in any cleansheet redesign.
But yeah, conspicuous by its absence is any mention of the elimination of the accursed V-Tech nonsense, nor is there any word on the beloved gear-driven cams of yore.
For it be a proper VFR and wear that title proudly, those two things need to happen.
I hope they’ve gone away from the “V-TEC” too. If they’re going to hold price then I’d bet they did. It would make more sense to play those tricks on inline bikes with only one head/valve-train.
My drink just fell out of my hand.
That puts it back to where the 98-01 model weighed. I think this is closer to the bike the VFR faithful wished for at the last revision.
keep it simple, sir and price it right
Good to see this! The VFR had gotten to the level of major overkill in price, size and weight. This could be a very nice sport/sport touring bike for those of us who are of a certain maturity. That V4 motor always has been a smooth power plant for road work, especially when they leave off the VTEC. Here hoping…
I was just going to make the comment : if they leave out the insipid VTEC garbage, it might be worth a look…
VTEC gives more power, more fuel economy and is quieter. An engine is either inefficient on top or at the bottom. VTEC is the solution for that. Honda knows you can buy an R1, ZX10, K1300 and so on. The VFR showcases VTEC among other things. My 919 has more low and mid range torque at the expense of top end. People complained about that. Enter VTEC. I have a Suzuki TU250. Simple. 17 tooth front. 70 mph all day long. The ultimate city/suburban bike. I put a pipe on too. Sounds amazing. But I will tell you as someone who rode a VFR 15,000 miles, there is nothing like it. It’ll cruise around town and hauls ass onto the highway, frankly without 150 HP that is unnecessary. It’s not like we have no choices these days.