Honda Concept CB
Honda has revealed display models for the upcoming Tokyo Motor Show (late October) and they include two CB1100 concepts, including the “Concept CB” pictured above, as well as the “CB1100 Custom Concept” pictured immediately below. The Concept CB appears it might be a new production CB1100 with detail changes, such as the gas tank shape, while the CB1100 Custom Concept seems to go down the path of Yamaha’s XJR1300 Heritage model.
Honda CB1100 Custom Concept
Also on display will be the “Light Weight Super Sports Concept” pictured below, which is expected to closely resemble a production lightweight twin competitive with the new Yamaha R3 and the Kawasaki Ninja 300. Here is what Honda has to say about this particular concept:
Light Weight Super Sports Concept: Designed with the key phrase “strong presence,” this next-generation super sport concept model and features a look possessing a sense of speed that comes from its long nose and low crouching position. The combination of a plane architecture, which indicates the sense of hardness and solidity, and sharp edges emphasize the aggressive look of this model. Moreover, the exterior featuring matte-black-based low-contrast graphics expresses beauty and the remarkable form.
Honda Light Weight Super Sports Concept
Do the “Custom” in a liter twin format and I’m there.
Sounds like you’re game for the Yamaha Bolt – or the Honda Shadow…
I haven’t read all 104 posts but am I missing something? Isn’t the yellow CB the exact same CB being sold now, except for spoked wheels? What is “Concept” about it? I really like the black café look, but a big block is just too heavy. A smaller, lighter engine can produce the same power and yield big positives in several areas, including sales numbers. I think LESS people would pay for the big four if it was sitting beside a lighter, same power alternative. Listening Honda?
similar but not exactly the same
New tank shape that possibly holds more fuel, chrome headlight bucket and instrument covers, square mirrors, polished master cylinders, no ABS ring, non linked brakes, different seat, smaller rear tail light, back to the 13 std side covers, differnt air cleaner box, 2 tone motor with cyl head silver, cylinder and block black, spoke whels like the Japanese and European EX model, Honda on tank instead of wing badge, 4 into 2 with double walled chrome waterfall head pipes like on the dlx,passenger grab rails different and style more like original CB750s with bar around back of seat…to name a few visible differences
I hear you and am in the same boat. However Honda would have to charge a bit less than this for a 750 version even though manufacturing, distribution, and dealer costs would still be the same. Besides, some people care too much about “torque”. What they are referring to is actually the amount of power something makes at a low RPM. Why they care what RPM it makes it’s power is beyond me but a smaller engine that was just as fast and accelerated just as hard would show lower torque numbers on magazine test reports and people would complain.
I’d love for them to come out with a 40 or 50(!) horse CB400F that was much lighter than this bike but they’d have to charge $5000 for it and not make nearly as much money off selling it (even though they would sell ten times as many).
If Honda came out with a CB400f, it would be over $6000. I wonder how well the SR400 is selling.
SR400 is a 25ish horse, kick start single. Not the same market, or at least not in the same performance category.
The SR400 is barely in the same performance category as my Hyundai Veloster… the base model…
I think history in this country would show Americans, for the most part, don’t want smaller motorcycles, they always want bigger motorcycles. As long as I have been riding and ihat has been since Honda came into the country with small motorcycles, motorcyclists have always wanted to move up, from 50cc to 65. 65 to 90. 90 to 125. 125 to 160 160 to 175.175 to 200 etc etc up to 750 tp 900, 900 to 1000, 1000 to 1100. Even today when Hnda brought out the cb 250, riders wanted it to be a 300, or 350, or 400 or 500. When Europe gets the NC750 while we only get the NC700 we want the more powerful bike.
If Honda brought out a modern CB400F people would just want it to be a 500 or 550F ad nauseum until it became so big that people would again start screaming for a 250 or 400 again and the circle would start all over.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to see Honda bring out a new CB400F, and they would sell a few, and when reviewed on MC Daily people will say If only it had a bigger motor, and more horsepower, and weighed less. etc etc
The small bikes are typically the best sellers. I wish manufacturers would release the numbers but I know, at least for Kawasaki, the Ninja 250-300 consistently outsells the bigger Ninjas close to ten to one. People buy bigger bikes because that’s all they offer and, frankly, that’s all the magazines report on. Back when the manufacturers sold 90s, 125s, and 350s, they sold tons of bikes. Now that they are focusing on gigantic bikes marketed towards the experienced “serious” rider, sales are dropping. I blame it on dealer greed (it cost the same to show and sell a bike with a $100 margin as it does a bike with a $5000 margin) and the ever growing professional experience of magazine testers. When was the last time you read a review on a motorcycle from a average rider’s or beginner rider’s point of view? They climb off a Panigale tester and onto a CBR250 and what are they going to write about it? How it has more than enough power to beat traffic and get out of town?
“I blame it on dealer greed (it cost the same to show and sell a bike with a $100 margin as it does a bike with a $5000 margin)”
To be fair, that isn’t “dealer greed”. That is how these guys make a living. The cost to “show and sell” is mostly a function to how long a bike stays in inventory and how much the dealer paid for it. A cheaper bike that outsells another bike 10:1 has much lower “show and sell” cost. Margin on a ZX-10R is probably 3.5:1 to 4:1 on a Ninja 300. High turnover bikes also offer the advantage of steadier cash flow which is really important to dealerships as well. The local dealer here that I know well absolutely loves the Ninja 300 in his inventory.
As far as mickey’s observation goes, I don’t think motojournalists or dealerships are to blame at all – they only sell us what we want to buy. Whether it is something in American culture or human nature, we are, generally speaking, programmed to crave the next best thing. And the next best thing is more power in the minds of most.
I spent the afternoon lapping the valves on my ’83 GS1100S Katana. That is a true retro bike. No pedicured hipster finger nails here. We have a new generation of urban retro-wannibes striving to find character in riding a modern bike that looks like something their dad rode. I like to wrench them as much as I like to ride them.
I really like the styling of the Honda, it is right on the mark. However IMO retro should not only be about styling, and should not involve as step back in technology.
That would be one hell of a motorcycle if it had a mono-shock rear end, inverted forks, fully adjustable suspension front and rear, radial front brakes, a 180/55R17 rear tire and about 40 more HP. No need for liquid cooling, fins are cool, in 1986 Suzuki’s air/oil cooled 1100 was putting out 137HP, that would be just about right for this bike.
Bikes are only as fast as you ride them and, most people can’t even get the most out of a CB1100. Would adding all that stuff make someone a faster rider or would it just ruin the simple statement the bike is trying to make?
Mono-shock rear ends, inverted forks, fully adjustable suspension front and rear, a 180/55R17 rear tire and about 40 more HP are wasted on 99% of the riders out there. Those things are just for styling and selling bikes.
While I agree with the ultimate performance benefit to the average rider, all of those things translate to a bike that rides and feels different, regardless of how fast one chooses to ride it.
It’s like saying there’s no difference between driving a base Toyota Camry and a loaded BMW 3-series.
I definitely agree with that. But I do see way more Camrys on the road that 3-series.
More power is the one addition that would have broadened the appeal of the bike. That is something that very few people would be disgruntled about so long as the power increase wasn’t so extreme that it ruined the engines current ridability and character in the lower rpms. The rest of it, while stuff I would like, would be wasted additional cost on the bike’s target audience.
“The rest of it, while stuff I would like, would be wasted additional cost on the bike’s target audience.”
Not so sure about that look at the price point of the FZ-09, it has all that stuff.
“Not so sure about that look at the price point of the FZ-09, it has all that stuff.”
I’ve ridden both bikes (though admittedly little more than a test ride as I don’t own either), and the CB1100’s suspension parts work better out of the box in my opinion. Just because a bike has adjustable USD forks and monoshock doesn’t mean that they are any good. And if they aren’t any good, then they don’t cost much. The FZ-09’s suspension meets its price point.
“Mono-shock rear ends, inverted forks, fully adjustable suspension front and rear, a 180/55R17 rear tire and about 40 more HP are wasted on 99% of the riders out there. Those things are just for styling and selling bikes.”
I get what you are saying, however I would not say it is “Wasted” on 99% of riders out there. You don’t have to ride at the envelope to appreciate what modern suspension and braking components have to offer.
I mostly agree. In a blind test (that would be a trick) 99% of the general riding public would not be able to feel the difference between well tuned mono-shock and similarly well tuned twin shock suspension. And the same goes for inverted and conventional forks. As far as fully adjustable suspension, that is only an advantage if the rider has a clue about what the bike is doing and how to make it do what he wants. Rear tire size should match the performance potential of the bike, anything more (like the suspension components) is a sales feature and for style.
Just for grins ( since it didnt sound right) I googled specs 1986 Suzuki GS 1100 and the figure I found was 94 @ 8000 rpm or about 6 more than this CB1100
The GS1100 no longer existed in 1986. When it did exist the TSCC 4 valve head model which saw its last incarnation in 1983, put out 110hp and the 2 valve head models which lasted to 1984 put out 100hp. The air/oil cooled motor debut was in 1986 in the GSXR1100, which out out 130-140 hp depending on which country it was sold in.
The GSXR was a supersport model. You can’t compare that motor to one in a roadster. The riding experience would be destroyed as supersport models have all their horsepower on top and mid range suffers. This bike is all about midrange. Heck riders today get upset when their supersports are retuned for mid range torque. It ruins the top end hit.There generally is no compromise. Hard to make the torque of a friendly roadster along with the high end hit of a supersport or all the manufacturers would do it, and none of them do.
http://www.statista.com/statistics/252210/market-share-of-major-motorcycle-manufacturers-in-the-us/
No. I would not pay 50$ to know that HD is the first and Honda is the second
Sorry , the initial time it was free and then that lovely box appeared and blocked off the graph.
Strangely Vostok motorcycles were more powerfull then MV.
Now I khow. They had more ratios per minute.
What about the current CB1100? http://powersports.honda.com/2014/cb1100.aspx
Retro… OK, I can’t help myself. I bought a ’71 BSA Lightning that was a bit of a shed. I put on pointless ingnition, a modern voltage regulator, oil filter, anti sump valve, drainable sump plate, stock looking modern shocks, and upgraded the alternator. That’s it. The bike’s been rock solid reliable over 4 years of use and is really retro. There are a ton of these guys out there, be they BSAs Triumphs, BMWs, even the gen1 Honda 750s. I am challenged to understand why new but retro looking bikes will trump the real deal that’s out there for a comparative pittance. Sure, the new bike won’t get a hipster’s hands dirty, but sorry, that’s part of the deal. Real retro was not clean (unless you rode a BMW or Honda) and back then before fuel injection, etc. you had to fiddle a bit no matter what you rode. It was all in the experience. Man up and keep the real bikes of yore alive, representing on the streets what it really was. I ride the BSA to get groceries, etc (lot of soft luggage capacity), ride it in the rain, etc. and it never fails. This is possible.
Awesome, a “man up and ride real bikes” comment, just like in the Harley forums! This is great, I don’t even have to go anywhere else for this stuff anymore!
“I put on pointless ingnition, a modern voltage regulator, oil filter, anti sump valve, drainable sump plate, stock looking modern shocks, and upgraded the alternator. That’s it.”
and you still have 45 year old drum brakes, wiring, fork seals, tiny little drive chain, anemic headlight, carburetors, coils, cables, skinny forks, kick starter, tubed tires, 4 speed trans not to mention the 49 horsepower when it’s running perfect,excessive vibration or whitworth tools you have to have to work on it. You must be lucky, BSA’s were never considered “rock solid reliable” even when they were brand new.
Have had many classics including a 69 BSA 750 Triple. Neat for what they were and fun to look at and reminisce about now. Not so much fun to live with on a daily basis. Some people like to actually ride more than wrench.
All that stuff has worked fine for me for as long as I can remember. It’s really hard for me to appreciate the modern bikes, even the ones I own, since the old stuff just works perfectly fine and can be had and maintained for nearly nothing. To me, that’s what motorcycling is all about, riding what you got and whatever you can get, not having to have the latest and greatest. I don’t worry about if other riders think I’m poor because I ride 30 or 40 or, gosh, 50 year old bikes.
Hey guys, I ride more than wrench. The prep work was a one time deal. I won’t diss the hipsters tooo much, but I honestly don’t have a lot of love for folks who posture. Yeah, I’ve got drum brakes, but I’m not a dilletante and I know how to set them up. You can lock up the front (oh, I forgot, you have to have ABS don’t you?). I’ve also got a 2007 BMW K1200gt (a BMW 3 series sawed in half lengthwise) so I have a foot in both worlds. If I had to sell one bike though, it would be the BMW. I can work on the BSA if I have to (don’t have to) or want to (not really, I just ride it), whereas the BMW, well, that’s another story. Creature comforts aplenty and an intimate relationship with my franchise’s shop. Harley guys don’t wrench BTW. They’re too busy having their shop put on Screaming Eagle farkles and tassles, and buying applique tatoos. There, how’s that for dismissive, prejudicial blather?
You paint all rider with a single swath. I’ve many brands (including HD) and wrench on’em because I’m too cheap to pay the dealer to screw up my bike for me!
Original CB 750 motor looks better.
They do have beautiful fit and finish but I could maybe see an upgrade to louder horns, rather than the Roadrunner “Mheeep mheeep” ones.
What a boooring bike…………..buy a Sportster if you want retro with a pedigree 🙂
lol trust me, you don’t want to get this particular group of motorcyclists started on how they feel about Harley Davidsons
I had a 1200 Sportster that was a lot of fun. Even went off-road with it and did a little adventure touring.
I’ve had two 883 Sportsters, a 59 and a 94. Even did a little off-roading with one as well. They don’t handle unexpected decreasing radius turns too well. They lay over fine, then stuff drags hard and it kinda throws you off the road, but maybe that wasn’t the kind of off-roading you were talking about?
Never went fast with it off-road, but did cover some ground. There are way better bikes for that kind of riding, but it’ll do in a pinch.
I have a big air cooled V-Twin cruiser, and I’ve had singles, Japaneses in line twins, a Triumph triple, Japanese in-line fours, and I also currently have a BMW in-line 6. In my humble opinion, the triples, 4’s and the 6’s are a lot more fun. I do get some of the appeal of a cruiser, and enjoy riding mine in certain situations, but I’m definitely am of the opinion the more cylinders the better. I grew up riding bikes with smooth, reliable Japanese engines, so I’m sure that plays into my opinion. If I had to live with one bike and one bike only, it would not have an air cooled V-Twin. Shake, rattle and roll doesn’t do it for me as much as smooth, high revving power.
But, hey, we’re all different. That’s what makes the world interesting. Anything on two wheels is good, some bikes are just better than others. I can only judge for myself, not for others.
Yep. Everything that was bad about the originals is still available in the Sportster. It may not have drum brakes, but you’d never know that by squeezing the lever.
Ouch, but pretty correct.
Never a fan of the all black treatment I really like the CB Concept with the spoked wheels. It reminds me of the CB400F in many ways and I always liked the yellow tanked model.To me, that’s retro Honda of a very popular style.
I agree. I think the model with chrome fenders and spoke wheels is much more period-correct and overall more attractive.
I got the retro bug a few years back.
Picked up a W650, ripped off all the plastic : headlight, tail light an those cheesy tank badges.
Reworked the forks, spooned on some sport bike tires along with super bike bars and literally drove the living snot out of it.
Loads of fun along with “nice restoration comments”.
Not sure why someone doesn’t come out with a Retro styled air cooled, 500 Vertical Twin in the sub 500lb./ 50 rwhp range.
Yea, I know air cooled is tough to meet EPA, but Ducati pulls it off.
Triumph came close, but they are too big, heavy and slow, not what I would call a middle weight.
If you are going retro, why not use aluminum hoops on those spoked wheels, how much more could it cost ? (Thruxton)
Find a GB500. A friend’s dad has two old FT500s collecting dust, yet won’t part with them. Fun doesn’t have to ave 150hp and 15K pricetag.
Try a Guzzi 750.
You did read the part where he said “fun”, right. 🙂
If Honda wants to make money selling retros’, why dont they bring back the air-cooled verticle twin of the 70s and 80s. In 450 cc size please, with upright ujm ergonomics.
Everyone a beauty…bring ’em Honda!
As a CB1100 owner, I thought I would chime in. I bought mine new in March 2013. I had wanted a Honda 4 since the 69 CB750 debuted. I have been extremely happy with this motorcycle. I own seven street bikes, including some pretty sporting hardware. The handling of the big CB on roads like the Cherohala and Dragon’s Tail is pretty surprising. This thing will really lean and carry nice corner speed. Not a bunch of horsepower, but all you need. All the bits are quality. The Honda has become my “go to” bike. Smooth, comfy, enough power and fine handling. A bargain that makes me question more expensive bikes in terms of “real world” usefulness, including some in my garage.
I think a CB750 would sell better than the 1100. A lot of people remember the original. It would give old guys a chance to buy the bike they couldn’t afford when they were young.
Funny. Back in “the day” the CB1100 would have been considered a no-holds-barred superbike. (With brakes from the future!) Now it’s your dad’s Buick.
Each manufacturer has a small capacity bike that outsells (by a wide margin) their bigger bikes. People do want the smaller stuff. The problem is they make less money selling the small stuff so they don’t want it to be as attractive. They just figure people will buy what ever is left in the lineup. I’ve been riding for more than a couple decades and not once has a manufacturer ever asked me what I want in a bike.
The older guys see what they believe a bike should look like and the younger guys see what looks like a cleaned up version one of those old pile of shits you see every once in a while rusted in some dump of a garage or leaned up against a tree at a swap meet. Me I’m somewhere in between, I take my bikes with a little more performance but I’m sure I could enjoy one of these. At this price point though I could find many options I would prefer.
Let’s see some wagering on the displacement of the light weight super sports concept. It’s got skinny tires and a single front disk but, to me, looks a little bit burlier than the current featherweight CBR300 proportion. The light weight class does not seem to have agreed upon a displacement yet, and it looks like Honda want’s to do some domination. I think this bike will be a twin in the 350-400cc range. What are your guesses, and why?
My guess is Honda will continue on with building a very reliable, nice, dull, motorcycle. It will look the part, it may even be very light, but I will not hold my breath on the engine being class leading in any aspect other than smooth. I love Hondas I own Hondas but they have been completely underwhelming for years in the performance bike segment. I can’t see them trying to turn the page with a small displacement sportbike. But I hope I’m wrong, really I’d like them to prove me wrong. Honda are you listening? Win back some adoration here, make it a fire breather. Get 60hp out of a 400cc twin! Make it weigh 325lbs wet! Have it eating Ninja 650s for lunch, DO SOMETHING!
I don’t think you’re wrong (as you may have noted from a reply to a post of yours below, you and I agree on the recent Honda). But I hope you are. 😉
Honda already has a 400cc version of their 500 so I’d expect something like 325-360cc for the new twin. The original 1968 CB350 was actually 325.6cc, made a claimed 36hp at the crank and weighed 375lbs. wet. This one could easily make 42-45hp and undercut that weight a bit. Of course, then Kawasaki will come with a “360” and Yamaha a 399cc R4 stroker.
I think they should bring the 400cc Super four to the US. Its proven and reliable. Just add an aluminum sub frame and lighter wheels and you’re under 400lbs. The aftermarket would make 60rwhp possible just like the old CB-1. Seems like an easy thing to do.
Nice bike but who would pay $10K for it?
It wouldn’t be that expensive. Plus I think there’s a market for a small displacement Sports bike pitched at advanced riders.
Beautiful bikes! Hope they come here for sale.
Honestly most of you guys just dont understand the retro market. They are meant to evoke a memory of simple perfectly good motorcycles. It doesn’t take 110 to 120 horsepower to achieve that and to achieve that you would lose a lot of the smooth easy going nature of the retro experience. The same with fat tires, fancy suspension and intruding electronics.
Triumph has sold a zillion of its 900 cc 50 horsepower Bonneville series. A mainstay of Moto Guzzi is it 45 horsepower V7 series. One of the most popular bikes in Europe is Kawasakis 40 horsepower W 800. Ducatis new 800 cc scrambler makes 75 hp. At nearly 90 Horsepower the CB 1100 is the powerhouse of the retro market. BMW’s R9T would be if it actually resembled anything BMW made in the 70s and 80s.
And yes the target market for these retros are the guys and gals who think these look like motorcycles should look. Simple, air cooled, narrow wheeled, steel framed, with real fenders, round headlights, round gauges and dual rear shocks.
Want a bike with 120 horsepower? There are plenty out there, and many with a lot more than 120 horsepower. This bike is a wonderful motorcycle, quiet, smooth, fun to ride, very capable and I can tell you the guys that own them love them…just the way they are.
Uh-uh. Looks like I’m going to get hit with another double post.
This system is downright maddening.
its ok VLJ I think I know what you are going to say. Honda could have easily made this 100 hp and 74 ft lbs of torque because the old BMW R1200R did. But, as we have discussed before that was not Honda’s design goal. If you read their World Market Design reports they specifically designed this motor down to the smallest details to provide a particular experience and are satisfied with what they made. As are owners around the world.
I sold my 125 hp Yamaha FZ-1 to get my 88 hp CB1100 and I couldn’t be happier. It makes the power in the rev range I like to ride in, 6K and under, (actually peak hp is at 7500 and peak torque at 5800) unlike the FZ which was anemic below 6K (comparatively speaking) and rocketed to it’s peak horsepower from 8K-13K.
this bike is just so much easier, and more fun to ride.
Don’t know what’s happening here, but my response to your response also vanished without a trace. My posts aren’t even going into moderation. They’re just disappearing the moment I hit ‘submit.’
tWell that’s not good VLJ. Who did you PO? I need you in these discussions to be my point-counter point.
Jane you ignorant sl*T lol (not you VLJ) and young guys probably won’t get that
Just another boring heavy steel frame retro with low HP and terrible suspension…lol. Hi Mickey!
I luv it 🙂
lol hey jimjim. Missed riding with you this summer. Are you and Jnor going to make it down for a fall ride around KY?
Heck yeah I would love to, let’s try and shoot for later this month.
The yellow isn’t bad but the original crimson color is still the best. Every time I see. CB 1100 in the flesh my first thought is how beautiful it is, with awesome paint and lots of shiney parts. It really is jewel like when you see it in person. I would love to have one if I had the garage space. It is one of, if not the best values in motorcycles right now with a lot of dealers heavily discounting them.
I love horsepower, but I would take a CB 1100 in a second and have a big smile on my face every time I rode it. That’s not to say a 100+HP version wouldn’t be better.
Many of us understand the retro market and that we are not really part of the target demographic for it. Honda designed the CB1100 to have a certain personality and achieved what they were aiming for I suspect. However, there seems to be a fairly large number of us who really like the aesthetic of the CBs and Bonnies and such. We love the retro look but do not want a retro experience. I’m sure we are too small of a market for OEMs to create a “performance retro” niche, but that is what I want. 105 hp at the wheel is feasible for a bike like this without noticeably disrupting performance below 5K rpms.
I have to wonder how many more CBs would have been sold if the engine provided a little Jekyll and Hyde personality to the riding experience, making the bike more appealing to both the retro fans and the retro performance guys. Maybe not many at all, but I know for sure they would have sold one each to my brother and me.
EXACTLY!
I have to wonder why you guys don’t seem to get this bike. It is not a super sport, was never intended to be a super sport. If you want a super sport, buy a super sport.
The CB1100 is a top notch, real world motorcycle. It has absolutely all of the performance you need to go for a ride and simply enjoy a very, very, good STREETbike. That is what it is.
I have been down the quarter mile in 9 and a half seconds, at 146 mph through the traps, on another bike. I know and appreciate performance. I also know that the place for it is at the drag strip, or on a track.
Don’t be disappointed because the CB1100 is not a BMW S1000RR, if that’s what you want, get the S1000RR.
Oh, I do get the bike, and I agree it is a gorgeous, top-notch, refined piece of machinery. The CB1100 is a fine example of what Honda intended it to be. But would it be any less of a motorcycle if it had an extra 20hp?
I don’t think you get us. I don’t want an S1000RR. I want a CB1100 with a little attitude, something like a Bandit 1200 or ZRX1200. Or a Guzzi Griso or R-nine-T to pick some more modern examples. Like I said, Jekyll and Hyde. You could ride my hypothetical CB1100 in Jekyll mode full-time if that is what floats your boat.
Put another way:
If Honda sold two versions of the CB1100, one with 80HP and one with 105 HP, and there was negligible price difference would they sell any of the former? Likely not.
I believe that the ability to instantly out accelerate any four wheeled vehicle at any time (even when carrying a passenger and luggage) is a safety feature. Given that, I really do need 100HP.
TF hit the nail on the head with this comment:
“If Honda sold two versions of the CB1100, one with 80HP and one with 105 HP, and there was negligible price difference would they sell any of the former? Likely not.”
It’s not so much that 80 hp isn’t enough, it’s more about the fact that 105 would be better. Unless you’re afraid of too much power (obviously you’re not NRHRetro, based on your 9 second quarter mile, unless your fear comes from getting speeding tickets)
I just don’t understand why anyone doesn’t think more is better. I’ve had bikes from 12 horsepower to 160, and the more horsepower the more I’ve liked the bikes (at least in general, exception being I’ve had some lighter weight great handling bikes that have been a blast). I’ve had one speeding ticket in 44 years of riding, so I’m not out there getting crazy. I do enjoy the 0 to 80 bursts up the interstate entry ramps and the occassional wheelie though, and love the sound of a highly tuned engine.
“I just don’t understand why anyone doesn’t think more is better.” Tim
It can be better or it can be worse. Depending on how the power is getting to the ground. This is a roadster and not a super sport. it’s 65 ft lbs of torque comes on heavily at 2000 rpms and peaks at 5800 rpms. Makes for a pleasant ride.
“I’ve had bikes from 12 horsepower to 160, and the more horsepower the more I’ve liked the bikes”
” I do enjoy the 0 to 80 bursts up the interstate entry ramps and the occassional wheelie” Tim
You don’t need 160 horsepower to run it up to 80. Believe it or not this bike will do both of the things you like to do.
Again, read the posts from the guys that own them. They love the bike AS IS. Many of the owners got rid of higher horsepower bikes to get the CB1100.
There are a lot of bikes out there with lighter weight, sharper handling, more horsepower, and adjustable suspension. This bike is not about that.
As I said, I would love having one in my garage too, 80 hp or 105. I’d just prefer 105 given the option.
Ever think of a vintage Allstate moped ?
The Custom Concept is pretty nice, but I really don’t care for big I4s. A new Sabre would be much more attractive, or a Scrambler version of the CB500. Another beauty is the CB750/900F or the Nighthawk 700S. A new CX with a bigger engine. To me, 70s UJMs really aren’t the kind of bike to get romantic about for the most part.
I think it depends a lot on what you were raised with, when it comes to what you consider attractive. When I was maybe 12 years old, a couple of guys in my small town bought 650’s, one a Yamaha 650, and one a Triumph Bonneville (the Triumph may have been a 750 by then, this was around 1972). To this day, in my mind, those are what motorcycles should look like. I also love the Honda in line 4’s from the early 70’s, be it 350 fours, 450 fours or 750 fours. I just think what you saw as a young person, and craved at that time, helps determine what kind of look you get romantic about later in life.
I suspect that is true to an extent. I developed a fascination with motorcycles in the early 90’s as a teenager. A blue, plastic-wrapped Yamaha Seca II was the first bike I ever fell in love with. The CBR900 and YZF750s were mouth-watering to me at the time. All of those designs look old and tired to me now. I really like a lot of new designs out today, and I really like a lot of designs from the ’50s, ’60’s and ’70s – well before my time. The look of those old bikes really tug at my heart strings. I might be an outlier in that regard, though.
Those Seca II’s were cool. The first one I fell in love with was the Top Gun Ninja GPZ900R. That made me like 8 or so.
Too bad Honda does not apply its engineering talent to designing a lighter, better handling/power/shifting(see BMW auto-shift)bikes. The CB has a great classic naked look, just incorporate modern features.
I think Honda missed the mark entirely with the CB 1100. They should have reintroduced the Nighthawk cb750 with updated styling.It would be far cheaper to make with fine performance for the intended market.
oh I bet that would be a smooth ride—sitting on that 1100 Custom—in the hot Summer months…riding from the hot road through the fields into the cool realm under the trees…the temp must drop 15 or 20 degrees. Or just ride all night. with all the world asleep around you. : – )
Where is the picture of the flat4, 3 wheeler, that was the most interesting one. I know this is a motorcycle page, but you should show the coolest thing Yamaha has built this year, their sport utv.
Who in north america would buy these? Everyone who wanted one, and could afford to did, before they were discontinued. So they tart them up a bit? I just don’t think there is a viable market for these newish variants, if there were the CB 1100 would still be a current model.
In 1982 the CB900F was a very good bike,the new CB1100 is better in most ways.It shifts easier,brakes better and power delivery is smoother.It weighs about the same and performs about the same.If I’m going to spend $11,000.I expect more than an improved 80’s era machine.
I’d guess those buying a CB1100 are looking for exactly that: an improved ’80s-era machine, i.e., a good-looking (and, in this case, high-quality), standard motorcycle.
I’ve seen new CB 1100’s selling for under $8,000 if memory serves. They tend to be heavily discounted now as a lot of them have been sitting in dealerships for a couple of years.
That was pretty much my point,they are discounted down because they were over-priced to begin with.It’s a nice bike and I enjoyed riding one recently when I switched with a guy at a local bike night.He rode my CB900F as a comparison.
We both came away preferring the updates to his bike as the better machine,but at what cost?
re: “features a look possessing a sense of speed that comes from its long nose and low crouching position.”
crouching tiger, hidden GSXR.
Flying Five Finger One Armed Eight Pole Shaolin Exploding Death Touch Thursdays? With respect to El Rey, of course.
CB1100 custom looks great!If only it had more horsepower.115-120 at the rear wheel would do wonders for the bikes sales(and a 180 rear tire).
XJR 1300, Bandit 1250, Kawi ZRX1100, and CB1300 all have 180 sized rear wheels and 100 hp, no more.
I would say the CB1100, tire selection and power is for the “enjoy the road while the engine purrs” kind of driving.
https://youtu.be/PlLhhXCEKaw?t=97 ohhh glorious sound.
More power and you need a race derived bike, or a race bike, check http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2015/09/2016-suzuki-gsx-s1000-abs-first-thoughts-on-our-test-bike/ .
Lucky number 1299.
Sagittarius horoscope: check your sag, bumpiness in your life will put your rebound settings at test.
“115-120 at the rear wheel would do wonders for the bikes sales”
The CB1000R is aimed at those people. Those interested in this CB desire a new “vintage bike experience,” and that doesn’t require any more power than this provides (and a bigger rear tire would only detract from its effortless cornering).
nobody wants the CB1000R.And there would be a market for a sport version of the CB1100.
If there were a market for a 120hp version of the CB1100 then the CB1000r and other bikes like it would be selling to enough of them to prove it.
I think it is a stretch to assume that someone clamoring for a more powerful CB1100 would instead buy a CB1000R and call it good. Guys like us are not looking for an either / or. We want timeless design AND performance.
See? Jeremy gets it.
Jeremy, I agree to a point but there’s only so much sales floor space and lots of choices in the naked category. Usually a market can be identified by the sales of adjacent categories. It seems to me that brands are either doing hyper-performance naked bikes or retros. Nobody other than Ducati seems to have any success with middle-performance naked bikes.
I stick to my statement, if there were a market for a 120hp naked/retro, it’d already exist since it’s presumably a fairly easy bike to develop and make.
Dave, I’m not disagreeing that there is not enough market to justify the existence of a performance-oriented CB1100. I am just saying that the potential for that market could never be identified by monitoring the sales of CB1000Rs because those product are not really adjacent.
Years ago when I was clamoring for a “Super” Bonneville, I didn’t buy a Speed Triple. I went for the Monster because it was the closest equivalent at the time. (Funny you mentioned Ducati.)
180 rear tire on the CB1100 would be hideous, and not handle nearly as quick and nice. What would be the point other than looking fat?
I like the extra origami insectoid fairings.
Chassis seems upgraded from the CBR300 series.
http://www.autocolumn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/2015-honda-cbr300r-side-matt-black.jpg
sub-frame seems to be welded on.
I hope this comes to be the new “must have 300”.
Race bikes should start coming with crash pucks installed.
Come on Honda! Start making standards sub 400 pounds like KTM and the new Yamaha R3. The money is on the people who can afford new bikes. Baby Boomers are needing bikes that are light and fast! I love the standard, I hate the fact that they are so damn heavy. I don’t need 1000cc, but I need a bike that can keep up with today’s traffic.
Why don’t they just put the “old” CR1100XX motor into a bike like this? Honda keeps coming out with 75 or 80 horsepower 1000’s or 1200’s and then wonders why they can’t sell the things. Then when they do come out with a “naked” they ask $14,000 for it with low tech suspension, lighting and brakes. Let’s see that Custom version with the Bird motor and a decent, not necessarily the latest greatest, suspension and brakes priced in the 12 to $14,000 range with ABS on a higher spec version
I usually don’t care for the Transformers look of present sport bikes( give me the look of the RGV Suzuki) but this is probably the best of the lot, styling wise, although I’d leave the decals off. They should bring that over in a 350-450cc as competition for the lil Ninja, KTM and Yamaha in that market segment.
Nice-looking machines. I really like the CB1100 Custom. The little sportbike has a little too much going on for my tastes with all of those angles going every which way, and I do wish Honda would get off of the matte black kick like everyone else did 10 years ago.
I really like the CB1100 custom as well. I like the CB1100 but its missing hp, as a lot of Hondas are these days. It’s not missing gobs of it but a CB1100 would reside in my garage by now if it had 110 of them. It is a fantastic looking machine though.
Same for me. A test ride on the CB1100 was one of the more memorable let-downs of my motorcycling life. I was hoping for something with attitude along the lines of a modern and refined air-cooled Bandit 1200, and what I found was the two-wheeled equivalent of Mr. Rogers. It is a very nice bike and probably something very easy to get along with on a daily basis, but it just didn’t have what I was looking for.
Maybe it’s the Honda on which you meet the nicest people?
As an owner, I kinda look at that as a feature, not a bug. I wouldn’t mind if the power delivery were a little less “marshmallowy” (though I think that can be largely solved with a reflash)…but for me, it’s just nice to ride a bike with plenty of real-world, low-end grunt that DOESN’T make me feel like I need to be riding the hell out of it all the time. That said, I’m lucky enough to have a couple other bikes for that…your mileage may vary.
And really, the thing is no slug. Cycle World got it through the 1/4 in the high 11s at 110, if I recall.
I really like the CB1100 custom too. It’s really tastefully done.
Judging from hp figures, it’s motor must be massively understressed. It’ll probably last forever.
I thought there must be aftermarket parts to unlock it’s full potential but, a quick Google search
returned practically nothing. Weird. Is there no demand for more hp?
“Is there no demand for more hp?”
Over on the CB1100 forum there is some, but not much. I’d say less than a dozen out of 2800 members. Popular farkles for those that do want a little more hp, are a pipe and a reflash to unleash the rev limiter and speed limiter. However not many gains are made. The highest I have read is 96 HP so about a 10% increase. Most people get the pipe for more sound than anything else. Staintune is a popular muffler, as is Yoshimura, Arrow, etc
Things I notice as a current 14 DLX owner with regards to yellow tank version, New tank shape that possibly holds more fuel, chrome headlight bucket and instrument covers, square mirrors, polished master cylinders, no ABS ring, non linked brakes, different seat, smaller rear tail light, back to the 13 std side covers, differnt air cleaner box, 2 tone motor with cyl head silver, cylinder and block black, spoke whels like the Japanese and European EX model, Honda on tank instead of wing badge, 4 into 2 with double walled chrome waterfall head pipes like on the dlx,
The cafe appears to have the 13 std tank shape with new checkerboard paint, black 4 into 2 which mufflers that appear thinner than current dlx, cafe seat, bar end mirrors, remote reservoir rear shocks, non linked ABS
I meant to say:KTM could get 50 hp out of a 500cc single without breaking a sweat.
Light Weight Super Sports Concept: It would be simple to use an unrestricted version of the current cb500 engine in a lighter weight chassis with higher spec suspension and brakes. The current Cb500 is designed to meet those goofy EU licensing requirements. That’s why the cb500 is no faster through the 1/4 mile than the KTM 375cc single. Drop 50 lbs, and bump the RWHP from 43 to 50, and you would have a smaller bike built for more experienced riders. the old Ninja 500 put 50 hp to the wheel and weighed the same or less than the current cb500 (minus gas:. where’s the progress? Its cleaner, but that hasn’t stopped KTM. KTM could get 50 hp out of a single without breaking a sweat. Honda engineering isn’t what it used to be……sad
I don’t think it is their engineering that is suffering. They don’t want to make high performance machines. For more than just a few years Honda had only 2 bikes in their entire line that threw down significantly more than 100hp and new models almost always stayed in the 100hp range. Honda discontinued the 919 and replaced it with the CB1000 which made 6 more hp, on an engine platform that even detuned could have easily tossed 120-130hp to the wheel. Nope it made 108. They already had the tech and engineering on that engine and they detuned it significantly under the competition. They have the tech and the talent just no interest in building go fast machines anymore.
“They don’t want to make high performance machines.” So is the RCV213V-S not hi performance enough for you?
I won’t speak for Colors. But I’ll add some thoughts that I imagine would resonate.
The RCV213V-S is basically not available. It’s a halo product, nosebleed expensive, much more than the H2R, and will only be seen, let alone ridden, by a few people. (Not to mention the detuned state of that machine in most countries – it is clearly not “high performance” compared to anything above about a 600cc machine in the state in which it is available. And please do not refer me to the high build quality of the machine. I have owned so many Hondas that my license plate used to read “RideRed”. I have almost lost count. Yes, I know the famed Honda build quality well, and there are few things like it. But you reference high performance so let’s stick to that.)
What I suspect Colors refers to is that the modern Honda does not seem anything like the Honda that built the RC30, RC45, RC51, Hurricane 600, early VFRs, early CBR 900s, wailing 250cc four stroke grand prix machines, and the like, and competed as a manufacture in national and world superbike championships, etc. I, and I suspect Colors, has been around long enough to see a modern Honda that I barely recognize.
Honda are wonderful, but not particularly interested in high performance anymore. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. 😉 As the world’s largest motorcycle manufacturer, if they prefer to focus on fuel efficiency, we’re probably all the better for it.
I hear what you are saying Curtis, your point about the RCV being a Halo bike is correct but this is just one example. Honda build plenty of performance bikes, here are some more examples: 1. The CBR600RR (winner of 2014 World super Sport title). 2. The CBR1000RR, outdated yes but still a competitive bike in the right hands eg winner of the Australasian Superbikes in 2014, second in the Isle of Man 2014 etc. How about the CRF150R, CRF250R and CRF450R?
You mention “Honda are wonderful, but not particularly interested in high performance anymore” But that is simply not correct. They are current World MotoGP champs, engine suplier for every Moto2 bike, current Moto3 world champs. Not bad if they are not interested in hi performance anymore.
For the record, i ride a 94 Honda NSR250 and a 1984 Kawasaki GPZ750 Turbo.
I would love a modern high po machine but if you ride a performance bike on the road in Australia you are garunteed to receive some big $$$ fines, loose your license and have your bike impounded ($500+ to get it out) all for going 25 mph over the speed limit.
Pablo,
I’m replying up here as I cannot reply to your post. Thank you for enjoying a thoughtful discussion.
Those are nice rides you have there! Enjoyable, and no doubt possessing great character.
I do not disagree with your examples. But I can remember many times in the past when “I feel” (again your opinion may vary) that Hondas were more exciting. In fact, I could go on for several hundred words, no prob. But I’ll spare you. You are focusing on Honda’s current GP efforts (which, if you look back, were always at approximately the same level), and I prefer to have a wider view including street machines on the sporting end of the spectrum. You are happy with the current Honda and I am not. It’s possible we’ll have to agree to disagree.
I’ll end with this with my current main “beef” with Honda, which pertains because it’s an example of Honda not doing what they could have. Johnny Rea toiled faithfully for over half a decade on Honda superbikes, on a hard-working and well-organized team in SBK. IMO, Honda never gave him the world-crushing superbike they were capable of building in the mid 2000s or so, and suffers seeing him CRUSH the field in his first year on a new bike, new team. Honda should have had that for themselves – JR could be a legend by now, rather than just having had his first c’ship.
I think it’s a fair assessment to say Hondas primary interest is not high performance with regards to top speed, quarter mile speed and horsepower. Hondas corporate philosophy in the last couple of decades has been with riding experience. Hondas never win the shootout put on by various magazines, but they always comment on the easiest bike to ride/ live with, the best bike for the average person would be the Honda in the test. Honda designs and builds excellent all around machines that make their owners appreciate what they have. Not the fastest, not the most technically advanced, just great motorcycles that will last and run for many years. I imagine Honda corporate is very willing to let the other manufacturers chase the latest technological advancement knowing that in 2 years that it will be ” off the front page” anyway as another latest and greatest comes out..ala BMW vs R-1 vs H-2 vs Panigale. Vs KTM Duke. i don’t think Honda has lost it’s way, I think Honda knows exactly which path it is following and is secure that it will remain #1 in sales by following that path.
I think Honda knows its way also. I agree with all you mentioned but I think Honda is right there in regards to technologies though.
In regards to how well Honda does its bikes it’s seldom you run across a Honda with fueling issues, at least nowhere like that of some bikes in the last few years. They are honest, excellent running bikes built to last a long time for a fair price. They may not always be class leading in power output, that tends to be Kawasaki’s schtick anyways, but make for a very satisfying ownership for years to come.
I agree. Every Honda I’ve ever ridden leaves the same impression on me – each bike is more than the sum of its spec sheet. The package just works. The value of that is something that gets lost in spec sheet contests and even in magazine comparisons, in my opinion.
Hard to argue with your assessment, Mickey. Take the Blackbird for instance, it was overshadowed (vis-a-vis sheer speed and quickness) by both the Hyabusa and ZX11, but was much loved by the people who owned them and was well-praised in magazine tests.
But every once and a while, Honda still manages to screw the pooch, engineering-wise. One example would be the cam galling on the ’84 / ’85 Sabres. But if I have to think back thirty years for the first example to come to mind, I guess I’m proving you point….maybe a better choice would have been to point out some marketing mistakes, like the CB1 “Big One”, or the Rune. Bottom line, not even Honda is infallable. But all in all, you are spot-on.
Tom I would never be so foolish as to say any manufacturer, including Honda, couldn’t make mistakes in design, engineering, manufacturing, distributing or marketing because they are all capable of that and have made mistakes in those areas. Being number 1 in world wide sales you are bound to make a dud once in awhile. I think in engineering and manufacturing Honda is better than the rest of it’s Japanese competition, the other things, well Honda could use some new advisors lol. However when you speak Rune and DN-01 and NM-4 and DCT models Honda has been the boldest in trying new things out, and I don’t think anyone can say they were bad from an engineering standpoint but from a design and marketing standpoint. All the other Japanese companies pretty much keep on making the status quo (except Kaw the new Supercharged H2R and). Honda has been very innovative even if not to everyone’s cup of tea. Not every Picasso is pleasing to the eye.
Honda has been trying to sell us automatics since when 1976? (76 CB750A) quite unsuccessfully, and are still trying to in 2016 (Africa Twin et al) but if they ever catch on, Honda is going to look like a genius lol.
My experience with KTM is that their engines are built on the ragged edge between durable and grenade. Honda can also get 50 HP out of a 500cc single without breaking a sweat too. Engines like that either have a short service life or can barely be ridden at lower rpms, particularly a single. That isn’t a formula Honda likes for its street bikes.
I agree with you on the CBR500. To me the Honda 500cc twin engine with a different cam and small compression bump mounted into an aluminum frame would yield a sub-400lb motorcycle with 50hp at the wheel which would be a nice alternative to the small displacement segment, but it would be too expensive vs. the competition I’d wager (at least in its full-size CB500 dimensions). Honda also uses a 400cc version of that same engine for their Japanese market which they could put into play.
For the record, the Ninja 500 is a tad heavier than the CBR500R, by about 12 pounds or so, and is only a little faster. Where’s the progress? You may not see it on a spec sheet, but there would be no denying the progress were you to ride both bikes and then draw your comparison. The Honda is a very refined piece of kit. The Ninja 500 feels like what it is – a slightly faster antique.
I agree with both Colors and Jeremy. And from what I can glean from other sites, this is a re-skinned 250/300. I hope they’re wrong and this is an updated cbr500. The old ninja was easily capable of high 12’s in the quarter. the best Ive seen for the Honda is 13.7. But your right, the Honda is no doubt better than the old ninja in every other way. Hyosung will have a water cooled 450cc single at EICMA (GDR450R) with a claimed 50ps at the wheel. It seem like this market is moving towards 400 – 500CC engines. Honda could beat them all there with a bike similar to what Jeremy describes. Breath on the engine, drop some weight and let the riders and the aftermarket upgrade the rest if we ant. That way the cost could be kept down.
Interesting. I have much experience with KTM dirt bikes and have never heard of one “grenading”. The RFS engines developed a reputation for reliability and longevity (except for water pump seals, lol) that would rival something like a Honda XR. They also have a far better spread of power than a comparable sized XR.
The two strokes are pretty much bomb proof. As for reliability, I don’t even consider looking at the condition of the top end until 150 hours. They are also very rider friendly. Don’t like the power spread, change out some base gaskets and/or spend $150 for a different head and you have a much different bike.
The original poster implied that Honda’s engineering team wasn’t up to the task of producing a high-performance single. I say that they certainly can: they just probably aren’t willing to put such an engine in a street bike like KTM is.
The “grenade” comment was a bit of poetic license. I wasn’t implying that KTM engines just blow up at random but rather high-performance singles in general are built on the ragged edge. KTM will put blinkers and emissions equipment on such bikes. High-performance singles regardless of the manufacturer require frequent and sometimes extensive maintenance to remain reliable. Honda has more of their image invested in the reliability/longevity (as opposed to “ready to race”) side of the equation to put a competition single into a street bike is my guess.