We told you previously about revisions to the 2017 CB1100, including the introduction of a new, sportier RS model. American Honda announced earlier today that the revised standard model will be available in the U.S. beginning next May at a price to be determined later. Apparently, there will be no RS model for the U.S. market next year. Details are described in the press release below, but changes include new seamless gas tank, wheels and revised suspension, as well as some minor engine changes. Here is the press release:
December 9, 2016 – TORRANCE, Calif. Since 1959, when they first adorned the twin-cylinder CB92 Benly, the letters CB have always meant a great deal to Honda and Honda owners. They came to mean even more in 1969, as the four-cylinder CB750 represented a seminal moment for motorcycling, as the world’s first production superbike took center stage, laying down a blueprint that still stands today.
Old school became new school in 2013, when Honda brought the CB1100 to the U.S., satisfying pent-up demand from an army of riders for whom a traditionally styled air-cooled four-cylinder CB was a must-have piece of engineering craftsmanship. For 2017, the CB1100 EX has been imbued with extra layers of retro style and several performance upgrades. Manufacture takes place in Honda’s Kumamoto factory, with a production process that’s been fundamentally revised to integrate technology and expert skill in order to create motorcycles rich in craftsmanship and attention to detail, plus a place in history that only comes with the passage of many decades.
“As with past CBs, we understand the timeless pleasure that our customers get from owning and riding an air-cooled inline four-cylinder motorcycle,” said Mr. Mitsunobu Imada, Large Project Leader for the 2017 CB1100 EX. “Building on the CB1100’s desirability and joy of ownership, while adding functionality and quality to deepen the sense of fulfillment, were very important elements for us to consider. With the CB1100 EX, we hope many riders get to appreciate and understand a very traditional motorcycle structure.”
CB1100 EX
The CB1100 EX outlines the proportion and silhouette of a true 1970s superbike. Its curvaceous fuel tank, which now has a seamless design, evokes handmade craftsmanship, while the single round headlight and twin instrument dials denote Hondas from a bygone age. Adding crisp-edged modernity, the front and rear lights are now LED and new 18-inch wheels run stainless steel spokes. The classic tubular-steel frame has relaxed steering geometry, sure-footed stability and neutral handling characteristics. The 41mm Showa Dual Bending Valve fork (SDBV) and twin Showa shocks offer improved suspension compliance, and ABS brakes are standard. The subtly blacked-out engine breathes more easily thanks to revised inlets and smaller, lighter dual chrome mufflers, producing linear, instantly accessible power and torque. An assist slipper clutch makes for easier lever engagement and rear-wheel stability on downshifts. With its classic lines, the CB1100 EX conjures memories, mixing the engine’s addictive performance and soulful sound with evocative appeal. It’s also a machine to savor and contemplate from every angle.
- Color: Candy Red
- Price: TBA
- Availability: May 2017
See more of MD’s great photography:
Wow my Dad will be so excited ! He has been dead for 20 years.
It has been my thought for quite some time, long before this CB came out, that if Honda brought back the ’81 Cb900F Super Sport, carbs, bias tires and all, I’d buy it. Loved that bike. Other than styling and some other minor differences, that’s exactly what Honda did with the ’13 CB1100F. It feels very similar. Weight, horsepower, seating position, performance are all very close. I’ve owned 5 F models and the ’81 was my favorite. Someone in an earlier post mentioned the styling. This bike has some similarities with early CBs was you would expect. But the ’13-14 F model bear a striking resemblance to the 1975-76 CB400F Super Sport. Including the side covers being a different color than the tank. I would also like to see a Super Sport model like someone else mentioned. But I could dod with an RS model in a pinch. If Honda brings it, I’m buying it.
If I have heard it once, I have heard it 100 times, the bike that people most regret getting rid of and the one that they miss the most is the CB900F. Man, people really loved that motorcycle.
Mickey you’re absolutely correct. And I was fortunate to have two of them. My favorite ’81 model in silver and black ’82. My ’13 model is going nowhere.
How about bringing the RS version to the states?? THAT retro bike is something I could see myself riding.
The smartest thing they could do would be badge it as a 750. Everyone would be happy about the power, and you always pay a price premium for Honda anyway. WIn-Win
They should badge it as a 750, then everyone would be happy about the power. Hondas always have a premium price that wouldn’t be noticed.
A very well thought out refined design that checks all the retro boxes for me except….it just seems to be painted with the dull brush. Example, I was just looking at the Triumph T120 in a candy apple metallic paint with nice chrome where it should be. Now that’s a beautiful bike. If the Honda had more exciting paint (including the grey cover plate) and real chrome wheels, it would be getting there. It needs to move up a level.
Random thoughts Re. Honda’s series of mid-2000s CB1100 retro bikes.
The CB1100’s motor descends from the 4-V DOHC 4-V series introduced in the 1979 CB750, which came in SS and Standard “K” models like the original a decade earlier (forgot which years Honda sold the stylized “Nighthawk” versions).
Conversely, the overall cosmetic design of the modern CB1100 is more like the original 1969 CB750K SOHC. Compare the ’69 CB750K SOHC 2-V vs. ’79 CB750K DOHC 4-V. They look quite different. One of the biggest cosmetic differences is the cylinder heads.
Purely for overall cosmetic design, I prefer the ’69 over the CB1100 retro. Do a Google image search and you’ll see CB1100’s modified w/paint and graphics that better mimic the ’69.
Performance wise, a stock ’79-’82 CB750SS absolutely annihilates any ’69-’78 CB750 SOHC. I owned both the ’77 CB750K SOHC and ’81 CB750SS, the latter likely being the best handling bike of its genre. The latter bike totally stomps and walks away from any stock prior/same vintage K model.
In fact, between an ’81 CB750SS and the modern CB1100 retro, through a moderately tight canyon, IMO the former would walk away from the latter.
IMO, any/all Triumph retros are more true to the classic, original cosmetics than the modern CB1100 is true to the ’69 CB750K.
Honda had two alternate choices, both more attractive than the current bike. One option is for the modern CB1100 to more closely mimic the cosmetics of the original ’69 CB750K. In that vein, it might be better if the motor displaced 750cc, the “CB750K” nomenclature then evoking more pure ’69 nostalgia. I think this is where the CB1100 suffers. First, it’s an 1100 copying an era that had none. Second, the DOHC motor and the graphics are too different from the original ’69. It fails from these two views.
From ’79 to ’83 Honda made SS models in 750, 900, and 1100cc. They all looked great. My personal preference is for Honda’s modern retro to more closely mimic any of the above SS models rather than the early K model. I suspect I’d prefer the 750cc engine, for less curb weight and less reciprocating mass. Beyond their SS nomenclature, all the above bikes were jewels among UJM’s, w/flat, usable seats, fantastic performance, and easily tailored/modified for any rider and/or modern use except winning races against modern race replicas. In their era, these bikes were among the most highly evolved and highest performing UJMs.
I ‘d prefer modern upgrades like ABS, USD forks, radial front calipers, and certainly as much power as Honda could squeeze while passing emissions laws. The USD forks would look appropriate on a retro SS.
Each year, Honda could copy the paint and graphics from a different vintage and/or engine displacement. They all looked to die for, my favorites likely being…well, any of them!
Styling choices are all relative. I believe most folk’s opinions are biased upon what era they grew up with. Older folks may long for a K bike. I’d like to see a ’79 CBX style (not the 1/2 fairing things with side bags). As a kid My favorite bikes were the KZ1000R, which was later retro ZRX, and the Ducati F1.
I think the CB1100 is a nice retro standard that I would enjoy. I’d consider this bike along with the ThruxtonR. Too many naked superbikes today, so I am glad to see the “standard” bike being supported. I wish I could add another bike or two to my stable right now.
Riding anything is better than nothing. I think too many folks forget that sometimes.
“I’d prefer modern upgrades like ABS, USD forks…”
Not to mention making a DCT version, as well. I would definitely buy in that case.
Honda’s previous attempt at an automatic CB (CB750A “Hondamatic”) was a complete failure. I doubt they want to repeat that expensive mistake.
when the top executive at the company who could buy any motorcycle he wanted buys one with his own money…well
from Wall Street Journal
Honda Motor Co. chief Takanobu Ito used a street model to gain access to quake-affected factories.
After the March 11 disasters, highways were closed and many roads were severed by the impact of the earthquake. But the man who runs Honda Motor Co. needed to get to Honda plants at Tochigi, about 100 kilometers north of Tokyo, as quickly as possible — a 43-year-old male employee died when the wall of a cafeteria crumbled, and 17 other Honda employees were injured at one of the company’s most important sites.
So Takanobu Ito, the top executive at the world’s biggest motorcycle maker by volume, took to his Honda CB1100 “naked” motorbike two days after the quake to get to the Tochigi facilities, a vehicle research center, a manufacturing-technology development subsidiary and a component factory. The CB1100 is a company mainstay, the “naked” version carrying no fancy frills.
The 57-year-old executive said he first drove a Honda car from Tokyo to his house in Utsunomiya, in the same prefecture as Tochigi, taking back roads with the highway network from the capital closed. The CEO then changed to the still brand-new motorbike he bought last spring to approach the quake-hit area. The pearl white 1100cc-engine CB was able to roll through disrupted roads around the facilities that a car would find it hard to navigate, he said.
That’s impressive
Reading your post, I see no mention of it, but what makes you think the CEO of Honda actually had to come out of his own pocket for a Honda motorcycle?
Most responsible companies have books and ledgers. No doubt he didn’t have to pay MSRP for it :)… but just “acquiring” a unit is tantamount to theft.
Got to read ALL the words VLJ lol
“The CEO then changed to the still brand-new motorbike he bought last spring to approach the quake-hit area”
“He bought” being the operative words
Yep, I missed that bit of the story.
In all fairness he is 57 which puts him smack dab in the demographic ( 50-60 year olds) that this type of bike was made to appeal to. I imagine as a lad of 9 or 10 he was quite impressed with the new inline 4 cyl Honda that would go on to set the standard for the rest of the world for many years to come.
I’ve read somewhere the man himself pushed and gave a go to the bike project.
It was heavily discounted because of low sales.
Simply beautiful. Like many, a bit confused over the slight lack of power, but it would be enough for me. Unfortunately, for Honda anyway, I am a Triumph guy when it comes to standards! And I love the Triumph classic lineup. (minus the seemed tank!)
I really love standard style motorcycles, but I am confused on one point. I rode a 1983 CB1100F for 11 years. Why can’t a 2017 version have a least equal (if not better) performance? That’s the only reason these bikes seem to sit. Triumph gets it, even the air cooled version of the new Bonnie would outperform the original and those new water cooled units are going to sell like crazy. Honda has a great history but they just don’t know how to exploit it.
Easier for Triumph to get 33 more horses out of a motor thats twice as large (650cc w/45 hp vs 1200cc with 78 hp)
The CB1100F of 1983 made 108 hp, but didn’t have to go thru any epa mandates. It also weighed more than the 2017 model and had a slightly larger motor. Also Honda had no plans to compete with the 83 CB1100. The new CB1100 does make 20 horsepower more than the 750 Honda did when it came out.
The current Honda CB1100 also makes more HP than the current Bonneville while using a smaller motor (not more than the current Thruxton however)
“Why can’t a 2017 version have a least equal (if not better) performance?”
Performance is more than hp/cc. It is very likely that this engine performs better than the 83’s in every other way, especially at the RPM levels where most of this bike’s owners typically ride.
That almost-flat seat looks beeah’chun!
Another looming sales flop. Styling took a serious turn for the worse. Performance barely increased. Dealers still have leftovers in stock from 2 or 3 years ago. Seems like they did a half-hearted effort to get leftover parts out of the warehouse.
This demographic from 50-60 are buying and riding Harleys as one can see on the highways and byways of America.
In its day, it was smooth and fast. There are now other smooth and fast bikes these days. It also flopped in the mid 70s along with the economy. And it flopped again in the early 80s after two years.
The “OLD” engineers and project leaders deliberately chose torque over power. Older guys were/are killing themselves on big high powered bikes, even the ZRX1200 left many a widow. The idea is to slow down and enjoy the scenery and the ride, which this bike does. It’s not about race tech this and high powered that. Do we REALLY want to scream along on a tube frame with conventional forks and shocks? A 60 something friend just buys a crotch rocket for that, and loves it, for that.
Finally, look at the highways. We are all driving CARS. CARS and more CARS. People don’t ride. And now people ride even less because everyone is texting like the lady next to me who looked at her phone 90% of the time!
some interesting reading into the development of the CB1100. It will answer a lot of comments and questions
http://world.honda.com/CB1100/engineer-talk/
http://world.honda.com/design/designers-talk/cb1100/
At last a major manufacturer realizes that hideous ugly tank seams are such an aesthetic blight that they should be forever banished from motorcycle designs. I am sure the original sketch did not include such warts. Let this be the beginning of the end of the seam, and let other makers understand that bike riders (and more importantly, owners) are not delinquent teenagers obsessed with cartoon images or Japanese manga style. This CB1100 is a clean machine, and looks far better than the CB750 original. I must admit that whirring metal, unimpeded by a liquid jacket, has a sound all of its own that appeals immensely. This one looks worthy.
I honestly can’t tell you if any of my nine bikes have tank seams or not without walking out to the garage. Oh wait, I remember my ’93 Ducati Monster has a tank seam, the little tank prop rod engages with the seam to hold it up. That’s one of the best looking tanks I’ve ever seen on a motorcycle. Come to think of it, my GB500 has tank seams – I’m pretty sure. That’s definitely a contender in the Best Looking Motorcycle Fuel Tank competition.
I’d say, to most “die-hard, born in the wool, motorcyclists”, tank seams don’t even show up on the radar.
I’m with you…have never understood the whole tank seam thing. I mean, BFD.
I totally agree, tank seams NEVER come into the equation when I’m considering a purchase. Makes no difference whatsoever.
How badly EPA’d is this thing?
Old design + old technologies and many get excited about the perspective of paying to pay today’s dollars for it!
Now wonder those companies are more than willing to provide those products while true innovations are so scares…
Those CEOs must be laughing their heads off!
When the bike first came out, Honda claimed they’d done a significant redesign of the traditional UJM motor to suit modern legislative requirements, so I don’t think they just raided the back catalogue. My guess is this handsome machine is head-and-shoulders above the ‘original’ in all departments; not that I’ve ever found fours to my personal taste.
Well, retro is a thing. A big thing. Customers want it and are willing to pay for it. Triumph gets over 50% of its sales from its modern classic line. If you go on Honda’s global site and read the story of how difficult it was to bring the CB1100 to production in 2013 you’ll understand why it costs over $10k. It’s more modern and unique than you might think.
So a 40hp single cylinder BSA 500 Goldstar could do 95mph in 1963. That bike sold for $985 dollars in 1963, which was a LOT of money considering what the average worker was paid in 1963. In today’s near worthless dollars that would be about $7,880.00, not such a big deal really when you look at what the average worker is paid today. Good collectors copies will run from about $12,000 to $20,000, but you will still own an old 40hp motorcycle. Sure, its fun to show and ride a bit, but you had better be very careful with it, too.
Or, you can pay around $10,000.00 for the CB1100 and have a much, much better motorcycle. High performance machines have NEVER been cheaper. The problem with most people is that unlike the people in 1963, we don’t just want the new motorcycle, … we also want every other new gadget on the market as well, which eats up disposable income and gives the impression that new bikes are more expensive. Be smart with your money and you can ride a much superior motorcycle than what your father or grandfather could for less labor.
What! No tank seams? How did they think of that?
When the new Bonneville T-120 came out last year, I had placed an order and it showed up as the first one for sale in the country. But the tank seam was so hideous. It belied the line that Triumph was pursuing the look of the original. I passed.
This one looks a little more, um, … curvaceous.
You based a $12K motorcycle purchase entirely on the question of whether or not it had a visible tank seam?
Unbelievable.
Around here, that’s par for the course.
I’ve never seen a group of “motorcyclists” who were so determined to come up with reasons NOT to buy a motorcycle.
LOL I get the same idea sometimes! I think they (well, us) just need excuses because they either don’t have the money to buy a new bike or that spouse thingy won’t let them…
I work in the MC business and listened to hundreds of posers say how wonderful a bike is, but… Of course the only truthful answer, that is seldom admitted, is they can’t afford it.
The original Bonneville had a tank seam. An ugly one, right down the center of the tank. Find another reason not to buy a Triumph.
too bad, you missed out on a fine motorcycle
Actually, the switch gear felt really cheap, too. I test rode it and I didn’t really like the it that much.
My brother bought a T-120. His only complaint is the pointy turn signal switch knob that hurts your thumb when you push to cancel the Tuurn signals. Other than that he loves it.
I’d bet if I asked him if his bike had a tank seam, he’d ask “What’s a tank seam?”
Gorgeous bike, no doubt. I’ve ridden one of the previous model, the engine is super smooth but does not wow you with power. Not sure why with an 1100cc inline 4 Honda doesn’t get more out of it, I’m sure tuners do. I’d need a windscreen, but that’s it.
“Not sure why with an 1100cc inline 4 Honda doesn’t get more out of it..”
My first thought are emissions coming from an air-cooled mill that can’t be controlled close enough temperature-wise to meet regs.
It was a choice. You can read in the article that Mickey had posted that the engineers wanted 100 hp but the project lead decided it should only have 80. Because he didn’t need more. The wanker.
Rotfl
That may be overly distilled. They were after a particular character, involving a mellow rumbling feel at lower rpm cruising speeds, which they would have probably lost by reaching for more HP.
For the guys who like this bike, they seem to agree that Honda nailed it. They don’t care about a cc/hp ratio, only that the bike rides the way they like it. Truimph is doing the same thing with their revised twin.
HD has had their finger on this pulse throughout their whole history.
The difference is, HD and Triumph aren’t losing sales because of it. In the case of the CB1100, Honda is most definitely losing sales as a result of the overly anemic motor.
Are they not selling, or are they simply recovering from an optimistic forecast? And if so, are we sure that’s the reason?
Is the new Bonneville selling that well, or is supply low?
Dave, no one can really say for sure either way except Honda and they don’t release that kind of info. We have no idea how many they wanted to sell, how many they projected to sell, or how many they did sell. THere are leftovers but there are left overs of about every brand and model. So it’s hard to say. On the US CB forum we have about 3000 members world wide from22 countries, plus there is a Korean CB 1100 forum and a German CB1100 forum and a French CB 1100 forum, and a UK CB 1100 forum. But I have asked Honda these questions, and how many of each iteration were produced etc etc and they just won’t divulge that info so it’s anybody’s guess. The CB 1100 is in it’s 8th year of production so they must be somewhat pleased with the acceptance world wide.
What an attractive motorcycle! And equally functional as well.
The best bike I will never buy.
“Dated and derivative”? Yeah, of a classic Honda 4! Sheesh. As the owner of a 2013 model (among a few other bikes), I can say that the CB 1100 is a real pleasure to ride. Not a ton of power, but super smooth and transparent, meaning that the bike has no distracting faults. Handling is surprisingly good as well. I’m glad to see the bike returning to our market.
Everyone is different and we can all be critical, but this is a really pretty bike no matter who you are!
I, for one, think retro stuff is better left to the past.
Though I know that this crowd is not going to agree with me, for the most parrt.
I’d normally agree with you except for the problem that so few of the new designs are appealing to look at.
Tell that to Harley and Indian. Why should it be that Honda can’t celebrate their own past but the cruiser makers can? Bikes from Japan reached an acceptable level of modern functionality in the 80’s and I’ll bet this bike will be as good or better than those with regard to comfort, handling and performance for this type of UJM.
“Retro stuff is better left to the past”
I love the retro styling because, quite frankly, the past ain’t what it used to be.
This bike just doesn’t look right. Most of the bike looks like it is from the ’70s but the fuel tank looks like it is from the ’90s. I couldn’t buy it. If I wanted a retro (which I don’t) it would have to look true to the era that it represents. This looks like a botched mix up of styles.
I agree about tank. Still on my short list though.
I always thought it was supposed to be a mashup of some of Honda styling elements from the past. I personally think they pulled it off beautifully.
Equally, if the tank seams were kept (more workers would be needed to make them!) there’d be any number of people complaining about them, retro or not. We don’t all like or dislike the same things but think where that puts the manufacturers?
This bike’s styling says it will go the distance. It already has. It will again. Its a timeless look and it always looks good. Love it!
Blah, blah, blah. Where’s the CB1100R?
Well, good job on the seamless gas tank. Why don’t more companies do that? But the styling is still too controlled. It’s not flamboyant enough. And it needs a good 90-95 hp. I don’t care for the way the left muffler needs a cutout for the center stand. Yuck. If you want a standard, I’d look at the Suzuki Bandit 1250. I just wish Suzuki would s*x up the styling on it by first, dropping the double-cradle frame an putting some creases in the lines. I like Big Red to succeed because Honda presses everyone else to try harder but the styling on this CB1100 is just too traditional. It looks dated and derivative.
“I don’t care for the way the left muffler needs a cutout for the center stand” Interesting, I don’t even give that a second thought.
3.2 0-60 times but only goes to 130 mph. Not 170?
It’s alot like saying a cb500f can out run a sportster so the sportser is no good. Both great and different bikes it s up to you which one you want. Honda could take the 17 cbr and make it more Touno like but would you buy it? How about a scrambler version?
Yes, 130, 150, 170 mph….these are all go-to-jail speeds these days, and will also result in a perhaps a four-figure court fine and skyrocketing insurance rates. Speeds like this should only be done on a closed race course, which is not what this bike is for.
This will lighten your bike a few pounds as well as your wallet to the tune of $2600
The full kit goes for $ 5300
Plus shipping of course.
http://www.samurider.com/?p=14293/#itemImage
Good find.
That’s how it should have been done. Had it looked like that, i’d sell my Super Tenere and Duke 690 to buy it, never having to buy another bike again. That would be all i need.
Dual, chromed exhaust!! OhhhHHHGAAAAADUhhhh…
Now if Kawasaki would just bring back the ZRX….
No RS no $$$ from me. Honda is clueless to what bikes we want. Worked for Honda for 10 years, they don’t care about our opinions!
Perhaps the RS is being held over till the ‘soaring’ sales of the EX fall away a bit.
Then it allows Honda to drum up some interest in the EX again in potential Customers who thought the EX a bit old fashioned, but found the RS too wild for them.
Reading all the comments here, maybe the conclusion is there are no boring bikes, only riders lacking in imagination??
I would buy one, except for the reported “added vibration”. Honda reportedly added vibration because of focus group request.
I’d say they added a courseness rather than vibration. I spent a weekend on one riding around the Rocky mountains, and the bike is very smooth.
Overrated: This bike IF it had 100 or more hp.
Underrated: An almost flat and deceptively comfortable seat, as on this bike.
re: “This bike IF it had 100 or more hp”
curious, anybody know of somebody doing engine work on these things…? in this day and age, there’s ALWAYS somebody in the vintage circles willing to tinker, even if the end result is a grenade. (hint, there’s “entertainment value” even in grenades, LOL)
Norm we have guys on the forum into the mid 90s ( highest is dynod at 96 rwh) with a Power commander, pipe and reflashed ECU’s and running into the mid 130s top speed. There are a couple people checking into cams right now.
re: “mid 130s top speed”
wait, mid 130s…? MID 130S…?!
you’ll shoot your eye out kid…!!! 🙂 (Santa voice)
Lol
Top speed on a bike like this is of little importance to the demographic that buys these things. I could care less. True, there are a few that are going to want “bragging rights” to tell their friends on forums and the local coffee shop what great speeds their bike is capable of. I owned a Bandit 1200 for 12 years that never went over a 100 and it was a blast to ride without unnecessarily endangering my license or my life. There are scads of bikes that will do over 170 if that’s what you’re into and they come with a fairing that you can tuck behind to keep the wind blast off you. But this bike is out of its element vying for top speed awards. Perhaps the RS version will come with a few more HP to wet your thirst for more power and satisfy your need for a few more miles per hour on top. Sorry to sound as if I’m railing, but Honda can’t make one bike do all things, and if it did you would have 140 comments on this forum that say “it sucks” because it doesn’t do….
Odd that the finished bike should be so heavy. From the looks of the engine’s power specs. The bike would run pretty nicely at real world RPMs. Pretty close to a Ducati Air cooled two valve Multistrada engine. Those are excellent street bike engines IMO.
The air cooled Multistrada is easily 100 pounds lighter. What gives?
Some really nice upgrades, but disappointed that the RS version is not coming here. Would really prefer cast wheels and tubeless tires. Still a neat bike, and glad Honda is continuing it, just wish they saw fit to bring the RS as well.
When photos of the CB1100 come up it’s like “going home” to me. Many of the modern designs aren’t really to my liking so much. I don’t hate them generally but there is just something about the big CB that is comforting, if you will? Not pretentious I guess it is?
i love the “looks”, but i hate maintenance, meaning, iirc, previous contemporary iterations required valve checks every 4k miles. and spokes? yeah, compatible with the “look”, i suppose, but i refuse to dispense the elbow grease, and riding time, to keep’m lookin’ purdy. anyway, i was moving around my 2015 vstrom 650 in the garage yesterday. dadgum thing feels heavier every time i deal with it. have read too many good things about the CB500 series……but, hey, to each his own.
Funny, I was juggling my fleet in the garage the other day, and my 650 Wee, which felt so light and manageable when I got it 8 years ago, just felt like a tank. I used to own a CB900F (original air-cooled one, not 919) and find this CB1100 very appealing, though I too wish it was more of an “F” than a “K” tribute. But I wonder now, 35 years later, if it would also feel overweight to my older body. The CB500’s look more appealing every year, but a GB500=look version with the twin engine would be especially nice.
It’s a matter of perspective I think. My other bike is a 717 pound Honda ST 1300. Push it around in the garage, and then go to move the CB and the CB feels like a super moto by comparison. So does riding the CB after riding the ST around for a few days lol.
A CB 500 is cool but push it around and then push around a CB250 and you’d think the 500 was a tank
Valve checks every 8000 miles. This is a great valve system the Japanese believe in. We have one member on the board that has had his checked 4 times in 61,000 miles always in spec. Very few require adjustment, but Honda does recommend inspections every 8K. Most never need it, but there is the odd one that does once in awhile.
All it needs is painted fenders.
…and side covers painted to match the tank. They’re not even the same silver as the engine, just some arbitrary lighter “contrasting” color. Looks like crap, and takes away from the overall look, imho.
I always liked the black barrel/alloy head combination that this bike has rather than all silver or all black. This engine looks beautiful.
I’m a fan (though not a purchaser, sorry Honda). They’ve fixed many things that was lacking with the original, 5 speed tranny, too small tank. Now if they’d just put as much power as an 83 1100 it might get me off the twin kick I’ve been on since I sold my GS1100. I’ve read about the difficulties of bypassing the very low set limiters and adding power isn’t going to be possible soon if the fines from the government continue to be implemented.
re: “seamless gas tank”
the way I need my tanks is the way I need my transmissions.
Sweeet!! Honda nailed it with that one.
Once again, USA getting only the blandest of colors and concentrations. I think the RS would sell quite well in the states.
I have one word “Bonneville”
Go Triumph
If the folks from Honda read the comments here, I think that they’d slit their wrists.
First everyone complained about the “Transformers” styling of all of the new bikes from Japan, the ugly radiators that they have, etc.
Then when Honda offers folks a bike with traditional vintage styling, and air cooling, it’s “too boring” for them, or they want more or less horsepower, different color cooling fins, different side panels, etc.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Honda threw up their hands and decided to only concentrate on selling to hipsters.
I’m hipster.
With a wife.
Do not like motor.
I was a child. CB750 in orange or white BMW.
Kawasaki Z1 40 years older.
If Suzuki built a bike like this, based on their old ’82 GS1100, or first year Katana, I would buy it. Just take their new blue naked bike, GSX1100S, or whatever it is, paint it silver, make it look like the original Katana, that would be irresistible.
I prefer the GS1000 or even the GS1150 to the GS1100, but either way, your points well taken. The early 80s Suzuki designs were high water marks for that style of bike, not unlike the early 70s American muscle cars that still garner so much appreciation.
I like it. Even my wife likes it. She prefers it to the new Bonneville everyone seems to compare it to. Which is kinda of funny, since numbers are the only thing that matters around here, the Triumph weighs about the same as my ’13 1100, makes less power from a bigger engine(albeit a twin) and is slower in the 1/4 mile by 7 mph. The Triumph is a nice looking bike but isn’t the engine made in Thailand? I’ll consider the EX, but since my ’13 isn’t going anywhere, I was hoping for the RS version.
Bumping up the hp and making the bike more exciting to ride would surely increase sales- I tested several of the 13/14 models but couldn’t bring myself to buy one. I found them to be beautiful bikes but totally lacking in personality. At 61 I’m not looking for a rocket but I still want some fun!
And why not give us the RS model? Looks like my next bike will be a Bonneville..
I bought the 1st CB1100 sold in south Florida…I’d had a deposit on it literally since Honda announced they were coming to the US. It was a beautiful machine, but once the retro excitement wore off it was boring.
Now I’m having a lot of fun on my FJ09…it has the power, handling, and brakes the CB should have.
Nice and clean though I’d rather have a lightweight 400 or 650 version for more fun.
Pros: Spoked wheels; very slightly more aggressive state of tune; very slightly lighter pipes; triangle-shaped side cover; bike still looks great overall.
Cons: mickey’s ’14 still has a better looking all-silver motor and winged-logo tank, even with the lack of seams on this new one; side cover should be a matching red, not silver; spoked wheels should be tubeless; motor is probably still electronically neutered in fifth and sixth gears; motor is still down a good twenty to twenty-five rwhp/ten ft-lbs of torque for a modern 1100cc I4 built by a world-class engine company such as Honda.
Give this new one mickey’s tank and matching red side covers, and let the motor breath properly without having to resort to the aftermarket to make it happen, and this is the one. As it is, it still hasn’t separated itself enough from the prettier Triumph Bonneville T120.
Honda had a great opportunity here, and instead went Bo Schembechler/three yards and a cloud of dust with it. They should have set the bar a bit higher this time.
One other con: that silly vertical chrome stripe on the black plastic side cover. Again, mickey’s solid black piece looks better. The only aesthetic flaw on mickey’s ’14 Deluxe is the bloated shape of the red side cover. Why Honda didn’t leave it as a form-follows-function triangle to fill the space between the frame rails, as they did here and on the black ’14 Standard model, I’ll never know, but they should have left it alone.
chromed vertical line????
he’s talking about on the air cleaner covers and I agree with him, but it’s no big deal.
I’m really suprised though that Honda went with this iteration instead of the RS, and they should have given the RS another dose of horses to satisfy those complaints, although if you asked the engineers at honda about horsepower they would undoubtedly come back with “we already make a bike with more horsepower for those that want more, it’s called the CBR1000.”
To which many would answer, “Yes, but that bike is ugly, and still woefully underpowered compared to its main competition. Notice how poorly it sells?”
Now, if the CB1100 made the same power as the CB1000, it wouldn’t be underpowered compared to its competition, which is different from the CB1000’s competition. A beautiful CB1100 with power that’s at least on par with something like the air-cooled RnineT, that’s the bike everyone wants.
Again, we’re not talking Super Duke R power here, we’re only talking about a target number of 100-110 rwhp/75 ft-lbs of torque with no electronic restrictions on the top end. Even as enamored as most current owners of the CB1100 are with their noble steeds, there isn’t a single owner nor a single potential buyer who would ever turn their nose up at the idea of having a few additional ponies in the stable.
You could still putter around at slow speeds, riding the smooth wave of torque, no problem. It’d be nice, though, to know that a firm handful of throttle will offer the usual rush of excitement befitting a liter-class Four.
In fact, that lack of top-end rush is a definite deal-breaker for many potential buyers of liter-class Fours, which goes a long way towards explaining why the CB1100 hasn’t been the sales success it ought to be.
We no doubt sound like broken record with respect to this, but I wholeheartedly agree. They could increase the size of their market by adding more power and yet alienate none of the current fans of the bike who insist on riding it like a cruiser.
Ahh you kids, all you want to do is go fast and act like hooligans
Actually …. if you actually READ my response above VLJ’s it says I thought they should bring in the RS with an extra dose of HP to satisfy those complaints
And
I said if you asked HONDA, about the low hp, that’s what THEY would tell you. That they made the CBR to satisfy those that want more hp.
The CBR1000RR and CB1000 are both completely irrelevant to a prospective CB1100 buyer. A guy who’s looking at a CB1100 won’t be the least bit interested in a CB1000 or CBR1000RR, and it’s not because they make so much more horsepower than the CB1100. Rather, it’s because they are completely different types of bikes. They aren’t air-cooled, dual-shocks, flat-seat, classically-styled retros.
So, Honda’s response that they already make a bike with more HP if that’s what people want is an absolute non-starter. The existence of racier bikes has nothing to do with addressing the concerns people have regarding the CB1100.
A quote from Fukunaga lead designer of CB1100
Fukunaga:
Since the rider, in this case me, plays the leading role, I’d like to be able to enjoy the scenery, and look around, while I ride. There cannot be any uncertainty, or anything I’d have to put up with, as that would spoil the ride.
I’d imagine being able to ride at my own pace, while enjoying the sunshine filtering through the tree branches. Since I wouldn’t need 100 ps per liter, the specifications were for 60 kW (around 80 ps) at 1100 cc. Engineers are power-hungry, but I insisted on lowering the power.
some interesting reading iinto the development of the CB1100
http://world.honda.com/CB1100/engineer-talk/
http://world.honda.com/design/designers-talk/cb1100/
I had read that article before, and it certainly augmented my appreciation for the bike. Though Fukunaga lost some creds with me when he said he insisted on lowering the power! Just because you don’t need something doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be nice to have.
His engineers new better.
That spoked-wheel red Deluxe at the top of your first “design” link there is just about the perfect look. The spoked rims are all your bike is missing.
I have to give those guys credit. They describe all the lengths they went to in order to make the bike more relaxing, which usually is a euphemism for “boring,” yet they still get me totally excited to ride one.
Single round headlight, non scooped seat, seamless tank, neither forward nor rearward footpegs, slipper clutch,ABS std, Showa Dual Bending Valve forks, front and rear led lights, lighter thinner dual mufflers… All good stuff
After 27 K still love my 14 DLX more everytime I ride it. Great motorcycle. The UJM is alive and well. Boring? Maybe for some, but competence has never been boring to me.
They really should bring in the RS too though.
Amazingly low mileage used models and even new left overs can be bought for nearly the same price as a new Suzuki SV, or Yamaha FZ-07 or Honda NC 700.
Ooh and I forgot, made in Japan not in Thailand, China, Vietnam, Brazil, Mexico or ????
centerstand standard. Runs on regular gas, and I average 54 mpg.
Haha, watch it Mickey! I am reminded of a certain, rather entertaining Hyosung / Benelli / CFMoto fan.
By all means, tell me about the warranty!
Oh lord do I sound that bad? lol. Ok I admit been a Honda fan a long time, but I am also a fan of Yamaha(had 9 street and a bunch of dirt), Suzuki (had 3 or 4)and Kawasaki (had only 1.. but ironically, one of my favorites, and a bike VERY MUCH like the CB1100… a 1977 Kawasaki KZ 1000)
Funny thing about the warranty..nobody uses them much on this bike, but for some reason Europe gets a 2 year warranty and the U.S. gets a one year warranty. One has to wonder why?
Could be a marketing and sales thing, similar to what Hyundai and Kia use here? I’m sure it bumps up costs to the manufacturer but may also be offset by those comforted by a greater length of coverage time.
Hondas are perfect but by golly I can’t think back through the years having ever needing to use their warranties. Oh wait, yes I did, my 1969 125SS twin had a full throttle miss that required a main jet change. http://librapix.com.s3.amazonaws.com/motorcycles-motorbikes.com/552.jpg
Beautiful. Test rode one a few years ago. Quite civilised. Not overly powerful but plenty enough for this 65yo. Used to own a XJR1300. Not ss powerful or torquey but better handing. Iddky they are approximately the same weight yet the Honda felt more agile & nimble.
My top choice for a retro bike. Then came the Street Twin. Getting my ST next week.
The bike is still a beauty. I like the new tank.
Personally, I think the RS version looks much better and more muscular with the 17-inch wheels, gold bits and simple stripe down the tank. But then sales of the DLX here have probably instructed Honda what typical consumers want from this bike.
I like it, but wouldn’t buy it. To make it more of a seventies bike, it should have a all silver motor, don’t believe black motors came out until ’83. I would take a CB1100F or Suzuki GS1000S Wes Cooley repro unit though. 😉
Had a ’78 Cb750 with standard black motor. F Model
My ’81 900F had a black motor. Well, at least for the first few years. After a while it just became kind of gray ….
Nice retro model – very pretty. Wonder how it will stack up against the new Bonneville and RnineT? If they give it a more aggressive tune with even a little snap and snarl it could do well. I suspect that it will have a ‘pleasant’ power delivery though. It looks great but a dull riding experience will hurt sales.
They probably would have done better to import the RS and left this EX home…
Faster, more hp and cheaper than a Bonnie (my younger brother bought a T120)and slower, less hp and way cheaper than an R9T
Not sure many people will be cross shopping the CB and the R9T even though magazines like to pit them against each other. Same with the MG Griso. More likely they will be cross shopping the V7 series, Bonneville and CB.
Bonnie, CB1100, R9T, Griso, V7: all great, minimalist standard motorcycles with excellent build quality and a timeless, though not retro in the case of the BMW and Griso, design.
Point being, I would cross shop those bikes. I care nothing about the retro designation. Fake carbs? Dual shocks? Tube tires? Important to the retro buyer most likely, but a bit silly in my opinion though not deal killers.
The R9T and Griso I would actually cross shop against all standard bikes. They have enough performance to compete. I’d feel the same about a more powerful CB1100RS. I actually think these bikes could have much wider markets if their performance envelopes were just enhanced a bit.
Though at opposite ends of the ‘retro’ spectrum I think some will. With this market it’s more about emotion and what grabs you than outright performance. Like many here my childhood passions were driven by bikes of the late 60’s and early 70’s so the Honda CB resonates more than the BMW.
I like the RnineT and would cross shop it but it’s at the fringe of retro with it’s far more current styling than a true R /5 or /6. What’s really interesting is the upcoming GS Urban variant which to me is most retro of the R9T line: https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjY1feauezQAhUDRiYKHQmUDqsQjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.visordown.com%2Fmotorcycle-news-new-bikes%2Fbmw-r-ninet-urban-gs-revealed&psig=AFQjCNHe-DU0dK5q0Ucy7bSrF5-0zA6INQ&ust=1481556054656539
I love the Urban myself.
I am not about outright performance either, but merely adequate performance is boring. I completely understand your perspective, and I’m not implying consumers of my type are the direct targets of retro bikes. My point is though that I think they could broaden the appeal of the bikes by making them better performers without sacrificing their retro market. I like BMWs approach: BMW figured out that they can cater to a broader market by offering bikes that aren’t necessarily retro but still manage to appeal to both retro buyers and people like myself who are not that interested in a carbon copy of the past. Triumph has the Thruxton R for the same reason. Honda is following suit with the RS, though it will still be significantly down on power:weight.
I’m surprised Honda hasn’t made smaller versions of this beautiful bike. Too much motor for me.
Yes, a 750 w/ good tune would be more than enuff!
Too much bike maybe, but there really isn’t that much motor there despite the cc’s. If an SV650 isn’t too brutish for you, then this bike won’t be either.
I am an old fart, too. Yes, the bike is beautiful and I AM in the market for a new bike. This one looks very nice and I will compare it alongside the Yamaha SCR950.
Ok here goes. I’m an old fart and this bike is beautiful. Every component is properly porportioned. Will I sell what I have to buy one? No. Why do you show the european model anyway?
I like that a lot. Proper 18″ wheels too. Ronnie, it’s bound to be more fun than your 750 with all the extra torque. Not all bikes have to be race and track day ready. For some it’s just fine to sit back and enjoy the ride. I bet this one will do that just fine.
It doesn’t look as good as the prior version. It appears completely devoid of passion.
It really is a simple thing isn’t it? After all the gee-whiz-bang designs from beaks to peacock tail ends to birds of prey fairings, the traditional UJM style never really went out of style. This is a great example. I’d love to take one for a spin.
If it’s anything like my 750 nighthawk, it will bore you to tears
Ex 750 Nighthawk owner here too, and always thought all the Nighthawk needed was a few more horses and some better brakes. CB1100 filled in those blanks nicely.
If they are going to sell an air cooled 1100 four, why can’t American Honda provide one that has better performance than the ’83 CB1100F? It has been over 33 years since they made a performance air-cooled bike. In addition, it should have at least 5.8 gallons fuel capacity. I don’t want to have to get gas more than once a week if I use it for my work commute. Why can’t they make a modern CBX six cylinder with decent suspension and brake components? Why can’t they? Because they know that if they were to make a modern CBX six, I would purchase at least two of them. My only reasonable conclusion is that the management of American Honda makes decisions that are in the best interest of their competitors, or else my mother-in-law told them “Don’t make anything that would make someone who grew up riding Trail 90’s, CB77 305cc Scramblers, CB500 Four’s, and CBX’s happy.”
Wasn’t the CBX a sales flop for Honda? It was certainly cool-looking (I have a nice, big photo of one on my wall), but wasn’t around long, with the needless complexity and width of an inline-6. I’d rather see Honda go in the other direction – to a triple.
I’d prefer a narrow, lightweight, water-cooled vertical twin motor in this bike with a well hidden radiator and a potent midrange. Also, tubeless tires and a 6 gallon tank please?
Incredibly clean and elegant.
Well said….I only wish it was coming to Australia.. 🙁