|
WreckSov posted:Why have I never heard of this before and why are they not making it. Why. Honda love to pretend they're still the pioneering company willing to push the envelope that they were in the 70s and 80s except now they do it with wooden concept bikes at shows that they would never even consider building. I'm really struggling to think of the last actually innovative bike they've bought to production - maybe the Fireblade (although arguably that's just a GSXR1100 done right), maybe the RC45. Everything they've done since then has just been following the trends (albeit often doing it better than the opposition).
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 09:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 12:42 |
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Honda love to pretend they're still the pioneering company willing to push the envelope that they were in the 70s and 80s except now they do it with wooden concept bikes at shows that they would never even consider building. VFR800/1200 are pretty innovative in that they're touring bikes that don't try to out-bmw bmw. The new NC700 or whatever it is, despite being mind-numbingly boring, is pretty innovative too. Using half a car engine for tractability and economy is a smart move and fairly original. Also the X11 which is a marvellous (albeit ugly) bike. I'll grant you, they don't innovate anywhere near as much as Yamaha, who I think of as the most 'alternative' of the japanese brands.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 09:54
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:VFR800/1200 are pretty innovative in that they're touring bikes that don't try to out-bmw bmw. The new NC700 or whatever it is, despite being mind-numbingly boring, is pretty innovative too. Using half a car engine for tractability and economy is a smart move and fairly original. Compare it to stuff like putting turbos on bikes, or oval pistons, or even V4 engines though. These are all things that Honda would just throw out there. Of course it was the last of these (and their tendency to eat themselves alive) that caused the modern, risk-averse Honda.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 14:04
|
|
|
Yamaha and Suzuki probably fill/create the most niches and take the most risks Honda is basically an accounting firm that makes bikes these days and Kawasaki is basically suzuki but two years later and green
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 18:21
|
|
|
Jim Silly-Balls posted:Yamaha and Suzuki probably fill/create the most niches and take the most risks Kawasaki has been pushing the electronics aspect hard lately, which is something to give them credit for. I think they were the first of the big 4 to have TC on both their 600s and their literbikes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 18:35
|
|
|
It's one of those new innovative inline 4 sport bikes I've been hearing about (but what happens if you slide off the back of the saddle?!)
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 18:37
|
|
|
  
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
Well... to his credit... I haven't seen that before
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 18:56
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Compare it to stuff like putting turbos on bikes, or oval pistons, or even V4 engines though. These are all things that Honda would just throw out there. Of course it was the last of these (and their tendency to eat themselves alive) that caused the modern, risk-averse Honda. The problem with the motorcycle companies, at least in the US, is that the companies keep trying to innovate and impress motorcyclist. I know that sounds rear end backwards but with the way the motorcycle market keeps shrinking in the US if you're a motorcycle company you gotta stop going after the motorcyclist, you already have that market captured, and motorcycles for them are already almost perfect. Instead, what these companies need to do is something rear end backwards and counter intuitive to them, they need to start dumbing down motorcycles so that they will appeal to Joe Schmoe car driver. Right now we don't have something we can call the Toyota Prius of motorcycles. I'm not saying it needs to be slow, or be hybrid. But there's not a motorcycle out there that is an appliance. If motorcycle companies want to innovate for the US audience they need to emulate the car experience. That means automatic transmission, built in storage on board, and ergonomics that mimic a car, but that's what Joe Schmoe car driver is used to and is comfortable with. So fullback or at least midback seats for motorcycles need to make a comeback. Even though scooters do almost all of this, it can't be a scooter, because scooters are stigmatized in the US. Also, CVT's still make people uncomfortable, so if this new whizbang motorcycle of the masses has a CVT, it can't feel like one, people bitch about how they feel in a car soooo. Basically a Honda DN-01 that doesn't look so drat ugly, is more comfortable, has more storage, and is cheaper. That would be real innovation from a motorcycle company here. Coredump fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Feb 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
Jim Silly-Balls posted:Yamaha and Suzuki probably fill/create the most niches and take the most risks I think the current VFR would have to be considered pretty innovative. They've also been very early adopters of fuel injections on bikes - I think they were the first. They were also the first company to make an aluminum framed dirtbike. I think you'd also have to credit them with game changing sportbikes like the CBR900RR and later bikes that have always been a great mix of track capability and street rideability. The latest CRF has air forks which seems pretty innovative to me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 20:27
|
|
|
clutchpuck posted:It's one of those new innovative inline 4 sport bikes I've been hearing about (but what happens if you slide off the back of the saddle?!) I still cannot understand this statement. How many times have you ridden a motorcycle and slid off the back of it? Back fenders are there to keep crap from flying onto your back and into the back of the motor. They are not there to save you when you slide off the back. I'm sure in some freak accident it could possibly happen but it's honestly not something that is probably ever going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 20:32
|
|
|
If I hamfist my bike I feel like I'm gonna slide off of it sometimes 
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 20:55
|
|
|
Valt posted:I still cannot understand this statement. How many times have you ridden a motorcycle and slid off the back of it? Back fenders are there to keep crap from flying onto your back and into the back of the motor. They are not there to save you when you slide off the back. I'm sure in some freak accident it could possibly happen but it's honestly not something that is probably ever going to happen. Sorry about your bikes lack of PURE loving TORQUE man.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 21:11
|
|
|
Coredump posted:The problem with the motorcycle companies, at least in the US, is that the companies keep trying to innovate and impress motorcyclist. I know that sounds rear end backwards but with the way the motorcycle market keeps shrinking in the US if you're a motorcycle company you gotta stop going after the motorcyclist, you already have that market captured, and motorcycles for them are already almost perfect. Honda seems to be trying this with the NC700X and this new CTX700: they both use what is supposed to be a very smooth, very efficient parallel twin with optional ABS and a dual-clutch transmission (full automatic mode!) and have storage in the standard gas tank location. Neither are terribly expensive, either. Of course they're still shaped like regular motorcycles, more or less. If you want a bike that comes closest to the car experience that'd probably be the old BMW C1, which apparently had approval in some European localities to be exempt from helmet requirements. I don't think it was ever officially sold in the US, though, and I'm not sure it was a big seller in Europe, either. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 21:23
|
|
|
My dad is convinced that if you crack the throttle too hard on pretty much any sportbike that you'll slide right off the back if you don't hold the handlebars tight.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 21:24
|
|
|
Coredump posted:Instead, what these companies need to do is something rear end backwards and counter intuitive to them, they need to start dumbing down motorcycles so that they will appeal to Joe Schmoe car driver. I think that's exactly what the F650CS was supposed to be, actually  Forgiving thumper engine, belt drive for little maintenance, upright riding position, storage in the gas tank, interchangeable plastic panels for custom colors and even a CD player. I think it seems like a pretty neato bike, actually. Except it sold poorly and they took it out of production after like three years. Not dumbed down enough? Sagebrush fucked around with this message at 21:49 on Feb 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
High Protein posted:That reminded me of of how my SRX's oil tank (somewhat) mirrored the shape of the frame, so I went looking for a picture and discover that apparently at some point a chunk had fallen out of an intake boot
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
Valt posted:I still cannot understand this statement. How many times have you ridden a motorcycle and slid off the back of it? Me: exactly never. Other folks: it may be an issue. goddamnedtwisto posted:Accelerate too hard and slide off the back of one of those seats and that won't be the only stressed member.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 22:16
|
|
|
Gay Nudist Dad posted:
They aren't that popular in the UK (though there are 2 that turn up at work in the winter), but on the mainland (I'm basing this on Paris rush hour) they're the commuter's weapon of choice, alongside MP3s variations.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 22:19
|
|
|
Covert Ops Wizard posted:My dad is convinced that if you crack the throttle too hard on pretty much any sportbike that you'll slide right off the back if you don't hold the handlebars tight. Did you explain legs to him? Also friction?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 22:23
|
|
|
Waterproof overpants, a seat freshly rained upon and you're only one enthusiastic launch away from sliding right off the back of a 690SMC I tell you what. EDIT: also one emergency stop away from a crotchful of triple tree...
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 22:34
|
|
|
I refuse to believe you won't 12-o-clock a 690SMC before it slides you off the saddle.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 22:47
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Compare it to stuff like putting turbos on bikes, or oval pistons, or even V4 engines though. These are all things that Honda would just throw out there. Of course it was the last of these (and their tendency to eat themselves alive) that caused the modern, risk-averse Honda. I thought it was the oval pistons that were a problem? The v4 engines are pretty bulletproof with the exception of the earlier ones (not on the VFR) having camshaft oiling problems.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 22:51
|
|
|
GnarlyCharlie4u posted:I thought it was the oval pistons that were a problem? Yeah that's the ones I mean. Honda pretty much had a corporate nervous breakdown over that (hence the gear-driven cams on the VFR/RVF), hence the cancellation of the NR (well that and the fact it just didn't work as well as they thought it would) and a few other, even weirder projects.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 23:01
|
|
|
clutchpuck posted:I refuse to believe you won't 12-o-clock a 690SMC before it slides you off the saddle. Dry seat and normal trousers? sure. EDIT: it's specifically *just* after it's rained; like tarmac the oil and grime build up make it like ice for the first few minutes. ReelBigLizard fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Feb 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 23:07
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:I think that's exactly what the F650CS was supposed to be, actually No, just ugly as gently caress. Laymen don't like retarded looking bikes; to someone who doesn't know anything about bikes, appearance sells and noone seems willing to make an appliance-style bike that isn't ugly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 23:37
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:No, just ugly as gently caress. Yep. Storage in the gas tank translates to "gaping divot and ugly straps where the gas tank should be"...
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 23:56
|
|
|
I actually don't think it's bad looking at all. It's different, and it may not be your cup of tea, but it's aesthetically tied together and ultimately a very visually complete design. I sure wouldn't kick it out of bed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2013 01:22
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Compare it to stuff like putting turbos on bikes, or oval pistons, or even V4 engines though. These are all things that Honda would just throw out there. Of course it was the last of these (and their tendency to eat themselves alive) that caused the modern, risk-averse Honda. All of these things were done for racing series. So was traction control. So was the aluminum frame. So were radial brakes and radial masters. So were USD forks and steering stabilizers. And pretty much every other innovation that wasn't obvious touring stuff like adjustable windscreens and in-dash nav. WSBK and MotoGP used to let you get away with murder when it came to bike specs. This was great for innovation but meant the company with the deepest R&D pockets could lock up the championship with ease, leading to shallow paddocks and dull races. So they piled on rules to ensure the bikes behaved more and more like each other. This has nearly killed off the V-twin superbike and has basically eliminated any chance for real "wow, never seen that before" design. A modern equivalent of something like an RC30 could never sell enough to justify the R&D cost without a racing pedigree to back it up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2013 01:48
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:All of these things were done for racing series. So was traction control. So was the aluminum frame. So were radial brakes and radial masters. So were USD forks and steering stabilizers. And pretty much every other innovation that wasn't obvious touring stuff like adjustable windscreens and in-dash nav. What about the panigale? Carbon frame, electronic bouncers, offset shock, technology out of the wazoo in general. It's no RC30 but it's a spaceship compared to most other liter bikes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2013 02:41
|
|
|
clutchpuck posted:I refuse to believe you won't 12-o-clock a 690SMC before it slides you off the saddle. I've seen the headlight on Spiffness's 690 from behind. So... it's doable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2013 03:54
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:I think that's exactly what the F650CS was supposed to be, actually That's real cool and I didn't know about that bike. I think to appeal to car drivers more the seat would have to be lower to get over the intimidation of mounting the bike, and a seat back to give more back support. Basically I think in the US if you want more people on motorcycles the group of people you're gonna pull from is car drivers. So you got to put a car on two wheel basically, as dumb as that sounded coming out of my keyboard. And no Monotracers don't count even though I think they're cool as poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2013 03:59
|
|
|
front wing flexing posted:Did you explain legs to him? Also friction? Yes and he said "Ok" but looked unconvinced. He used to ride too, but I think he's got the idea that sportbikes literally can slide a person off the back because the seats are small and flat or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2013 04:25
|
|
|
Maybe he knows someone that ArmorAll'd their seat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2013 04:45
|
|
|
Covert Ops Wizard posted:Yes and he said "Ok" but looked unconvinced. I was curious how fast my Pop's FZ1 was so I took it out with the go pro the other day. I also forgot to put my visor down when I launched, so after the 1-2 shift I took my hand off to snap the visor down. He can watch it if he wants 
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2013 05:03
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Yeah that's the ones I mean. Honda pretty much had a corporate nervous breakdown over that (hence the gear-driven cams on the VFR/RVF), hence the cancellation of the NR (well that and the fact it just didn't work as well as they thought it would) and a few other, even weirder projects. I thought the cam problems in the early v-4's was from sticking them in cruisers and then people trying to lug around a high rpm engine like it was a v-twin (oiling system was not designed for that). The gear driven cams in the vfr were because they couldn't get cam chain tensioners figured out. I have some replacement early v4 tensioner springs that are apparently worth their weight in gold now that honda stopped selling them years ago.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2013 05:48
|
|
|
obso posted:I thought the cam problems in the early v-4's was from sticking them in cruisers and then people trying to lug around a high rpm engine like it was a v-twin (oiling system was not designed for that). Pretty much this. Although oil flow was probably insufficient at higher RPMs too. The cause was small oil lines and passages, not an underpowered oil pump.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2013 07:12
|
|
|
Found on Reddit: Guy's Valentine is his motorcycle. http://imgur.com/a/4NgWk I larfed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
GnarlyCharlie4u posted:Pretty much this. Although oil flow was probably insufficient at higher RPMs too. The cause was small oil lines and passages, not an underpowered oil pump. The funny thing about the chocolate cam engines was that Honda made several cures for the same disease. The problem was, as it seemed, unacceptable camshaft wear. Honda came out with a number of explanations for this, among them being incorrect valve adjustment, improper cam chain tension, soft cam lobes because of a faulty hardening process, and inadequate lubrication. These where all addressed by Honda via revised parts and (in late 1985 IIRC) Honda started with line bored cam bearing surfaces, which is what most people believe cured this once and for all. According to Honda though, all of the previous things contribute to the problem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2013 18:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 12:42 |
|
|
Coredump posted:Found on Reddit: Guy's Valentine is his motorcycle. http://imgur.com/a/4NgWk I thought it was awesome, but too bad about the noob gear.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2013 19:02
|
|
