New Honda NC700X Anyone ride one of these yet???

[eakins]

yep this is what honda meant when they said "larger"
http://blog.motorcycle.com/2012/09/2...north-america/
as in physical size not engine size.

as for the next auto-cruiser in Honda's line-up, it's not as fugly as the DN-01 and auto w/ high fuel-efficiency is better accepted now.
there are plenty of new riders who could embrace very low seat seat and not needing to switch gears. most people own auto cars these days so the idea of switching gears is foreign to most noobs...then add to the fact this is the land of cruisers and their friends probably have a cruisers anyway.

I think the biggest problem with the DN-01 was not he auto but rather the freaky looks with that big nose.

Originally Posted by Garp

I guess this proves that the DN01 was ahead of it's time. Either that or Honda hasn't learned from it's past

[Pecha72]

Originally Posted by eakins

yep this is what honda meant when they said "larger"
http://blog.motorcycle.com/2012/09/2...north-america/
as in physical size not engine size.

as for the next auto-cruiser in Honda's line-up, it's not as fugly as the DN-01 and auto w/ high fuel-efficiency is better accepted now.
there are plenty of new riders who could embrace very low seat seat and not needing to switch gears. most people own auto cars these days so the idea of switching gears is foreign to most noobs...then add to the fact this is the land of cruisers and their friends probably have a cruisers anyway.

I think the biggest problem with the DN-01 was not he auto but rather the freaky looks with that big nose.

I think that new one´s also a really weird-looking thing, at least on the picture... but pictures do lie, might have to see one for real first.

Honda sure do have new models coming up at a high rate (compared to the rest of the Japanese manufacturers anyway).

[eakins]

the 700X is up $500 for 2013 but the 700XD (auto & abs) was reduced by $500.
the difference (for adding auto and abs) is now only $1000 (vrs 2k in 2012).
that tells me honda sees auto/abs as their future, if there reducing the price of it (while increasing the base model)
i'd buy one for my wife who want to learn to ride but has no interest in a clutch.

http://powersports.honda.com/2013/nc700x/options.aspx

[eakins]

Originally Posted by Pecha72

I think that new one´s also a really weird-looking thing, at least on the picture... but pictures do lie, might have to see one for real first.

Honda sure do have new models coming up at a high rate (compared to the rest of the Japanese manufacturers anyway).

yeah i'd agree it's not a beauty queen but the looks are not flat out strange.
if you want auto and want to cruise then these are your 2 bikes. there is another w/o a fairing that in black looks decent.
http://www.cycleworld.com/2013/02/08...up-first-look/

honda has released alot of bikes but in the low price point to aggressively maintain their overall sales. even though they are not the fancy expensive models it's good to see a Japanese company do this. honda sure sat on it's hands forever with nothing new prior to this.

[Mobiker]

Originally Posted by Garp

I guess this proves that the DN01 was ahead of it's time. Either that or Honda hasn't learned from it's past

The biggest problem with the DN01 was its $15,000 price tag. The new CTX is $8000. That's huge.

[Triumpher]

Althought the DN01 looks simular to the CTX700 the bikes are worlds apart, cost maintnance and performance wise. I think that Honda was going after a v twin market, and found a small following for the DN-01.
This new paralell twin is going after new markets which are driven by value and fun, the comuter is fickle regarding perceptions of coworkers and family. Sounds boring to be a comuter, which is more mainstream than "Adventurer" or "Macho". So there is a market for those who want an entry to enjoy what we know to be true, 2 wheels rock. Not everyone will want this bike but it is an alterantive.
I have not seen how this bike fuels yet....is it being down played?
BigE

[noitallal]

Naked version. Not sure what to think. It's different.




http://blog.motorcycle.com/wp-conten...03-500x387.jpg

[Qaz]

I rode the NC700 back to back with the DL650, no choose there, DL all the way! The NC700 is a city bike period. Rowing threw all the gears so quickly reminded me of a two stroke, except without the power or speed or in other words FUN. The engine is not flexible with a 6,500 redline and the vibration is present everywhere but between 3-4 thousand rpm's, hmm.., what was I saying about a two stroke? Handles great around town and cruising at 70mph is smooth, very smooth, but even with Hondas tall shield, the wind coverage is bad, not to mention seat to pegs length is cramped unless you have legs like a chimp. This is probably a great maxi-scooter engine. Come to think of with a CVT speed is dependent on rpm's, so it may not be that hot after all. I thought about the ride all the way home and why I didn't like it. The bike and engine just seems to lack Honda quality. I am looking forward to the 500cc bikes hitting the showroom. I wish them luck with the CTX, but baby, that is the wrong engine for that bike!

[Garp]

Originally Posted by Qaz

I rode the NC700 back to back with the DL650, no choose there, DL all the way! The NC700 is a city bike period. Rowing threw all the gears so quickly reminded me of a two stroke, except without the power or speed or in other words FUN. The engine is not flexible with a 6,500 redline and the vibration is present everywhere but between 3-4 thousand rpm's, hmm.., what was I saying about a two stroke? Handles great around town and cruising at 70mph is smooth, very smooth, but even with Hondas tall shield, the wind coverage is bad, not to mention seat to pegs length is cramped unless you have legs like a chimp. This is probably a great maxi-scooter engine. Come to think of with a CVT speed is dependent on rpm's, so it may not be that hot after all. I thought about the ride all the way home and why I didn't like it. The bike and engine just seems to lack Honda quality. I am looking forward to the 500cc bikes hitting the showroom. I wish them luck with the CTX, but baby, that is the wrong engine for that bike!

Not surprising. Honda took a 4 banger out of an econobox Honda Fit and cut it half. It's not surprising that the end result is uninspiring as a motorcycle engine.

[ducatirdr]

Originally Posted by Qaz

The engine is not flexible with a 6,500 redline and the vibration is present everywhere but between 3-4 thousand rpm's, hmm..,

They were targeting former Buell owners.


I can laugh at my own joke.

[precarious]

Originally Posted by ducatirdr

They were targeting former Buell owners.


I can laugh at my own joke.

We will laugh together.

[cbolling]

I saw a NC700x with the DCT at the library on Sunday. 1st time that I have seen one on the street. Looked really nice.

[dduelin]

Originally Posted by Garp

Not surprising. Honda took a 4 banger out of an econobox Honda Fit and cut it half. It's not surprising that the end result is uninspiring as a motorcycle engine.

I am amazed how much technical information has been released on the NC engine and yet how one remark has assumed factoid status.

Just about everything in technical detail that appeared for the last year on the NC700s was given out at the world press debut in Spain and it was there that the NC project leader Uchida made this remark: "I got a hacksaw and cut a Jazz engine in half, but it didn't really run very well so we had to put some more work into the NC700X". It was a throw away remark made half in jest but it has been endlessly repeated because it was made in a room full of journalists and it made it into print and onto the web. That in itself does not make it any more true than it was at the time it was said.

If you understand engines you know that the NC engine and the Jazz/Fit/City engines share virtually nothing in detail. The 270 degree crankshaft arrangement is different, the valve train is different, the fuel delivery system is different, the electrical generating system is different, the water pump is driven differently, etc, etc.

The only detail that is the same is the bore diameter of the 1339 cc auto engine. Other commonalities in the relationship between the NC and the Jazz is the oversquare dimension of the bore and stroke which is common in auto engines (and old fashioned v twins of all makes) and the approximate 1/2 displacement of a 1.3 liter Jazz engine sold in the EC and USA. To date there have been a total of 4 engines available in the Jazz worldwide and the displacement varies from 1246 cc to 1496 cc. Some are VTEC, some are dual spark, 8 or 16 valve. Lots of variation. It isn't "half a Jazz engine" to someone with knowledge of engines.

In comparison to the immensely popular and capable DL650.... in actual use there is little performance difference between the two bikes unless you regularly wind out the Suzuki and if you do that the Honda is just a second and half about 5 mph slower thru the quarter mile than the Wee and in the motorcycle world, no 650 rocks the world anyway. We are talking about 100 mph quarter mile times in this class. It's rare to ride to redline in day to day use so performance differences in normal riding matter little. These are different motorcycles with appeal to different types of riders. If you have a need for speed....what are you doing on a 650 anyway?

[Garp]

Same bore, same stroke, similar redline and similar uninspiring power band.

I get that it is more complicated than just "sawing an engine in half" but the point is that it uses the Fit engine as the launch point for it's design, and car engines are built with different dynamics and different design compromises. It's dull but efficient. Personally my bikes are toys and Fuel Economy takes second place to fun, so I'll take a V-Twin over any parellel twin.

[dduelin]

Originally Posted by Garp

Same bore, same stroke, similar redline and similar uninspiring power band.

I get that it is more complicated than just "sawing an engine in half" but the point is that it uses the Fit engine as the launch point for it's design, and car engines are built with different dynamics and different design compromises. It's dull but efficient. Personally my bikes are toys and Fuel Economy takes second place to fun, so I'll take a V-Twin over any parellel twin.

Still a bit off the mark. The stroke is not the same ...... and you do know what a 270 degree crank mimics? A V-twin, the firing order is the same, it matters not the orientation of the cylinders. I think what you mean to say is you like to rev past 6,500 rpm which is OK. I get that.