Superhawk Anyone?

Well you see endlessly here that people want a 1000cc, lighter VFR. Didn't this bike already exist? The superhawk. Ok, I admit its uglier and its a v-twin instead of a v-4. But, v-twins have good character. So anyone ride these? What cha think? I am curious about trying one for my next bike. I don't like the looks nearly as much, but they run cheaper used and are supposed to be a blast to throw around in the twisties. And a 1000cc v twin packs all the punch I would ever need. Oh, and its a Honda :)

I think the superhawk is the bastard love child from the unholy congress between an RC51 and a VFR. It isnt a proper Supersports bike because of its relatively weak output and its budget suspension. If you modified it enough, I think you would end up with a slightly less capable VFR.

Now I'm not saying that I dont want one, because I do. But only if I could try and sharpen it up a little, because like I said, the other direction would give you VFR lite.

And i think they look good. Even better in flat black.

I've had several friends with Superhawk's (SH), and I'm sure at least one of them will chime in here when he wakes up!

The SH is a great bike. It has suprised me how they didn't hold thier value well at first... but now they seem to be holding up well... Remember the first ones came out in '97... and twelve years ago is about a hundred years in Sportbikes.

The power is great... it is exactly the type of power you need to have fun on the street.... instant torque at low rpms. The TL-s absolutely pounded it on the top end by 20 horsepower... but I've ridden both back to back and thought the SH was more impressive in the "Street Environment".

You'll hear alot talk about suspension... the fork, though different than the VFR, suffers from the same problems at a more extreme rate... soft springs, and harsh hi-speed compression damping. The rear shock is just a mess of harsh compression damping and too much rebound. Now, what this means is if you're a decent speed rider, you probably won't mind much. If you are a fast rider and do a lot of track days, you'll get tired of it soon. But, there are lots of bikes out there with aftermarket shocks and a little fork work. Properly setup... they're awesome.

The riding experience overall is enjoyable.... the bike feels very narrow at the tank, the clip ons are not that low (although many put VFR clipons on them), the low torque means that if you like wheelies... you'll like this bike. the negatives are a sucky stock seat (but which ones aren't) and about a 100 mile tank range... which everyone complains about but I don't see that it limits that much.

I have heard guys complain of the super low fuel tank range. The first version had a smaller tank. The updated model got a little bigger tank but still only about 4 gallons.

I've put some miles on one. I thought it lacked character when compared to a vfr. I thought an sv650 was more fun to ride. The combination of gear ratios and lack of a power hit left me with no desire to own one. Good bike, sure. Exciting bike? not to me.

[image: View Post]WERA910, on Dec 27 2008, 08:24 AM, said:

I've had several friends with Superhawk's (SH), and I'm sure at least one of them will chime in here when he wakes up!

Yup, I had one for about 5 years and put 30,000 miles on it. Had the SH and the VFR at the same time for about 2 years. The VFR got ridden more on a daily basis, but if I was going to the mountains to play, the SH was going without a doubt. If it wasn't for getting a divorce and only being able to keep two bikes (track bike), the SH would still be in the garage. I've often thought another one will be in the garage some day. With some front fork work and a Penske shock on the back, it handled just fine for me on the street. It's actually the only bike I've ever gotten a knee down on the street with (following WERA910 up Blood Mountain on his '98 VFR).

The wheelies on demand put a smile on my face every time I rode the bike. For the two years I owned the VTR with the VFR, I thought about selling it multiple times. Figured the VFR could adapt to the weekend play bike, and it wasn't as good of a 2-up bike as the VFR (which I was doing a lot of). Then I would just go for a ride and when I got back I was convinced it was too fun to get rid of. In the end, I didn't have a choice, but for those two years, I could never bring myself to selling it.

As far as fuel mileage, I think I could regularly get 120 miles out of a tank, which wasn't a problem. Only once was I worried about it. I passed an exit and didn't realize the next one wouldn't be for 25 miles or something stupid. That tank showed 147 miles on the odo when I filled up, but I never ran out.

[image: View Post]pashnitrider, on Dec 27 2008, 05:32 AM, said:

Well you see endlessly here that people want a 1000cc, lighter VFR. Didn't this bike already exist? The superhawk. Ok, I admit its uglier and its a v-twin instead of a v-4. But, v-twins have good character. So anyone ride these? What cha think? I am curious about trying one for my next bike. I don't like the looks nearly as much, but they run cheaper used and are supposed to be a blast to throw around in the twisties. And a 1000cc v twin packs all the punch I would ever need. Oh, and its a Honda :)

My brother has a jam-up, low miles yellow 2000 Superhawk for sale. He's loves the bike but the company he worked for went under, he's working but make much less and needs to sale the bike. If your interested I'll put you in touch with him. Side note for anyone reading this I had a crash, got got hurt pretty good and will be parting out my 2002 VFR. Not to worry I've already bought a 2004 to replace it.

I almost got one but ended up getting an FZ1 instead. A local dealership back home let me test ride a Super Hawk they had and I really liked it. Way more torque than a VFR. The best 1/4 mile e.t. I've seen in a magazine was something like 11.4. Since the best e.t. I've seen for a 6th gen. VFR is 11.29, I think it's fair to say the VFR has only slightly better acceleration capabilities. I have no idea how the Super Hawk handles, though. There's a good article on it on motorcycledaily.com.

Since I almost got one, I used to hang out on the Super Hawk forum a lot. The only real gripe I recall are problems with the CCT's. IIRC correctly, they've also got thirsty engines due to the large carburetors. Up until a certain year, they also had a smallish gas tank (giving the bike a total range of something like 120-130 miles.) I'm pretty sure Honda subsequently put a larger tank on it, though.

As for looks, it doesn't look all that great in stock form:

[image: Posted Image]


However, with a little imagination, look at what you can do. Wow!

[image: Posted Image]

[image: View Post]soichiro, on Dec 27 2008, 08:01 AM, said:

I have heard guys complain of the super low fuel tank range. The first version had a smaller tank. The updated model got a little bigger tank but still only about 4 gallons.

True and false. Yes, relatively short range just like tons of other bikes. USA didn't get the slightly larger tank which wasn't a large enough increase to fret about.

Everyone should own or get a good day long ride on a SuperHawk at least once in their life. As a self-pronounced bike ho', I've owned two and the first one still holds the record for longest length of ownership (5 years).

I added a VTEC gas tank to my second one (SuperBling), curing the low range problem, which made it into a great sport-tourer:
[image: Posted Image]

Just like the VFR, attention to the suspension will transform the bike and the original r/r is suspect.

My '99..........

[image: Posted Image]

[image: View Post]WERA910, on Dec 27 2008, 05:24 AM, said:

I've had several friends with Superhawk's (SH), and I'm sure at least one of them will chime in here when he wakes up!

The SH is a great bike...The power is great... it is exactly the type of power you need to have fun on the street.... instant torque at low rpms. horsepower... the SH was more impressive in the "Street Environment".

You'll hear alot talk about suspension... Now, what this means is if you're a decent speed rider, you probably won't mind much.
The riding experience overall is enjoyable.... the bike feels very narrow at the tank, the clip ons are not that low (although many put VFR clipons on them), the low torque means that if you like wheelies... you'll like this bike. a 100 mile tank range... which everyone complains about but I don't see that it limits that much.


I own a Superhawk and I think it's a great street bike. It's performance envelope is calibrated for street riding, and in this environment it works really well. As WERA910 stated, the power is right where you need it on the street, and when properly tuned/jetted it is surprisingly fast. Did someone say the SH is slow?? You must be joking.

In terms of suspension, (my SH is an '03) I would put it on par more or less with the stock suspension on my '04 Interceptor, which is to say IMO, it works well for street riding.

In terms of fuel range, it seems that everyone comments that it gets 100 miles per tank because they read somewhere that it gets 100 miles per tank! ON AVERAGE I get 36 mpg, which is exactly the same as I get on my VFR and my CBR1000RR. So, do the math with me: 36 mpg x 4.2 gals= theoretical tank range of 151.2 miles. My best ever mpg was 48 (yes, I was really milking it) - so then, 48 mpg x 4.2= 201.6 miles in theory. I say this just to make the point and also to help dispel the myth that the Superhawk is limited to 100 miles. It is not.

All said, I think the SH is an extremely underrated bike, without a doubt one of the best buys out there, and there's nothing like the sound of an uncorked big-bore V-twin. I'll be keeping mine for a long time.

SH is still on my short list of bikes I want to try out. I LOVE my VFR and probably won't be happy with anything else but I would like a bike that "feels" a bit lighter. I've been a bicycle rider/racer for a long time and I'm use to leaning 17 pound bikes (that cost as much as motorcycles) through corners a 40+mph.

If the VFR weighed 300 lbs I'd be happy.

[image: View Post]JBAXX, on Dec 27 2008, 12:29 PM, said:

[image: View Post]WERA910, on Dec 27 2008, 05:24 AM, said:

I've had several friends with Superhawk's (SH), and I'm sure at least one of them will chime in here when he wakes up!

The SH is a great bike...The power is great... it is exactly the type of power you need to have fun on the street.... instant torque at low rpms. horsepower... the SH was more impressive in the "Street Environment".

You'll hear alot talk about suspension... Now, what this means is if you're a decent speed rider, you probably won't mind much.
The riding experience overall is enjoyable.... the bike feels very narrow at the tank, the clip ons are not that low (although many put VFR clipons on them), the low torque means that if you like wheelies... you'll like this bike. a 100 mile tank range... which everyone complains about but I don't see that it limits that much.


I own a Superhawk and I think it's a great street bike. It's performance envelope is calibrated for street riding, and in this environment it works really well. As WERA910 stated, the power is right where you need it on the street, and when when properly tuned/jetted it is surprisingly fast. Did someone say the SH is slow?? You must be joking.

In terms of suspension, (my SH is an '03) I would put it on par more or less with the stock suspension on my '04 Interceptor, which is to say IMO, it works well for street riding.

In terms of fuel range, it seems that everyone comments that it gets 100 miles per tank because they read somewhere that it gets 100 miles per tank! ON AVERAGE I get 36 mpg, which is exactly the same as I get on my VFR and my CBR1000RR. So, do the math with me: 36 mpg x 4.2 gals= theoretical tank range of 151.2 miles. My best ever mpg was 48 (yes, I was really milking it) - so then, 48 mpg x 4.2= 201.6 miles in theory. I say this just to make the point and also to help dispel the myth that the Superhawk is limited to 100 miles. It is not.

All said, I think the SH is an extremely underrated bike, without a doubt one of the best buys out there, and there's nothing like the sound of an uncorked big-bore V-twin. I'll be keeping mine for a long time.


...... and here I was going to post up about JBAXX owning one and what it was like riding with (read, behind) him all morning up on GMR! After that ride, I'd have one in a heartbeat..... No further input needed. He's pretty much said it all !
:fing02:

I think the quote was "JEEEEEZE, that thing has a lot of TORQUE"!

Yep, i've owned one and my buddy owns one right now that he's either gunna sell as is or part out..........and it has a Brand new Ohlins rear. Anyway the Superchicken is a great bike, super light and pretty much what i'd call a hooligan bike, would fit perfectly in with the NFR crew. The front end becomes super light under minimal right hand manipulation :biggrin: so keep your weight up front if your planning quick "takeoffs". Overall its a very underrated bike with an underrated pricetag, with a few mods it could probably be turned into a very comfortable tourer.

When I was hanging out on the SH forum, I remember this one guy put a VFR SSSA on his SH. He had VFR wheels front and back.

His bike looked really good. It's one of three non-VFR's I've seen with a VFR SSSA (the other two being an FZ1 and an RC51). I'm sure there have got to be others. I drooled over his bike.

[image: View Post]JBAXX, on Dec 27 2008, 01:39 PM, said:

I think the quote was "JEEEEEZE, that thing has a lot of TORQUE"!

Yeah, I think so ..... just replace JEEEEEZE with an expletive and you're spot on ! ! !

:beer: :beer: