More Fuel For The Fire...

(disclaimer: I do not follow much of the new bike stuff so if this is a repost forgive me)

Cycle World has joined the bandwagon but this looks and sounds legit. Cycle World 2010 VFR Spy Shot

Discuss

Yeah, the same pics were in the last thread (which seemed to spiral out of control). But I have a new question for all of you who are looking at that shaft drive and wondering...

I have never had the opportunity to ride a shaft-driven bike before...What are the cons?

[image: View Post]Beaver, on Jul 2 2009, 05:42 PM, said:

I have never had the opportunity to ride a shaft-driven bike before...What are the cons?
Gearchange can be clunky, as there's less slop in the drivetrain, if the geometry isn't right there can be some attitude effects from torque (rise and fall on acceleration/deceleration), and on some bikes (like some older Guzzis), there is some routine maintenance required to prevent the drive splines and universals from dying, but it's a lot less than a chain'n'sprockets.
I think the biggest one is the gearchange clunk, but that probably outweighs ongoing maintenance for a chain-driven bike, particularly a tourer or sports-tourer, where lubing a chain on a long trip could be a pain.

Hmmm...I've ridden the K1200R; I can only imagine what it would be like with a V4 1200. Sign me up!

[image: Posted Image]

Either that tail is too short or the bike is really long....

Either way, not feelin' it.

I see evidence of stacked transmission gears. That fender growth would be the first item to be exorcised.

That flippin' dude needs some gear!

Silly rabbit, tennis shoes and jeans are for squids!

(Best Forrest Gump impersonation) "And that's about all I have to say about that."

[image: View Post]cassandtim, on Jul 1 2009, 11:46 PM, said:

That flippin' dude needs some gear!

Silly rabbit, tennis shoes and jeans are for squids!

(Best Forrest Gump impersonation) "And that's about all I have to say about that."


Aw, give him a break; it's probably 130F at the test site!

[image: View Post]enzed_viffer, on Jul 2 2009, 12:29 AM, said:

[image: View Post]Beaver, on Jul 2 2009, 05:42 PM, said:

I have never had the opportunity to ride a shaft-driven bike before...What are the cons?
Gearchange can be clunky, as there's less slop in the drivetrain, if the geometry isn't right there can be some attitude effects from torque (rise and fall on acceleration/deceleration), and on some bikes (like some older Guzzis), there is some routine maintenance required to prevent the drive splines and universals from dying, but it's a lot less than a chain'n'sprockets.
I think the biggest one is the gearchange clunk, but that probably outweighs ongoing maintenance for a chain-driven bike, particularly a tourer or sports-tourer, where lubing a chain on a long trip could be a pain.


You forgot the most important difference IMO. A shaft driven bike will eat up more HP than chain driven ones. I hope the engine will produce close to 200HP as a quite a bit of that will be lost by the time it reaches the rear wheel.

I've ridden a few shaft drive equipped bikes (V65, older V-Max's and recently one of the new V-max's) and applying the throttle mid-turn didnt exactly give me a boost in confidence. The rise you feel from the torque is something I obviously would have to get used to.

Better yet, I hope I wont have to get used to it and the new VFR will actually have a chain and sprockets.

[image: View Post]Beaver, on Jul 2 2009, 12:42 AM, said:

I have never had the opportunity to ride a shaft-driven bike before...What are the cons?


Years ago my Brother owned a shafty.... I never got used to it and wouldn't dare change throttle in a corner.

If I changed throttle in the corner it would either jack or squat the rear end and radically change my line in the corner. I have enough of a problem making it through corners without the bike providing it's own input.

That must be 15-20 years ago at this point. Maybe things have changed since then with the design... but my guess is that the laws of physics still apply to some degree.

Having said all that, if it was your normal ride you would adjust very quickly to it and it would not be an issue. That was not my normal ride and it felt very wierd.

The new C-14 has addressed/rectified the rise & fall with accel/decel inputs. They call it the Tetra-Lever shaft drive-"four-link design offsets lifting and squatting tendencies of shaft drive when the throttle is opened and closed, significantly reduces driveline lash during sport riding and provides smooth acceleration when exploiting the engine�s incredible power output � Virtually maintenance free, the Tetra Lever system dramatically reduces routine maintenance requirements." I can say that the Kawi does feel better than any other shafty I've ridden. Of course I don't think this is fesible with a SSSA.

That is butt ugly!!!! I hope the bodywork is different. Shaft or not.

[image: View Post]i_needit, on Jul 2 2009, 10:06 AM, said:

That is butt ugly!!!! I hope the bodywork is different. Shaft or not.
I agree, looks like it's been designed by a Hollywood plastic surgeon.

Moto Guzzi's CARC shaft drive system is supposed to be really nice and stable in changes to throttle, although I believe it's kind of sloppy at parking lot speeds and actually makes noises that are unexpected because of it, but that all goes away over ~5 mph.

Having never ridden one I can't comment personally, but I do think that designing these sorts of flaws out of a shaft driven bike are extremely non-trivial, or more companies would be doing it already.

The bike shown in this thread is pretty fugly on many fronts, unfortunately, I hope they don't call it a VFR and there's something else in the wings.

[image: View Post]hondalover, on Jul 2 2009, 08:29 AM, said:

The new C-14 has addressed/rectified the rise & fall with accel/decel inputs. They call it the Tetra-Lever shaft drive-"four-link design offsets lifting and squatting tendencies of shaft drive when the throttle is opened and closed, significantly reduces driveline lash during sport riding and provides smooth acceleration when exploiting the engine�s incredible power output � Virtually maintenance free, the Tetra Lever system dramatically reduces routine maintenance requirements." I can say that the Kawi does feel better than any other shafty I've ridden. Of course I don't think this is fesible with a SSSA.

Why would a SSSA have anything to do with this? All modern BMWs, and most recent Guzzis, (both having SSSAs) have also basically eliminated the lifting and squatting tendencies of shaft drive - and the last few BMWs (R1200RT, K1200GT & R1200ST) I have owned, with the paralever and latest gearboxes, have suffered no serious driveline lash, and have compared very favourably with the VTEC VFR and Ducatis (ST2, ST4s & Multistrada) that I owned over the same period.

In my opinion, shaft drive is a real boon for anyone who tours seriously on a motorbike - be that sport-touring or longer distance work. Having to lube a chain, or install a custom oil leak (like a Scottoiler), seems like an anachronism to me - I'd rather ride than stuff around with that sort of stuff.

I can imagine most potential new Honda or BMW car purchasers would look elsewhere if they were told they had to change their own oil...

Cheers

Robert
Brisbane, Australia

[image: View Post]Beaver, on Jul 2 2009, 01:42 AM, said:

I have never had the opportunity to ride a shaft-driven bike before...What are the cons?

Along with what was mentioned above, the biggest con for me is not being able to change gearing!

From the one pic it looks interesting enough to get my attention. Hmmm, 2010 means that in 2011 all the bugs will be worked out and my 07 new in 08 will be paid for! Who needs a new truck when I can have......... I will wait for more information and actual pics/specs from Honda. Then go look at one, cajole a test ride and prolly buy a new truck anyway since my current truck is an 02.

[image: View Post]blkrabit, on Jul 2 2009, 02:52 AM, said:

[image: View Post]cassandtim, on Jul 1 2009, 11:46 PM, said:

That flippin' dude needs some gear!

Silly rabbit, tennis shoes and jeans are for squids!

(Best Forrest Gump impersonation) "And that's about all I have to say about that."


Aw, give him a break; it's probably 130F at the test site!


Actually, if you look at the rest of the pictures from the test, you'll find that it was on Tuesday, 23rd June and the ambient air temperature was 43 degrees Celsius which is 109.4 degrees Fahrenheit.

[image: View Post]zzrwood, on Jul 2 2009, 04:50 AM, said:

[image: View Post]hondalover, on Jul 2 2009, 08:29 AM, said:

The new C-14 has addressed/rectified the rise & fall with accel/decel inputs. They call it the Tetra-Lever shaft drive-"four-link design offsets lifting and squatting tendencies of shaft drive when the throttle is opened and closed, significantly reduces driveline lash during sport riding and provides smooth acceleration when exploiting the engine�s incredible power output � Virtually maintenance free, the Tetra Lever system dramatically reduces routine maintenance requirements." I can say that the Kawi does feel better than any other shafty I've ridden. Of course I don't think this is fesible with a SSSA.

Why would a SSSA have anything to do with this?......

Cheers

Robert
Brisbane, Australia

As for how the Concours is designed, it wouldn't work for a SSSA. A four-link setup is kinda hard to make work when you only have one side of a swing to work with. The C-14 is the first bike that I didn't notice the rise & fall, that is why I'm only mentioning that set-up.

[image: View Post]rc36Honda, on Jul 2 2009, 06:53 AM, said:

Actually, if you look at the rest of the pictures from the test, you'll find that it was on Tuesday, 23rd June and the ambient air temperature was 43 degrees Celsius which is 109.4 degrees Fahrenheit.

Ok, so share with us, where are the rest of the test pics at? More views, other side? Girls in not many clothers? OK, forget the last one. :biggrin:

[image: View Post]motorhead1977, on Jul 2 2009, 09:41 PM, said:

[image: View Post]rc36Honda, on Jul 2 2009, 06:53 AM, said:

Actually, if you look at the rest of the pictures from the test, you'll find that it was on Tuesday, 23rd June and the ambient air temperature was 43 degrees Celsius which is 109.4 degrees Fahrenheit.

Ok, so share with us, where are the rest of the test pics at? More views, other side? Girls in not many clothers? OK, forget the last one. :biggrin:



Here: http://www.leftlanen...m/honda-v4.html

Can't link images into VFRD as they are copywrited. Apparently the bike was caught in Death Valley doing durability testing.

My V65 is a shaftie, and I just don"t notice the rear climbing or moving around at all - in corners or anywhere else. Probably just me. The VFR is my first chain drive bike, and just the other day when I was cleaning/lubing my chain, I was thinking that I really prefer the shaft drive because of the maintinance free aspects. The power loss issue is legit though - I'll bet my V65 would be a monster with chain drive! (It's no slouch now - in a drag race, it walks the VFR..)

Dave P.

[image: View Post]Beaver, on Jul 1 2009, 10:42 PM, said:

I have never had the opportunity to ride a shaft-driven bike before...What are the cons?
I don't understand all the hatred of shaft-driven bikes. I've owned three, a Yamaha Virago, a BMW R1100RT, and a Yamaha FJR1300. For purposes of this discussion the Virago will be left out as it was never ridden particularly aggressively.

The disclaimer is that I'm not a knee-dragging, ride-it-to-the-limit rider, but...

I was able to ride the RT and FJR just as quickly as my YZF600R and VFR along the same stretch of road. I don't understand the comments about jacking in corners, I certainly never felt it on either the RT or FJR. The FJR felt extremely well-planted in corners and throttle adjustments while leaned over were probably less scary than going into VTEC while leaned over (which isn't all that scary to begin with).

I suppose if you're racing on a track the loss of HP from the shaft drive would be important, but I personally (as in, this is my opinion only) don't think it's that big a deal on the street. I don't know what the actual numbers would be, but even the loss of 20 HP at the wheels isn't going to make or break the enjoyment I get from riding. I think it's more an d**k-measuring contest than something that actually matters.

Finally, as someone else pointed out, dragging along the stuff you need to clean and lube a chain over a week-long trip is a bit of a pain, not to mention sitting in a motel parking lot cleaning, lubing, and adjusting while you could be drinking. The convenience factor of a shaft while touring should not be discounted.

As for the new bike, I bought the VFR mainly because I didn't want the poorer fuel economy and increased insurance rates of a larger engine (I had short-listed the VFR and FJR) and for riding solo I certainly didn't need any more power. I have no interest what-so-ever in a 1200cc VFR. Plus, I really don't care for the look of the bodywork (assuming it is the new bodywork).

P.S. Probably the biggest downsides of a shaft are that you can't wheelie them and they don't counter-steer. :dry:

[image: View Post]SEBSPEED, on Jul 2 2009, 06:12 AM, said:

[image: View Post]Beaver, on Jul 2 2009, 01:42 AM, said:

I have never had the opportunity to ride a shaft-driven bike before...What are the cons?

Along with what was mentioned above, the biggest con for me is not being able to change gearing!


Agree, shaft drive seems to be adding complexity where the simple/cheap technology of the chain works great and allows anybody with a wrench to easily gear their bike to how they ride

[image: View Post]SpiralGray, on Jul 2 2009, 08:48 AM, said:

P.S. Probably the biggest downsides of a shaft are that you can't wheelie them and they don't counter-steer. :dry:

Was this said sarcastically? I hope so.




On the shaft discussion...the biggest downside is the loss power. I'm convinced that belts are the best of both worlds and am surprised they don't show up on more performance oriented machines. I'll be giving Buells a long, hard look when I get ready to purchase another bike.

torque reaction....






power loss...





fixed gearing....







yeah yeah....


but a Guzzi still looks good...........






[image: Posted Image]
:cool:

[image: View Post]SpiralGray, on Jul 2 2009, 08:48 AM, said:

P.S. Probably the biggest downsides of a shaft are that you can't wheelie them and they don't counter-steer. :dry:

Why wouldn't you be able to wheelie them? I used to wheelie my Virago.

I've spent a lot of time on shaft-driven bikes ('91 K75 and '96 R1100RT). I also tend to push pretty hard in the mountains (I typically ride in Bailey's groups, but a little slower than Bailey, Jeremy, Seb and a few others). A switch to shaft drive is no concern for me. The gears are a little clunky on the BMWs I ridden, but I rode the new R1200RT and the gear box was much smoother. I never had any problem with hard down shifting before the turns or getting on the gas at full lean with these shaft drives.

[image: View Post]SpiralGray, on Jul 2 2009, 06:48 AM, said:

Finally, as someone else pointed out, dragging along the stuff you need to clean and lube a chain over a week-long trip is a bit of a pain, not to mention sitting in a motel parking lot cleaning, lubing, and adjusting while you could be drinking.


Can't think of a better reason to get a shaftie!! :goofy:

[image: View Post]SEBSPEED, on Jul 2 2009, 06:12 AM, said:

[image: View Post]Beaver, on Jul 2 2009, 01:42 AM, said:

I have never had the opportunity to ride a shaft-driven bike before...What are the cons?

Along with what was mentioned above, the biggest con for me is not being able to change gearing!


:+1:

[image: View Post]kirbster, on Aug 7 2009, 03:54 PM, said:

I think this was because the slightest mistake on the CBR meant it tried to throw you off whereas the VFR was so forgiving you could do basically anything to it and it would just beg for more.



To quote George Orwell:

"All 4th Gens are equal.........


but some 4th gens are more forgiving than others"





Clearly...










[image: Posted Image]


:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:

[image: View Post]Parker, on Aug 6 2009, 07:52 AM, said:

I'm sort of with Dwade here - others may be right that handling, steering and general sure-footedness are more than a little associated with rake/ trail and wheelbase dimensions, but for me a bit of weight in a bike is a Good Thing�. Whereas a light(er) bike may steer faster and respond quicker, in many circumstances a bit of inertia is a boon, especially when the bike, like the VFR, carries it so well. Unlike the top-heavy feel of I4's, the V4 gives the VFR superb balance in almost every everyday road-riding situation (and this is almost 32 years of riding experience talking here, not a convenient cherry-picking of magazine articles written by wannabe racers). Yes, on a racetrack a VFR is (relatively) slow-steering, heavy and ponderous, but then a VFR wasn't designed for track use (even though it will cope admirably with it - Roy and Kirbs will tell anyone who wants to listen of the number of race-prepped track bikes they rounded up on a slightly-modded '94 VFR750 at the track). To flip that on its head - how many lightweight, track-prepped litre sportsbikes can cope with day-in day-out commuting, scratching and road riding without the rider coming up against its limitations? In short, to state that the VFR's weight produces nothing but drawbacks is to misrepresent the case somewhat IMO. Given decent suspension and brake mods (I'm now lucky enough to have both, at both ends), my 13 year-old 750 is about as good a road bike as I could ever wish for this side of a $50,000 bike (and even that probably wouldn't have one of the best engines ever made powering it).

Back on topic, while I don't doubt Honda's prowess in making damn good bikes, my feeling is that no matter how good the realised product is, it still won't be a match for the distinction the last of the 750s had in their day, much less the hype that the seemingly endless press "scoops'" and speculation has generated. IMO while all the hoopla about the new V4 may be good for generating anticipation, it won't do the actual bike many favours when it's released, as it will have to carry so many (largely unwarranted) expectations.
Thank you for the calm and reasoned perspective, backed up with actual long-term experience. I learned a lot!

[image: View Post]The Phantom, on Aug 7 2009, 10:31 AM, said:

Great shot Kirbs, I completely agree - you really can get away with murder on a VFR, which is why I reckon I'd be far slower on an out and out sportsbike. I did that squashed foot thing plenty of times, if you went to rearsets you'd be that much closer to throwing it away. I think Honda got it perfect with the VFR as far as how much rope it will give you before it says 'enough'.

So, back o/t - it's supposed to be announced in September? So we will know within seven or eight weeks...
Not sure about the 4th gen, but rearsets won't help a 6th gen much. The headers and fairings start dragging just as the pegs begin to fold up. Center stand too, if you have one.

[image: View Post]magicman, on Aug 7 2009, 12:07 AM, said:

You know what, I like the 6th gen just fine. Around here not all the roads are so pretty. Having a heavy bike with soft(er) suspension allows me to out ride most of my supersport riding friends. The inertial direction of the bike is forward. It doesn't want to fall into all the holes. And when the tire does hit the other side of the hole it just moves up, back to the level of the road, without bouncing me off the seat. I have a problem around here finding other riders willing to keep up on some of the more technical roads, all because their 400lb SS keeps bouncing them around. I always laugh a little when I have to wait for the 636, R6, 675, 6RR and SV650s. When we're at the restaurant they can talk their bikes up all they want, but when they hit the REAL roads, it is normally too much.

I don't remember which review I read as I was researching the VFR, but they described it as the motorcycle equivalent of the BMW M5. Comfortable, refined and supple, yet more than fast and agile enough to teach the guys with REAL bikes a lesson.

Having also ridden mid group on my 6th gen with those same bikes on the highway (at the speed limit), I have seen the other bikes getting pushed around by the wind.

I did a trip through Nova Scotia and Cape Breton a few years ago on my V-Strom. Man do you guys have some frost heaves! I wouldn't want to take those roads on a CBR, that's for sure. And the wind, whoa. The Strom has a side profile similar to my old V65 Sabre (which I ran with a series of different windshields and fairings), but about a hundred pounds less weight. The tarmac traillie suspension carried the Strom over the frost heaves pretty well, and I like the lower weight in slow tight corners, but it gets pitched around a lot more in the wind.

My 4th gen is the densest bike in my garage, it has the most weight compared to sail area. I really appreciate that when I'm riding all day in a heavy crosswind.

Now to go really far off topic:
The other thing that really struck me about Nova Scotia, was the lack of road rage, or indeed any driver aggression. I swear they must hand out tranquilizers with the license plates. I've never overtaken so many slow cars that just pulled over and waved me by. I don't think I had to wait more than 30 seconds to pass any vehicle up there. At one point, I and my two friends passed a car with a very high delta vee, only to fetch up at a ferry landing a half mile up the road. As we were taking off our helmets, the car we'd passed pulled up behind us and started tooting their horn and beckoning me over. I thought "here it comes, they are mad at us for passing them like that." We were going to be there a while, so I figured I'd best let them yell at me and get it over with. I went over to listen, and they said "We think it's just scandalous what the ferries charge the tourists. They give us locals these rolls of cheap tickets. We want to give you some." Coulda knocked me over with a feather.

[image: View Post]elizilla, on Aug 7 2009, 11:53 AM, said:

Now to go really far off topic:

I'm doing my part down here. 30 seconds before I read your post, gave a car full of tourists from Michigan directions to the zoo. ;p

[image: View Post]elizilla, on Aug 7 2009, 12:53 PM, said:

Now to go really far off topic:
The other thing that really struck me about Nova Scotia, was the lack of road rage, or indeed any driver aggression. I swear they must hand out tranquilizers with the license plates. I've never overtaken so many slow cars that just pulled over and waved me by. I don't think I had to wait more than 30 seconds to pass any vehicle up there. At one point, I and my two friends passed a car with a very high delta vee, only to fetch up at a ferry landing a half mile up the road. As we were taking off our helmets, the car we'd passed pulled up behind us and started tooting their horn and beckoning me over. I thought "here it comes, they are mad at us for passing them like that." We were going to be there a while, so I figured I'd best let them yell at me and get it over with. I went over to listen, and they said "We think it's just scandalous what the ferries charge the tourists. They give us locals these rolls of cheap tickets. We want to give you some." Coulda knocked me over with a feather.

Just to comment on that, even though it's slightly :offtopic:

I moved here two years ago from Qu�bec. I really like this place and I too was amazed at how friendly and easygoing people are around here...but on the other hand, I must say that the average driver's skill level here is driving me nuts. I guess some people also get LSD with their license plates on top of the tranquilizers you already mentionned. The average driver's skill level here is by far the worse I've witnessed in all the places I have been to. I happen to be in the vehicle maintenance business, sort of (equipment maintenance for the military), and the collision rate (number of accidents / number of vehicles on the road) that we have here is 3 times the Canadian national average. It is unreal. Bad driving habits that you normally attribute to elderly drivers (driving dangerously slow, not using signals, using the wrong lane, not checking blind spots, etc.) are very frequently seen all accross the board here. The only accident I've had in almost 20 years of driving was last year, thanks to a Cadillac driver who did everything he could to make me believe he was pulling over to park (coming to a near complete stop and pulling to the right) before making a left turn without his signal on.

BUT when you get past that, it's a pretty good place to live...we have some nice roads and registration fees for bikes are pretty cheap. You just have to ride as if everyone is out to get you...

End of rant.

[image: View Post]timmythecop, on Aug 7 2009, 12:02 PM, said:

[image: View Post]elizilla, on Aug 7 2009, 11:53 AM, said:

Now to go really far off topic:

I'm doing my part down here. 30 seconds before I read your post, gave a car full of tourists from Michigan directions to the zoo. ;p


Did you write the directions on the back of a citation? (heeheehee)

[image: View Post]francois_payen, on Aug 7 2009, 01:32 PM, said:

BUT when you get past that, it's a pretty good place to live...we have some nice roads and registration fees for bikes are pretty cheap. You just have to ride as if everyone is out to get you...

The biggest trick is to ride inland. Roads get better, and traffic ceases to exist.

Now is about the time to visit, through to the end of Sept. Then (for most people) it starts getting cold. Although I ride until the end of November if the snow doesn't stick.

And you should always ride like everyone is out to get you. Having ridden in Montreal and Toronto (and Mississauga), I couldn't wait to get back to NS. Dundas was terrifying. Pass you on the far right at 30 over, cut across three lanes to make the next left a block away. Happened 4 times in 2 days! :mad:

2 things trouble me about this video: 1. With as much that is the same between this concept and the test bike, I am starting to fear that the vee is less than 90 degrees. 2. I hope there was some money left over for R&D after this add campaign ...back to your regularly scheduled speculation...............

[image: View Post]timmythecop, on Aug 9 2009, 02:39 AM, said:

1. With as much that is the same between this concept and the test bike, I am starting to fear that the vee is less than 90 degrees.

According to "a" Honda V4 design patent, the engine might be 72 degrees.

To change topic again, the patent also suggests cylinder deactivation.
Can somebody tell me what happens to the air trapped in the cylinder after the valves have been deactivated?
Is there a vacuum or something...?

[image: View Post]Vee-Ef-Ar, on Aug 8 2009, 07:31 PM, said:

[image: View Post]timmythecop, on Aug 9 2009, 02:39 AM, said:

1. With as much that is the same between this concept and the test bike, I am starting to fear that the vee is less than 90 degrees.

According to "a" Honda V4 design patent, the engine might be 72 degrees.

To change topic again, the patent also suggests cylinder deactivation.
Can somebody tell me what happens to the air trapped in the cylinder after the valves have been deactivated?
Is there a vacuum or something...?


I've always assumed all of the valves would be closed, you're still taking energy to compress that air, but it will uncompress itself so tehre's not as much of a loss. Simply keeping the valvetrain working normally would be extremely inefficient. But I'm not entirely sure...

[image: View Post]Ryanme17, on Aug 8 2009, 08:11 PM, said:

[image: View Post]Vee-Ef-Ar, on Aug 8 2009, 07:31 PM, said:

[image: View Post]timmythecop, on Aug 9 2009, 02:39 AM, said:

1. With as much that is the same between this concept and the test bike, I am starting to fear that the vee is less than 90 degrees.

According to "a" Honda V4 design patent, the engine might be 72 degrees.

To change topic again, the patent also suggests cylinder deactivation.
Can somebody tell me what happens to the air trapped in the cylinder after the valves have been deactivated?
Is there a vacuum or something...?


I've always assumed all of the valves would be closed, you're still taking energy to compress that air, but it will uncompress itself so tehre's not as much of a loss. Simply keeping the valvetrain working normally would be extremely inefficient. But I'm not entirely sure...


I googled it :happy:

By forcing the engine valves to remain closed, an effective �spring� of air is created inside the deactivated cylinders. Trapped exhaust gasses (from previous cycles before the cylinders were deactivated) are compressed as the pistons travel on their upstroke and then decompressed and push back on the pistons as they return on their down stroke. Because the deactivated cylinders are out of phase, (some pistons traveling up while others are traveling down), the overall effect is equalized. The pistons are actually just going along for the ride.

[image: View Post]Knife, on Aug 4 2009, 02:19 PM, said:

They need to release two versions - a pure sport (light and tuned), and a sport/tourer (ABS and all that stuff).
That's what it looks like they are planning, but the info on the ST version is about as clear as mud. I mean one article say its going to have the Auto-clutch double shaft tranny that I think is in the DN-01 (not what I want my VFR-ST to have). Also the various mockups of the ST version all have too much of a ST1300 look to them.

So I'm hoping that either the VFR-ST version is more like the Sport version, or I can predict a lot of business for SW-Motech, Givi.

The other possibility is a lot of VFR buyers will roll their own cross breeds and end up with the middle ground bike that Honda is not making.

I'm looking at the Sporty version right now.

I'm not in love with the looks, but I may like it better when I see it and touch it.

I mean I can kind of see it now. I'd rather have the Sporty edition they are showing, with SW-Motech racks and Givi V35 bags, a ZG st screen and probably a sargent seat, instead of that bad copy of an ST1300 cross.

ps, Where can I get copy of the Austrailian Motorcycle News??

[image: View Post]dwade277, on Aug 4 2009, 04:02 PM, said:

Unless the new VFR comes in at less than 450 pounds dry it won't be "sporty" enough for me. I have done many track day's on my 4th gen. It's a great bike on the track, you can ring it's neck and it won't brake a sweet. Two problems with the 750 is too much weight and soft suspension. Shit, come to think of it Why doesn't Honda make a great light weight chassis throw the vfr750 engine in it and some lights with a total dry weight of no greater than 375 pounds. Sounds like the perfect sport bike to me.

Why does it have to be a 750. I mean Honda has absolutely zero reason to build a new 750 sport bike at this time.

Maybe they should build a 600cc VFR-S version, Then they would have a bike that would be able to compete in most parts of the world.

I mean I bought my VFR for a "mid-size" sport-touring bike. If I had wanted a pure sport bike, I would have purchased something more like an rc51, an rc45 or Gixxer 750.
The VFR has not been a true sport bike for at least three generations already. Yeah its a great sporting bike, but its not a sport bike any more.


Oh and If honda were to build a VFR600 based on this new tech, I'd be very interested.

[image: View Post]JES_VFR, on Aug 14 2009, 01:17 PM, said:

ps, Where can I get copy of the Austrailian Motorcycle News??

Do you mean the one with the 1200 V4 article? PM me an address and I'll send it to you (assuming I still have it - pretty certain I do).

[image: View Post]JES_VFR, on Aug 13 2009, 11:34 PM, said:

The VFR has not been a true sport bike for at least three generations already. Yeah its a great sporting bike, but its not a sport bike any more.
+1. I can't say my 6th gen is a sportbike, not even when describing my bike to non-riders. I ride it like a sportbike at times, but IMO my VFR is best described as a sport-tourer, with an emphasis on "sport". :)

I used to ride a VFR...2001....but I moved to the bmw k1200s because it had a shaft drive and was MORE of a Sports-Tourer than a Sport Bike....

I may be switching back now with the new V4.

[image: View Post]JES_VFR, on Aug 13 2009, 10:34 PM, said:

[image: View Post]dwade277, on Aug 4 2009, 04:02 PM, said:

Unless the new VFR comes in at less than 450 pounds dry it won't be "sporty" enough for me. I have done many track day's on my 4th gen. It's a great bike on the track, you can ring it's neck and it won't brake a sweet. Two problems with the 750 is too much weight and soft suspension. Shit, come to think of it Why doesn't Honda make a great light weight chassis throw the vfr750 engine in it and some lights with a total dry weight of no greater than 375 pounds. Sounds like the perfect sport bike to me.

Why does it have to be a 750. I mean Honda has absolutely zero reason to build a new 750 sport bike at this time.

Maybe they should build a 600cc VFR-S version, Then they would have a bike that would be able to compete in most parts of the world.

I mean I bought my VFR for a "mid-size" sport-touring bike. If I had wanted a pure sport bike, I would have purchased something more like an rc51, an rc45 or Gixxer 750.
The VFR has not been a true sport bike for at least three generations already. Yeah its a great sporting bike, but its not a sport bike any more.


Oh and If honda were to build a VFR600 based on this new tech, I'd be very interested.



Too bad Moto2 has a spec engine(doesn't it?) and Honda won't build a killer new 600cc V-4 with a lightweight racing chassis to compete. :cool:

Yep and it is Honda who will be supplying the engines for the class... if they went and made it a 600cc V4, I'd probably lose interest in MotoGP!