The Ideal Honda VFR DCT

Honda, if your listening...here it is...

-900cc unrestricted motor for better mileage, lighter weight, better range
-USB Port to customize HP/Torque map and software for PC/Mac
-Thinner rear wheel/rim for faster leans
-57-59 inch wheelbase better flickability
-16 inch tires for better turn in
-Taller wind screen like zero gravity touring model
-360 degree adjustable pegs with 3 inch radius
-Left hand rear brake lever/parking brake combo and do away with the foot brake and curent parking brake
-Higher and further back handlebars like the Helibars

Specs:
0-60 in 4 sec in sport mode
0-60 in 6 sec in drive mode

45 mpg in sport mode
55 mpg in drive mode

dry weight 500 lbs

I'd be pretty disappointed in some of those specs.

[image: View Post]YoshiHNS, on 22 November 2011 - 09:31 PM, said:

I'd be pretty disappointed in some of those specs.

I was thinking the exact same thing.

Think i'm just gunna "take the bus" :rolleyes:

hopefully Honda isn't listening

[image: View Post]Awareness, on 22 November 2011 - 09:16 PM, said:

Honda, if your listening...here it is...

-900cc unrestricted motor for better mileage, lighter weight, better range
-USB Port to customize HP/Torque map and software for PC/Mac
-Thinner rear wheel/rim for faster leans
-57-59 inch wheelbase better flickability
-16 inch tires for better turn in
-Taller wind screen like zero gravity touring model
-360 degree adjustable pegs with 3 inch radius
-Left hand rear brake lever/parking brake combo and do away with the foot brake and curent parking brake
-Higher and further back handlebars like the Helibars

Specs:
0-60 in 5 sec in sport mode
0-60 in 7 sec in drive mode

45 mpg in sport mode
55 mpg in drive mode

dry weight 500 lbs

I think you bought the wrong bike.

[image: View Post]Awareness, on 22 November 2011 - 09:16 PM, said:

-Thinner rear wheel/rim for faster leans
Just think how fast those MotoGP slobs would be able to flick a bike over if they had a narrower rear.

Nobody uses 16" wheels on sportbikes anymore.

Judging by the contents of your garage, you'd be much better off calling up Yamaha and asking them to build you a V4 powered maxi-scooter.

WTF.

Another perfect example of how Honda has demoralized the VFR model.

If the left hand is now the rear brake, where's the clutch?? :huh:

[image: View Post]YoshiHNS, on 23 November 2011 - 07:12 AM, said:

If the left hand is now the rear brake, where's the clutch?? :huh:

DCT, no clutch.

lmao - I could see Honda (of late) building something like that.

Seriously, you'd be on an island with those specs...

As a DCT owner I got the survey. Everything I suggested was on the 2012 model, I think. I asked for a little more revs in drive mode. And the big one traction control instead of the restricted first and second gear. While losing #100 would be nice, I think a more modest reduction would be feasible. As far as size and flickability I think it is fine for a sport tourer. I don't really see the demand for the envisioned bike. I could see a smaller version than the 800 for the third world and as a second bike after a beginner bike or commuter and before going to liter bike and above. Would like to see Honda throw together a 1000cc 450# ultra sport with some kind of v4 just to shut up those that screamed so loud how bad the vfr1200 was.

I really think Honda did OK with the bike. It is a bike similar to the VFR800. One that bridges a gap between sport and touring. A ride is still the best way to decide. But if you have matured enough to be beyond the supersport bikes but not ready to retire to a tourer, it is a durn fine bike. I could only imagine the reviews of a slow heavy 900cc super motard (with dct.) You've got yours, I've got mine. Perhaps if you could explain your logic we could understand your selection criteria.

I'm pretty sure my mini-van can go 0-60 in 7 seconds.

You forgot a spec.

$18000 MSRP

What a horrible bike! Sir, are you on drugs? Do you like things that are slow and handle bad? I have Chrysler Pacifica out front that has you name on it!

Don't pick on him it sounds like he wants a good commuter. Not a mini Van. I do like his fuel numbers the 1200 is a PIG on gas

[image: View Post]jugornot, on 23 November 2011 - 08:33 AM, said:

. Would like to see Honda throw together a 1000cc 450# ultra sport with some kind of v4 just to shut up those that screamed so loud how bad the vfr1200 was.

I .

Now ya Talkin, I still want it street usable ergo wise, and a Nice well contoured and supportive seat. However Honda days of just Producing a Great Bike without all the Green gimmicktry is probably over.
So it only down Hill from here IMO.

Should be no reason Honda Can't do the HP and the MPG. Kind of sad when a mini cooper can do about same HP and as good MPG and move an extra 1800LBS around. Yeah I know the mini isn't as fast but WTF right ???

[image: View Post]ignoreance, on 25 November 2011 - 02:51 AM, said:

Should be no reason Honda Can't do the HP and the MPG. Kind of sad when a mini cooper can do about same HP and as good MPG and move an extra 1800LBS around. Yeah I know the mini isn't as fast but WTF right ???

It's clear you are not an engineer. Spec jockey is more like it.

[image: View Post]Awareness, on 22 November 2011 - 09:16 PM, said:

Honda, if your listening...here it is...

-900cc unrestricted motor for better mileage, lighter weight, better range
-USB Port to customize HP/Torque map and software for PC/Mac
-Thinner rear wheel/rim for faster leans
-57-59 inch wheelbase better flickability
-16 inch tires for better turn in
-Taller wind screen like zero gravity touring model
-360 degree adjustable pegs with 3 inch radius
-Left hand rear brake lever/parking brake combo and do away with the foot brake and curent parking brake
-Higher and further back handlebars like the Helibars

Specs:
0-60 in 4 sec in sport mode
0-60 in 6 sec in drive mode

45 mpg in sport mode
55 mpg in drive mode

dry weight 500 lbs

So what you are saying is you want a NT700 with auto? Throw a powercommander and some aftermarket adjustable pegs on it and there you go. :tour:

[image: View Post]tin, on 27 November 2011 - 08:15 AM, said:

[image: View Post]Awareness, on 22 November 2011 - 09:16 PM, said:

Honda, if your listening...here it is...

-900cc unrestricted motor for better mileage, lighter weight, better range
-USB Port to customize HP/Torque map and software for PC/Mac
-Thinner rear wheel/rim for faster leans
-57-59 inch wheelbase better flickability
-16 inch tires for better turn in
-Taller wind screen like zero gravity touring model
-360 degree adjustable pegs with 3 inch radius
-Left hand rear brake lever/parking brake combo and do away with the foot brake and curent parking brake
-Higher and further back handlebars like the Helibars

Specs:
0-60 in 4 sec in sport mode
0-60 in 6 sec in drive mode

45 mpg in sport mode
55 mpg in drive mode

dry weight 500 lbs

So what you are saying is you want a NT700 with auto? Throw a powercommander and some aftermarket adjustable pegs on it and there you go. :tour:

I agree, OP is asking for an NT700. They basically took a CAR ENGINE and adapted it to a bike. The thing has a 6500 Redline! I'm not saying that's bad... Gets great mileage though, they're talking ~79 MPG. :ohmy: :ohmy: Read all about it here.

http://www.ashonbike.../honda-nc700x-0

Brian

[image: View Post]ignoreance, on 25 November 2011 - 02:51 AM, said:

Should be no reason Honda Can't do the HP and the MPG. Kind of sad when a mini cooper can do about same HP and as good MPG and move an extra 1800LBS around. Yeah I know the mini isn't as fast but WTF right ???

BUT THEY CAN DO IT! Just look at the CRF230. That could probably keep up with most of the cars out there as far as acceleration goes. Even the Cooper, which really isn't all that fast. And it gets upwards towards 70mpg or so I've read.

Asking for the high performance AND economy is a whole nother thing. Now you want to have your cake and eat it too.

[image: View Post]jugornot, on 23 November 2011 - 08:33 AM, said:

Would like to see Honda throw together a 1000cc 450# ultra sport with some kind of v4 just to shut up those that screamed so loud how bad the vfr1200 was.

Please point out someone who has said that the 1200 is an awful bike.


Difference between saying they're disappointed that it's not close to what they were hoping for, and saying it's a pile of trash. But it would be awesome if they built that bike to shut us up. :laugh:

[image: View Post]jugornot, on 23 November 2011 - 08:33 AM, said:

I could see a smaller version than the 800 for the third world and as a second bike after a beginner bike or commuter and before going to liter bike and above.

I think I'd take a serious look at a V4 600cc bike. Doesn't have to be a liter bike to draw my interest.

[image: View Post]jugornot, on 23 November 2011 - 08:33 AM, said:

Perhaps if you could explain your logic we could understand your selection criteria.

Sometimes, there is no logic in passion.

So explain the difference Solo how or why our engine should or shouldn't be able to make about 45mpg and still have the horsepower it does. Best I have gotten out of the bike and this was being really easy on it and keeping the bike between 55-65 I could only get 42.6mpg. My 1.8L Toyota Corolla gets 38mpg at the same said MPH on the same route. If i ride like normal I get maybe 37mpg and in the car 33mpg. Guess we will have to wait and see what the 2012 is doing for Fuel mileage. So I guess the myth that a motorcycle will save you gas money is wrong.

In no means do I think the 1200 is crap, it is good bike if you get past the 1-2 gear debauchery which Honda clearly fixed with the addition of TC to the 2012.

[image: View Post]ignoreance, on 27 November 2011 - 10:52 PM, said:

So explain the difference Solo how or why our engine should or shouldn't be able to make about 45mpg and still have the horsepower it does. Best I have gotten out of the bike and this was being really easy on it and keeping the bike between 55-65 I could only get 42.6mpg. My 1.8L Toyota Corolla gets 38mpg at the same said MPH on the same route. If i ride like normal I get maybe 37mpg and in the car 33mpg. Guess we will have to wait and see what the 2012 is doing for Fuel mileage. So I guess the myth that a motorcycle will save you gas money is wrong.

Here is my beef with your assumptions, just as I have with so many other spec jockeys on the web:

People as yourself believe there is a mythical "free lunch" to be had despite the fact that you are comparing apples and oranges. So your car can get 38mpg and your bike a wee bit better. Does it matter that they have nearly diametrically opposed design goals and purposes? One is tuned for economy and low rpm efficiency, the other for sport performance and a level of enthusiasm. One has low coeff of drag, the other high cd. One has higher gear ratios, the other lower gear ratios to suit the purpose. Shouldn't these be factored into your expectations? Of course, but since when does rationality get in the way of people's demands and expectations?


Here is a typical forum spec jockey list of demands from Honda:

1. 1000cc V4 with gear driven cams

2. 160 hp at the rear wheel

3. stump shreading torque at low rpms

4. screaming 180mph top end

5. 400 lbs

6. top shelf suspension with 3 way adjustability

7. race track handling

8. touring stability and comfort

9. 50mpg highway

10. traction control

11. anti-lock brakes

12. slipper clutch

13. electronic gizmos

14. hard bags

And by the way Honda, forget about charging a premium price.


Sound extreme? Hardly. Except for some performance numbers, the OP ain't all that much different. Nevermind that many of these demands are contradictory and compromising. A lot of items on this wish list probably can be done, but only at an exorbitant price that no one would ever pay for a consumer product.

As a design engineer myself (electrical) my pet peeve is that people who aren't the least bit clued in to the physical and economic realities of engineering and manufacturing want their cake and eat it too, that they can have something for next to nothing, and when a product doesn't mesh with their expectations, then the manufacturer is somehow arrogant and didn't "listen" to their demands. If I were Honda, I wouldn't listen either to such ridiculous demands. Honda ain't perfect either and I'm not here to defend them and their decisions. But from where I stand, if I were to choose a side, I'd side with a company whose business and engineering competence has resulted in excellent products for many decades versus a bunch of people who seem to be good at whining and saying "WTF" Honda.

BTW, my DCT averages about 44mpg overall and 47mpg highway and while I don't burn up the asphalt, I don't exactly doddle about much of the time either.

I was puzzled at the 16" wheels, but my head exploded when I read 0-60 in 6 seconds.

I can seriously run that fast and I am old and fat.


Sounds like a CBR250 is right up your alley!

[image: View Post]YoshiHNS, on 27 November 2011 - 08:35 PM, said:

[image: View Post]jugornot, on 23 November 2011 - 08:33 AM, said:

Would like to see Honda throw together a 1000cc 450# ultra sport with some kind of v4 just to shut up those that screamed so loud how bad the vfr1200 was.

Please point out someone who has said that the 1200 is an awful bike.


Difference between saying they're disappointed that it's not close to what they were hoping for, and saying it's a pile of trash. But it would be awesome if they built that bike to shut us up. :laugh:

http://advrider.com/...t=731982&page=1

And there was some nut video blogger who actually blogged that he hated it without so much as a ride. But I'm sue there is someone out there who hates the VFR1200 especially the DCT model. You know the 170HP scooter. At least thats what I tell everyone that asks about mine. I leave out the 170 hp part. As can be seen I do not follow the masses.

And yes it would be cool to have a southerner in charge of honda for just long enough to say gotto have more power and less weight and say hey yall lookit this. But then have the engineers step in and actually build a turned loose bike. You know there's some engineers just wanting to bust loose.

I think most people were like me, just up grade the VFR , and loss the VTEC.

[image: View Post]ignoreance, on 27 November 2011 - 10:52 PM, said:

So explain the difference Solo how or why our engine should or shouldn't be able to make about 45mpg and still have the horsepower it does. Best I have gotten out of the bike and this was being really easy on it and keeping the bike between 55-65 I could only get 42.6mpg. My 1.8L Toyota Corolla gets 38mpg at the same said MPH on the same route. If i ride like normal I get maybe 37mpg and in the car 33mpg. Guess we will have to wait and see what the 2012 is doing for Fuel mileage. So I guess the myth that a motorcycle will save you gas money is wrong.

In no means do I think the 1200 is crap, it is good bike if you get past the 1-2 gear debauchery which Honda clearly fixed with the addition of TC to the 2012.

I think the fuel injection, especially on MC, being more efficient is a myth.

[image: View Post]Switchblade, on 28 November 2011 - 08:20 PM, said:

I think the fuel injection, especially on MC, being more efficient is a myth.

Wow, that's quite the sweeping statement.! :ohmy:

As I understand it a carburator will adjust fuel based on manifold vaccuum only, with a little help to enrich the mixture during the throttle stroke.  A proper fuel injection system can adjust fuel settings for manifold pressure, coolant temp, air mass, air temp, RPM, knock, fuel grade, ...etc. not to mention can be remapped to various strategies (sport, tour, rain,...)

EVERY single car in the world (pretty much) has gone to MORE EXPENSIVE fuel injection...mostly just to propogate that myth... :ph34r:   I suppose...

If by 'efficient' you mean fuel economy, there are many much more effective ways to optimize.  Fuel injection is one of many.  Motorcycle engines are designed for high to ultra-high specific outputs (HP/liter).  This is in DIRECT conflict with maximum fuel economy.  Take the time to read the link about the NT700 engine and you will see that it is derived from a CAR engine and manages to get 80MPG, not because it has fuel injection, but because everything about it has been tuned for fuel efficiency, not power efficiency. http://www.ashonbike.../honda-nc700x-0

Don't hate me.... :unsure:

Brian

[image: View Post]Switchblade, on 28 November 2011 - 08:20 PM, said:

I think the fuel injection, especially on MC, being more efficient is a myth.

In regards to MPGs on motorcycles, I would have to agree. Can't argue about the performance increase though.

Solo your statements are good and for the most part true however the lotus cars are based on small light weight high rev engines and they get about 2mpg less than the toyota and put out 180 hp from the 1.8l that's the same engine base corolla with a different tune/cams and the what not's.

On paper is always one thing and as a manufacturing engineer I always know electrical and Mechinical engineers come up with many things that can't be done. Nothing gets me more pissed than when an mech eng sends something out and has no ideas at what standard manufacturing shop can do. Sure you can get it made but @ what cost. The process or what not hasn't been devloped. The mileage issue is drastically different they have cars that are high rev high high power and acceptable fuel mileage on paper and on the street proven.��One of the reasons they force the new mileage engine test standards out a couple of years ago.��



Mind you I have a manual and not a DCT.�� So I guess honda's fuel mileage is better controlled by that piece of tech and probably has a multi map for the drive/sport.��I will agree there are different states of tuning what works forbest mileage usually doesn't work for best HP.��I would prefer to see a drop in the comp ratio so that the 87 pump gas can be ran and more fuel econ bike to me has more that enough balls I can stand to loose what ever 5-7% by having the cheap fuel reducing my over all cost of fill up by a dollar or more in some areas. I also know that the elevation that you ride/drive affects fuel mileage less/more air the bike/engine puts in less/more fuel.

Again the 2012 will be a big tell if the bike moves over the 180-200 mile per tank mark.Why does everybody keep shoving the NT700 it's not a V4 so it an orange when we're talking about bananas?

Never ridden one (though Miguel has offered on a couple of occasions).....

I've followed Miguel enough on his to tell you that in capable hands the Veefalo will smoke a Kansas boy.

I kinda think I want that 700. I gave up on my PC800 cause it was a bit too old and heavy. Didn't turn out to be the maintenance free commuter I was hoping for.
My '99 VFR's gas mileage takes a nose dive with the Wing Rack.

There's two things that will severely impact the mpgs on a motorcycle.

1) Cruising RPM. It's high. At highway speeds, I think my 5th gen was around 5k. Cars tend to cruise much lower than that. My 3000GT cruises at 2.4k.

2) Drag. Also known as the "Sitting upright in comfortable touring position" condition. I'm sure you've noticed that the air tends to hit your body and that. Happens when a blunt object is positioned in a wind stream. I'm fairly sure if you strapped an open lawn chair to the top of a lotus the mpgs would drop quite a bit. You could always ride in the tucked in position to save your mpgs. Your wallet may thank you, but I'm pretty sure your back wont.

I averaged 38-40MPG US on my trip through the NW, fully loaded with the stock panniers and a gargantuan 55L givi case on the back, doing minimum 85MPH where I could.