Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > Honda News

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-25-2001, 11:47 AM   #81
VTR-Pilot
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 8
Default Re: Year 2002 VFR Interceptor Dyno Run

Ok, let me be frank with you than: one big reason I took what I did was that I didn't want to ride a scooter! Just look at that thing (I mean before last update). Next step to comfy, link-braked toorer is RT. When comes to dynamics I can pull from Viffer any time.
VTR-Pilot is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 12-25-2001, 12:12 PM   #82
deweybch
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 14
Default Re: Year 2002 VFR Interceptor Dyno Run

Lets get something straight...AFTER 7000 RPM, the 2002 VFR is NO DIFFERENT than the '98-'01 models. They are EXACTLY the same engine, so MAX HP and MAX torque should be the same since they occur AFTER 7000 RPM. With that said, what looks depressing to me is that the two valve operation BELOW 7000 RPM was suppose to give a more linear torque curve with more torque. That does not appear to be true - very depressing as I am looking to buy one this summer (I also wish this damn bike would come to the US in several colors, not ALWAYS red)! However, everything I have read on the bike says it feels faster and rides much better than its predecesors. MO compared this bike against the bigger displacement (1000cc's) Triumph and Aprilla sport tourers and said the VFR was a definite winner. They didn't say it was close, they said there was no contest. If your the type whose looking to get a sport tourer, and 100hp and a 11 sec quarter mile isn't fast enough for you, then your kidding yourself that you want a sport tourer. This bike is plenty fast - fast enough to stay with the 'big' boys and it handles well enough to keep up with the smaller bikes. IT IS the best of both worlds. Again, the bike it designed to be this heavy, otherwise it just gets blown all over the road when you go on those LONG journeys. If you want a lighter bike, then your not in the market for a sport tourer! Also, if you know anything about the heritage of this bike, then you know Honda isn't interested in making the VFR a larger displacement bike and that this bike has always been the launching pad for their new technology. Lastly, I LOVE the look of this bike - I for one am glad Honda didn't take the conservative approach to the design of this bike. Very aggresive looking and I love the under seat exhaust. The only thing that scars me now is the damn chain driven cams! I wished they had kept the gear driven cams, but it IS a Honda, and I am sure they're not going to ruin their reputation by building a cam tensioning system that will be problematic. Let hope!
deweybch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2001, 12:39 PM   #83
deweybch
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 14
Default Re: Year 2002 VFR Interceptor Dyno Run

Sorry, I meant MCN did the test between the three bikes, NOT MO. MO is obviously doing their test as we speak!
deweybch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2001, 06:06 PM   #84
shralper
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2
Default Re: Why more displacement?

I realize more displacement equals more weight when everything else is equal. That's the problem...everything else shouldn't remain equal. For starters, why didn't Honda put a full titanium exhaust system on the VFR, just like it did on the CBR 929 a couple years ago while still keeping the price under $10K? Surely there's other places weight could be shaved as well. I agree that the V-4 engine by design requires more mass, but a hundred pounds more than a GSX-R 1000? I'm not an engineer either, but I find it hard to believe. Don't forget that the GSX-R 750 in the 1993 model weighed around the same as the '98 VFR. It was an inline four, but at the time, I'm sure they made it as light as they knew how. Obviously progress has now allowed them to know build a GSX-R1000 ( 250cc more) in the 380lbs range, and I don't believe it's simply because it's an inline four with a slightly smaller fairing and lighter seat that allows them to do it.



I don't pretend to be an expert on the matter though...just opinionated. Maybe someone else can shed more light on the matter?



Honda was able to drop the weight in the '98 model from the previous year's model, so it's not like they've never done it before.



I do love that standard centerstand on every VFR though. Screw the extra weight, I say, in some cases.
shralper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2001, 07:40 PM   #85
madcow
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 6
Default Re: What a shame....

The Silver and Red anniversary model was put together by Honda Japan. It admittedly does look a bit strange at first with the silver fairing on a red bike but it grows on you. It comes with retro Honda decals and discreet enameled 50th anniversary badges on the side panels and on the ignition key. One way or another it's a unique look and is worth owning for the silver wheels alone.



The UK anniversary edition (by John Keogh designs - the ones responsible for the very nice Evoblade) is truly an ugly one though. It is simply a red one with a white painted rear cowl, some fake carbon fibre stickers and 'limited edition' stickers. Must have been done before Honda Japan released theirs.
madcow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2001, 07:49 PM   #86
madcow
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 6
Default Re: Year 2002 VFR Interceptor Dyno Run

It's not surprising that the new VFR is slower than the old. The 99-01 model has essentially a slightly detuned RC45 engine with a 2mm longer stroke. In other words a no-expense spared race engine in a road bike! The new bike's engine is just a cost cutting exercise with cheaper to produce, higher friction chain drive to the cams and a watered down 'V-Tec' added simply as a marketing ploy. The result is less predicable power delivery, apparently less power and torque, and more weight. Disappointing.
madcow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2001, 08:37 PM   #87
luvmyvfr
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 237
Default Re: Year 2002 VFR Interceptor Dyno Run

There is no RAM air on a VFR. If the selling point was a video, I'd do some more research. Not that a viffer isn't a good buy, but ware the first generation anything. Even a Honda.



luvmyvfr
luvmyvfr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2001, 02:56 AM   #88
rvfrules
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 135
Default you mean, "as we write". Sorry, couldn't resist....

rvfrules is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2001, 03:02 AM   #89
rvfrules
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 135
Default Re: What a shame....

Interesting, because as far as I know, the anniversary model you have was only available in the UK. It wasn't sold as a domestic model here in Japan where I live and wasn't available in the US either. Dunno if Australia got it either.
rvfrules is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2001, 03:25 AM   #90
Eskimo
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2
Default Re: Year 2002 VFR Interceptor Dyno Run

Sorry big guy... The RC46 (aka VFR800FI to the masses), did NOT have a "slightly detuned RC45 engine" as you stated. The crank is different, the valvetrain is different, the firing order is different, etc, etc...



But the demise of the oh-so-sexy sounding gear driven cams will be missed by all Viffer enthuiasts like myself. I'm keeping my '98!
Eskimo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off