Year 2002 VFR Interceptor Dyno Run

[Joe_Momma]

First Post. Man, I don't know if that thing is pretty or ugly.

[El_Flaco]

Maybe I'm not looking at the graph correctly, but I really don't see any improvement between the last model and this one. OK, 1/2 hp at the peak, but less at lower revs. And less torque- I thought the point of the Vtec was to increase torque, especially at lower rpms. Again, the dyno isn't everything, but I hope that the street ride is more hopeful than the dyno run.

[Jeff_W]

Why the hell would Honda want add the pseudo-VTEC complexity to the VFR if you can't show any measurable difference between the new and the old performance? Sure, it might be better in some vague way if you actually ride the two side by side and compare them. But most mc consumers only get to look at ads, reviews, and dyno runs....



I still say they should have increased displacement, improved the suspension, and added a hard bag option (the second two they did apparently but I bet the suspension could be even better if the VTEC wasn't a cost factor). Customers are gonna be paying extra for VTEC when it apparently doesn't actually do much of anything.

--

Jeff

[minime]

FYI: The new Interceptor (non-ABS) is $9,999 US dollars which is $500 more than last year's machine. The '02 ABS version costs $10,999.

[CBR1000F]

Wait a minute... Let me see if I got this right. The new Viffer - complete with "VTEC" - actually makes LESS power than the old one? Added to the fact that the new one is heavier, and the looks are... Um... unique. Wait, they're not unique. They look suspiciously like the Aprilia Futura. I noticed that when I was at the MC show... The one at which the Honda rep asked me which I liked better.



Good one Honda, you bunted that one right to the shortstop.

[VTR-Pilot]

To sum it up, one might ask, why Honda bothered to do all those fancy changes to the engine. To show new and finicky variation to "old horse", to prove their technical supremacy? Why would not they instead increase it's capacity? One improvement for sure is the layout of bike and two under seat tucked exhaust canisters (but that is somebody elses idea, isn't it); it may be seen as a welcome change by touring (as well as esthetics loving) fans. Over and over I am still content I opted for VTR instead...

[fwalters]

IT IS UGLY. Sorry Honda, but that is one ugly baby!



My 2000 model makes 106 hp with a 2 Brothers pipe and a K&N air filter.



And it ain't near as ugly.



Guess I won't be trading this year..................

[Jeff_W]

The money for the new technology and manufacturing still has to come from somewhere. Let's just hope that VTEC was paid for with improved manufacturing efficiency instead of sacrificing something on the tried and true VFR platform. Well, they did get rid of the gear-driven cams...



With a timing chain and funky valve actuation, reliabilty might be an issue too.

--

Jeff

[BBD_Racing]

I spent a good bit of time looking at the VFR and 919 at the moto show last weekend. I gotta say, both left me a bit cold. The 01 VFR was way better looking to my eyes. Bummer I was hoping to drool.



As for the dyno, I am hoping that this is either an anomoly or that the bike isn't broken in yet. 30 more lbs, questionable aesthetics and less torque everywhere spells doom.

[BBD_Racing]

At that same moto show, Yam had some Road Star customs. One looked like a refugee from Who Framed Roger Rabbit. It had the new obligatory 240 section rear tire and a 180 section FRONT. It looked like an eight foot long chrome Fat Cat.