Motorcycle Forum

Motorcycle Forum (https://www.motorcycle.com/forum/)
-   Honda News (https://www.motorcycle.com/forum/honda-news/)
-   -   Year 2002 VFR Interceptor Dyno Run (https://www.motorcycle.com/forum/honda-news/985-year-2002-vfr-interceptor-dyno-run.html)

Rafi 12-24-2001 08:51 AM

Re: Year 2002 VFR Interceptor Dyno Run
 
Well, I figured as much. heh heh I love your dyno run videos... ;)

Lincoln 12-24-2001 09:28 AM

Re: It meets 2008 Emissions PEOPLE!
 
oh man, the end of motorcycling as we know it near. when people start espousing the virtues of a bike based on its emissions output, we're finished. motorcycles account for like .01% of annual vehicle emissions output. If you think you're "doing your part" by riding a bike that puts out less emissions in the name of more parts, more cost and less performance, then the EPA has had its way with you

rvfrules 12-24-2001 11:30 AM

Re: What a shame....
 
It was a special model put together by UK Honda. All they did was slap a silver fairing onto a red bike, add some boring stickers and give it silver wheels. It's a shame Honda Japan didn't put their muscle behind it and release a special paint job along the lines of the RC-30 or 45.

shralper 12-24-2001 04:33 PM

Re: Why more displacement?
 
Huh? More displacement=more weight? Since when? Most liter-class sportbikes today are well under 390 lbs. So why can't Honda bring down the weight on an 781cc bike? It just doesn't make any sense.



I'm not asking for the VFR to become a featherweight racebike like the R1, GSXR-1000, or CBR 959. I realize the VFR has things like a single-sided swingarm and a linked braking system. But I think it's reasonable to expect its weight to be somewhere in the low 400lbs range. Now it's almost 500lbs! Crazy.



As for increasing the displacement, I'm glad to see they didn't, simply from the perspective of the cost to insure. Unlike many, I refuse to ever ride a bike without full coverage, and the cost of insurance nearly triples when going from a 750 class bike to liter-class.



Unfortunately, I waited four long years, expecting (with all certainty) to see the weight decrease in 2002. Instead, we get a weight INCREASE and a DECREASE in HP and torque! This is almost unheard of in the industry. Talk about a step backward! Plus, the gear-driven cam is now gone, while a complex vtec system (with no discernable benefits) has been added.



Apparently, Honda thinks that VFR fans don't care about weight and performance.



The VFR could have been the perfect bike for those who want more usable torque in the mid-range (instead of the 12K+ RPM range like the CBR600), a little more legroom than a CBR600, a little more wind/weather protection, and a reasonable "cost to insure". All it needed, IMHO, was to lose about 50 lbs and maybe a gain a little more HP/torque.



Honda blew it. Big time.

RRocket 12-24-2001 08:12 PM

Re: Year 2002 VFR Interceptor Dyno Run
 
"and a Husky NOX." Thank god, I was starting to think your garage was kinda boring....

Arch 12-25-2001 06:36 AM

Re: Year 2002 VFR Interceptor Dyno Run
 
*Ouch* RRocket. Please send over a NOX to put me on the straight & narrow!...



:-) Arch

starvingstudent 12-25-2001 08:38 AM

Re: Why more displacement?
 
As for the VFR's weight, remember that it's going to always be significantly more than a CBR because a V-4 has a lot more mass to it than an inline-four (at least, it seems that way to me, but I'm not an engineer). The healthy fairing, nice seating, and rear subframe that can handle hard luggage also add weight.



Also, more displacement DOES equal more weight _if everything else is equal_. If you're altering more than one variable, then of course you can up displacement and drop weight.



As for the decrease in torque, MotorcycleDaily and others who have ridden it say that it feels a LOT more powerful in the lower rev range. Something wierd is going on with MO's dyno reading here.

Troll 12-25-2001 09:33 AM

Ugly with Tech Features of a Cadillac 8-6-4
 
The appeal of this Interceptor has much in common with the tech features of my old man's Cadillac 8-6-4, which ran on 4 cylinders when cruising, 6 if more load and 8 in full out acceleration. Cadillac abandoned the idea years ago and that model had a lot of problems.



Anyways since this is a sports touring bike whose going to be riding this bike at a steady 7000+ rpms just to hear the other 2 valves open up. In top gear my Honda RC51 at 5500 rpms is doing about 100mph and my Suzuki Hayabusa at about 5000 rpms in top gear is doing 100mph. If the Intercepter is geared similar to the RC51 or Busa, no one is going to be cruizing at 7000+ rpm. If you're going to rev out the engine constantly at 7000+rpm, get a true sports bike.



The present Interceptor is porky(overweight), low on horsepower, overly complicated mechanically(VTEC valves). If Honda got rid of the VTEC valves and added a shaft drive, I would consider it as a viable sport-touring motorcycle.

admnelson 12-25-2001 10:00 AM

Re: It meets 2008 Emissions PEOPLE!
 
I own a '94 VFR and am still waiting for a bike that looks as good. Don't really care for so much RED, would need to get a paint job on the lower half, maybe add a VFR sticker to the side too. Are they even available?

VTR-Pilot 12-25-2001 10:24 AM

Re: It meets 2008 Emissions PEOPLE!
 
Right on, let's cut that environmental bull. What a heck it has to do with motorcycles anyway. Let's be realistic; how many participants in traffic are bikers? Half a percent at best. That's what makes us special, too!


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:46 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.