CBR1000RR SP and SP2

[LEGEND]

The 80's were Honda's magic v4 years, that is when they were sticking v4's into sportbikes, standards and cruisers.   Nice machines but it seems historically Honda has had much better sales success with the I 4 engine.     As good as the near $200K v4 race replica is the new CBR is another great I4 that people can buy and actually ride.

 

 

 

 

[jhenley17]

They probably tested with a V4 at some point and abandoned it for whatever reason, or it was at least a possibility at some point in development. The cost is up there now, so maybe they were trying to keep it from getting ridiculous by going with the I4. Suzuki and Kawasaki are also having success with even-firing I4s in WSBK, Motoamerica, BSB, etc., so it's not like a change in layout is going to make it a far superior performer.

The articles I've read seem to hint at $18-$20k for the SP. I wonder If they're going to build something like the R1S priced closer to $15k.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Switchblade]

3 hours ago, RC36Rider said:

Drawbacks to the V4 as opposed to IL4 (not exhaustive and not necessarily in order of importance) :

 

1. Cost

2. More rearward weight distribution

3. Longer wheelbase (assuming equal swingarm length) 

...

 

Still, seems to me that the very best MotoGP engineers can't really make up their minds as to which is the superior architecture. 

3.  nailed it !

[Bent]

The second thing a typical potential uneducated motorcycle customer does is look at the price tag.  The first thing this customer does is look at the bike and engine size to decide if the price tag is worth looking at to him.  Engine size can be everything to them sometimes.  Look around the roads you're traveling and look at what people ride.  You aren't riding what they ride because you likely know more than they do about what you're riding.  Honda understands the meaning of the number on the price tag and how a customer thinks.  Honda might know what they're doing by offering cheaper cruisers with more power in most cases than a Hardley.  Same applies to an inline 4.  Most people don't know anything about cylinder configuration and the implications.  A lot of cruisers are sold because it doesn't require a lot of effort or skill to ride one.  That isn't us.  People that buy VFR's typically know more about what they are looking at before they walk in the door.  I read that in some Holiday Inn Express literature left in the room......  

[RC36Rider]

56 minutes ago, Bent said:

 

I read that in some Holiday Inn Express literature left in the room......  

 



[jlrotax583]

19 hours ago, RC36Rider said:

 

1. True so no big risk there but the fact remains that Ti sparks readily when rubbing against asphalt while Al does not.

 

2. Nope. Weight for weight, Al is the structurally stronger material. Ti is much harder and has much higher tensile strength... which is why you'll see Ti con-rods but not Al but this is hardly relevant for a fuel tank.

 

3. Yup ! Which is why Ti is the material of choice for lightweight exhaust systems while Al is a non-starter.

 

I'd like to know if there is a single advantage to Ti in this application.

 

I can't think of one. 

I think you guys have covered it from a Application standpoint but from a Manufacturing standpoint, Honda may not have been

able/comfortable stamping Aluminum into the intricate shapes this tank requires. Since Ti has a higher resistance to sheering.

Ensuring the tank doesn't develop stress fractures down the road also plays into Ti's hand.

 

From HondaProKevin.com (which btw is very detailed review)

"Positioned high the weight of the fuel tank (and fuel) plays a significant part in a motorcycle’s handling. In another first for mass production Honda has developed a compact 16L titanium fuel tank for the Fireblade SP. Manufactured by an ultra-deep drawing process, it’s 1.3kg lighter than an equivalent steel design and contributes to the concentration of mass and reduction in the moment of inertia."

 

Ride On!

Jon

[ridered]

On 10/5/2016 at 6:17 AM, Mohawk said:

Definitely says Titanium, then in one video complains that this "art" is covered with bodywork. Trust me if anyone crashes one of these, the tank will explode if it holes whilst sliding upside down, the down side to titanium & friction = sparks :(

 

I'm surprised that Ti tank would be allowed under racing regs, but probably no one has done it before so not banned yet !

I work in golf, and we make drivers out of Ti.  It is very strong, and would resist having a hole worn in it better than Au.  Ti is a bitch to cut.  Aluminum is softer and more brittle, so it would crack easier in a crash, where Ti is like steel where it would only dent.  Golf clubs use Ti as thin as .35mm with no problems from cracking or denting.   I'm sure the tank is thicker than that.  The forces of the club hitting the ball are incredible.  Tour players swing the club at almost 200 MPH.

 

Now, for all you that complain motorcycles weigh too much, you now see the expense and difficulty of saving a few pounds.  Weight reduction is expensive and difficult.  Parts need to be light, but just as strong.

 

I would like to see all Ti fasteners so then would never rust though.

[Rogue_Biker]

7 hours ago, LEGEND said:

The 80's were Honda's magic v4 years, that is when they were sticking v4's into sportbikes, standards and cruisers.   Nice machines but it seems historically Honda has had much better sales success with the I 4 engine.     As good as the near $200K v4 race replica is the new CBR is another great I4 that people can buy and actually ride.

 

Well, they can achieve everything with an I-4.  Why go with more complicated V4 when you can get the same with a simpler I-4?  If V4's were superior, everyone would be using it. 

 

I'm thinking the next holy grail is what manufacturer's are striving for now:  Power and Control.  Honda's overall philosophy is the complete harmony of power, refinement, handling, and rider interface (always has been).  They're not chasing ultimate power, they're going for the fusion of all including rider.  That was their goal with the '14 SP model sans any electronic intervention, and based on road test it seems they achieved that.  Unfortunately that doesn't sell a lot of bikes. 

 

[RC36Rider]

4 hours ago, jlrotax583 said:

[...]

from a Manufacturing standpoint, Honda may not have been able/comfortable stamping Aluminum into the intricate shapes this tank requires.

 

I hasten to say that I am no expert but everything I have read on the subject suggested that wherever Al is not the friendliest material to work with, Ti is even worse.

 

It's reportedly tricky to machine, weld or shape in any way (AFAIK it work hardens something fierce and galls badly) making it a lousy material in anything but a select few applications where it does have unique properties that warrant the cost and difficulty.

 

4 hours ago, jlrotax583 said:

Ensuring the tank doesn't develop stress fractures down the road also plays into Ti's hand.

 

Good point. Age hardening is one of Al's undesirable properties. Not sure how significant it is, though.

 

4 hours ago, jlrotax583 said:

 Manufactured by an ultra-deep drawing process

 

They do seem to consider it something of an accomplishment. Nobody brags about it when making toothpaste tubes or soda cans out of Al. 

 

[Mohawk]

Ti in sheet form suffers badly with stress fractures, its to stiff, alloy breaks from being work hardened.

[Bent]

****Good point. Age hardening is one of Al's undesirable properties. Not sure how significant it is, though.***

 

Age hardening is VERY significant.  As it hardens, it becomes brittle and much less ductile (ductile gas tank isn't good anyway).  A brittle gas tank isn't good either.  

I worked in the aluminum fabrication and machining industry for 15 years.  Aluminum is a weird but great metal.  Steel can be much easier to work with.  A Ti gas tank.....spending a lot of money

for not much gain.....but Moto GP is life and death when you have that much money invested as a team owner.    

 

[luvtoleanit]

On 10/5/2016 at 2:48 PM, Rogue_Biker said:

Well, as much as I love my VFR's V4 engine, I have to admit I kind of understand Honda's resistance in giving us a modern, high volume, V4 sport bike.  V4's are notoriously heavy due to their additional valvetrain gear and serpentine exhaust systems.  Ever wonder why Aprilia's with V4's are porkers....that's one reason. That and the Aprilia's are closing in on 1100cc's.  Not exactly an apples to apples comparison.  Inline-4's are also much easier and simpler to maintain, especially on major service intervals.  Having only one set of camshafts and CCT's makes things easier, although that may not matter to every owner.  I really don't think torque is a factor in liter bike engine configuration.

 

The only real "nice thing" about the V4 is the exhaust sound.  But there is nothing wrong with the sound Formula 1 engines either.       

 

As BLS already pointed out, this is incorrect.  Not sure where you are getting your information from. 

 

I've never heard of the Aprilia RSV4 being called a porker.  The current RSVR is listed as 398 lbs dry.  Sorry that's not a porker.

 

It's also NOT closing in on 1100cc's as you mentioned.  It's a 999cc motorcycle, 999.6 CC's to be exact.  How is that closing in on 1100cc's?  Again we are talking about the CBR1000RR, a literbike, so the Aprilia equivalent is the RSV4, not some other model. 

[luvtoleanit]

On 10/6/2016 at 10:34 AM, Rogue_Biker said:

Well, they can achieve everything with an I-4.  Why go with more complicated V4 when you can get the same with a simpler I-4?  If V4's were superior, everyone would be using it. 

 

 

 

 

Well, MotoGP is always the reference.  They can run anything, and they run V4's.

 

Honda: V4

Ducati: V4

Aprilia: V4

KTM: V4

Yamaha: Virtual V4

Suzuki: Something close to a virtual V4, firing order mimics one just like the Yamaha

 

So every bike in GP is running some sort of V4, either a true one, or a one head set up with a crank that fires like one.  Why?  A vee engine on a motorcycle hooks up better out of the corner.  You get the torque aspects of a twin and the high revving capability of the inline 4, so the best of both worlds.  If you have owned a V4, Vtwin, and inline 4, it's pretty clear which one hooks up better and is a more complete engine for a sporting motorcycle.  Hell it's why this site exists. 

 

The only reason Honda chooses an inline 4 is cost, it's cheaper to build.  But that doesn't make the excuse any longer.  Yamaha has a V4 firing order in their inline 4, and they make it for a reasonable and competitive cost in the marketplace.  So does Aprilia with their RSV4.  Actually I can but a RSV4 for less money than I can a brand new R1.  And Aprilia is a fraction of the size of Yamaha or Honda.  Honda, with their economies of scale, could easily build an affordable V4 sportbike, they just continually choose not to. 

 

I'm friends with the local Honda GM and Honda's sales have tanked at his dealership.  Yamaha dealer acquisition has provided the necessary business to keep them moving.  I understand there is a number of Honda apologists here but the bean counters are running the company now and have for years.  When was the last time Honda produced something truly interesting and exciting compared to their competitors?  Answer that question honestly, and for that you have to remove the Honda red tinted glasses.

 

If I were buying a new Japanese literbike today, no way would I choose this new CBR over the R1.  The R1 is a MotoGP derived motorcycle, styling cues, engine, and electronics package.  And it fires at exactly the same intervals of a 90 degree V4, or, the firing order is exactly the same as the VFR800.  I think Honda missed another opportunity here. 

[RC36Rider]

16 minutes ago, luvtoleanit said:

 

It's also NOT closing in on 1100cc's as you mentioned.

 

 

Confusion with the '16 Tuono V4 ?

 

The Tuono has been bored/stroked (not sure which combo) to 1100 cc. The RSV4 remains a 1000 cc.

[RC1237V]

     Another consideration is that back in the 80's and 90's Honda was building "fun" bikes to satisfy enthusiasts - "gear heads" were most of their audience and superbikes ruled a good portion of the sales. Now with the shift in demographics (not to mention a corporate, consumer focus mentality) they are building bikes to satisfy a different audience, where the decision is more subjective and "package-based" (the bike as a whole). There are so many factors, and so many people at Honda reviewing, and providing the data, and making the decisions on what the correct bike(s) should be in each segment.

     When they build a bad ass bike like the 7th gen, and it flops in the showrooms, they are forced to look at why, and how to not make the same mistakes next time. They (from a corporate standpoint) probably feel they got burned by consumers, and the consumers feel their product was just a bit off of what they really wanted, and did not meet expectations, so sales suffered.

     My prediction, is that they might make a wicked V4, but if they do, it will probably be in the 30K range as the SP2 is in the 25K range.

[RC1237V]

Yep, you nailed it.........+1

 

I understand there is a number of Honda apologists here but the bean counters are running the company now and have for years.  When was the last time Honda produced something truly interesting and exciting compared to their competitors?  Answer that question honestly, and for that you have to remove the Honda red tinted glasses.

 

The 7th gen was the only bike that interested me in the last 10 years - since the RC51.........

[RobF]

13 minutes ago, luvtoleanit said:

I'm friends with the local Honda GM and Honda's sales have tanked at his dealership.  Yamaha dealer acquisition has provided the necessary business to keep them moving.  I understand there is a number of Honda apologists here but the bean counters are running the company now and have for years.  When was the last time Honda produced something truly interesting and exciting compared to their competitors? 

 

4 minutes ago, RC1237V said:

     When they build a bad ass bike like the 7th gen, and it flops in the showrooms, they are forced to look at why, and how to not make the same mistakes next time. They (from a corporate standpoint) probably feel they got burned by consumers, and the consumers feel their product was just a bit off of what they really wanted, and did not meet expectations, so sales suffered.

 

It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall at Honda corporate in order to better understand these issues. I'm curious how much the market failure of the VFR 1200 has shaped what we've seen from Honda for the better part of the past decade. If Honda staked a significant portion of their 10-year R&D budget on that product and due to [fill in your favorite reasons here] that financial gamble went bust and resulted in some serious injury to the balance sheet, it's not hard to imagine that the motorcycle division (Powersports?) would be obligated to play it very conservatively until either the balance sheet recovered or less chastened corporate gamblers were willing place a new big bet.

[Rogue_Biker]

39 minutes ago, luvtoleanit said:

As BLS already pointed out, this is incorrect.  Not sure where you are getting your information from. 

 

I've never heard of the Aprilia RSV4 being called a porker.  The current RSVR is listed as 398 lbs dry.  Sorry that's not a porker.

 

It's also NOT closing in on 1100cc's as you mentioned.  It's a 999cc motorcycle, 999.6 CC's to be exact.  How is that closing in on 1100cc's?  Again we are talking about the CBR1000RR, a literbike, so the Aprilia equivalent is the RSV4, not some other model. 

Aprilia lists the RSV4 as 398 lbs. dry, but Motorcycle.com measured its wet weight at 456 lbs.  To compare, the CBR1000RR SP weighs 441 and the R1 is 442 wet.  Ok the Aprilia is not a "porker" in and of itself but it is compared to what's out there now.  If the '17 CBR dropped another 10 lbs., then that gap widens.

 

The Tuono is the one closing in on 1100 cc. 

 

Aprilia just revised the RSV4 in 2016 and it has more power at 179 at the wheels.  It's a sub 1,000cc.  So why does it still weight more compared to its peers?   

[Rogue_Biker]

43 minutes ago, luvtoleanit said:

When was the last time Honda produced something truly interesting and exciting compared to their competitors?  Answer that question honestly, and for that you have to remove the Honda red tinted glasses.

 

If I were buying a new Japanese literbike today, no way would I choose this new CBR over the R1.  The R1 is a MotoGP derived motorcycle, styling cues, engine, and electronics package.  And it fires at exactly the same intervals of a 90 degree V4, or, the firing order is exactly the same as the VFR800.  I think Honda missed another opportunity here. 

I personally answered this question myself last year when I bought my CBR600RR.  I chose it because of performance, styling, and reliability.  Road test comparisons from the major publications described the bike as ultra refined with smooth fueling, lightweight, sublime handling, and very easy to ride fast. I love the styling and the under seat exhaust.  I wanted a machine with all of that and I got it.  I wasn't looking for the most power and the latest in electronic gadgetry.  So like everything else, what is exciting and interesting to you is not the same for everyone else.  

 

If I were buying a new liter bike today, I would decide based on the above criteria as well.  My choice will be the same as the reasons I chose to buy my VFR & my CBR600RR.  I will be primarily interested in refinement, smoothness, perfect fueling, easy to ride fast, styling, reliability, and lightweight.  Power is a secondary concern.  They're all plenty fast.  Electronic aids takes a backseat as well.  Since I service my own bikes, I'm not interested in another V4.  The CBR1000RR and even the 600RR both have MotoGP derived designs.  They may not be V4's but a lot of what they have learned in MotoGP goes into their CBR's.  Always have.          

[Rogue_Biker]

1 hour ago, RC1237V said:

     When they build a bad ass bike like the 7th gen, and it flops in the showrooms, they are forced to look at why, and how to not make the same mistakes next time. They (from a corporate standpoint) probably feel they got burned by consumers, and the consumers feel their product was just a bit off of what they really wanted, and did not meet expectations, so sales suffered.    

I've been on this board and other ST boards a while and listened to all the griping regarding the VFR800 (mine included).  I can tell you that YES consumers did burn Honda.  They listened and when they delivered the 1200, they could not even sell enough of it on its first year.  But like I said before, it was a combination of very bad economic timing and shifting consumer taste.  The 1200 was an in-betweener, not quite a VFR800 but not quite an ST1300 either.  In 2014 they went completely back to the VFR800 and played it VERY safe.  No all new engine most likely because of what happened to the 1200.  Everyone wants 150 rwhp, shaft drive hard bags, etc.  When Honda finally delivered, people complained why is the range so low, why is it so expensive, why is it heavy, why doesn't it have cruise control like the BMW's, blah-blah-blah.  One type of bike isn't going to make everyone happy that's why!  Just listen to the CBR1000RR complaints:  it's not a V4 over and over and over.  Same with the VFR800....why isn't it 1,000cc....I'm seriously doubtful that a 1,000cc VFR would sell any more strongly than the 800.  And if we were to dream and Honda were to build us a CBR1000RR with a V4 and 180 rwhp for $18k-$22k how many more would they sell and how much of a contribution to revenue would it add compared to having the SP/SP2 versions?     

 

So one test would be how successful Ducati will be with their SS.  After all the Ducati fans get theirs, will the new sales of the SS be sustained?  If so then perhaps there is a market for a VFR1000 at the price point of $15k.     

[VFR Capt.Bob]

Competition is fierce in the motorcycle market these days. Honda did not listen to me when building the VFR1200. If they had their offerings would more closely match the Aprillia Factory Tuono and a new Futura in the V4.

 

Still the VFR800s are fantastic all arounders. Can't go wrong with any of them. The 1200 is starting to grow on me but Honda put a lot of annoying obstacles in the way of me being able to love it right off the magazine pages like my 98 VFR. I had to have that bike. I think I still do. LOL. 

[jhenley17]

The 1200 is actually starting to grow on me after all these years. It's not quite as ginormous as it looks in the showroom, looks a lot better in black/silver than red/silver, and had a lot more power with not much more weight than my 800. I'm more on the sport side of ST, so shaft drive isn't really a plus in my book, but I kind of wonder if I should have picked on up instead.

I never really saw why Honda put so much into it, though. I'm not sure of the market they were shooting for, it obviously wasn't me in my early 20s, but what they released didn't seem to really be what anyone was expecting or particularly wanting.

[Rogue_Biker]

I think Honda got the 1200 right on. 

 

But 2008-2011 were BAD economic years.  Only two things sold back then:  cheap new bikes under $6k, or expensive new bikes.  Everything else got hammered.  Even Suzuki did NOT release any new models for a whole year of 2011 because they were trying to sell left over inventory. 

[BusyLittleShop]

On 10/6/2016 at 0:41 AM, RC36Rider said:

Drawbacks to the V4 as opposed to IL4 (not exhaustive and not necessarily in order of importance) :

 

1. Cost

2. More rearward weight distribution

3. Longer wheelbase (assuming equal swingarm length) 

...

 

Still, seems to me that the very best MotoGP engineers can't really make up their minds as to which is the superior

 

Cost is the single draw back... not weight distribution nor longer
wheel base... MotoGp is the battle of engine architectures and the V4
or Yamaha's "virtual V4" are superior... Screamers I4 like the CBR are
dead and buried and no longer a part of anyone's MotoGp race plans...

 

[BusyLittleShop]

On 10/6/2016 at 8:34 AM, Rogue_Biker said:

Well, they can achieve everything with an I-4.  Why go with more complicated V4 when you can get the same with a simpler I-4?  If V4's were superior, everyone would be using it. 

 

 

If V4s were wishes then bitches would ride those instead of cheap I4s...