New Honda CTX700

[Quattro Pete]

It has the same engine/platform as the NC700X released last year, but a significantly lower seat height, which I particularly find appealing as I'm fairly short.

Not crazy about the version with fairing, but the naked (CTX700N) version in black looks kind of cool, IMO, and I like the laid back cruiser-like seating position.

The engine (half of Honda Jazz engine) is a bit odd though. Fairly low powered with a 6.5K rpm redline. Alas, for someone not looking into making a lot of noise, maybe it's OK.

I am looking for something a bit more sporty, but still with low seat height, and I'm not really sure if this CTX700 would be much of an upgrade from my current Vulcan 500. I guess I need to check it out when it shows up at the dealers. I could also consider the NC700X, alas, the seat may be too tall for me. I sat on a comparable Kawi Versys once, and it did feel too tall.

What does everyone think about the CTX700? It's considered a beginners bike, but I really don't need a crotch rocket.

http://www.cycleworld.com/2013/02/08/2014-honda-ctx700-lineup-first-look/

The 3.17 gal tank is a bit of a disappointment, even considering the bike's good MPG, but most of my trips are in the areas where finding gas stations isn't much of a problem.

 

[Danno]

Sweet looking ride. I like the way the engine is almost laying flat to reduce the center of gravity.

 

[newfiecharger]

Looks to be a nice bike. Was looking at the NC700 but GF may wait and have a look at this once released. I currently have a Super Tenere, a little overkill for my use. Honda is really bring out some nice bikes last year in the NC700 and now the CB500X and F models. They are really making a innovative push for market share and possibly starting to listen to customers.

 

[Robenstein]

If you like the styling, and want a more modern bike (21st century versus 1980's vintage engineering)I would say ride it and see how if feels. May not rev as high, but you just need to see how its power curve feels. I kinda dig the looks too. Modern design with cruiser ergonomics.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: Robenstein
but you just need to see how its power curve feels.

Yeah, agreed. On paper, the power/torque curves look pretty good for this engine. Motorcycle.com did a comparo of NC700X (same engine as CTX700) against Versys, and included this power/torque chart:

 

[Robenstein]

I have that same motor in my Triumph Speedmaster as they tested, but I added some better pipes and a better tune in the ECM. Feels so rider friendly. I have a feeling that is what Honda is after with this. Not the fastest thing in the world, but it gets out of its own way without much of an issue.

 

[Spazdog]

parallel twin.

Everybody laughed when Kawasaki introduced the EX500 parallel twin in 1987. Nevermind that it performed virtually identical to the V-Four VF500F Interceptor.

Vulcan 500 Parallel twin cruiser? They laughed then too. Nope people would want a V-twin. Again nevermind that the 500 outperformed many cruisers double it's size.

Looks like Honda has a couple of parallel twins now too.

I'm not opposed to it. Just wish they had put the footpegs further back where they belong.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Just wish they had put the footpegs further back where they belong.

They did on the NC700X:

 

[HerrStig]

Originally Posted By: Danno
Sweet looking ride. I like the way the engine is almost laying flat to reduce the center of gravity.
Kinda like the K bikes.

 

[Silverado12]

I really like that bike. I'm thinking that these are being designed for us older riders who can't sit in a crouched position very long. I like the sport bikes, but can't get comfortable on them. I also like a lot of legroom, and the CTX 700 with the forward footpegs looks like it would be good for long rides.

 

[Spazdog]

I'm not talking about rearsets. I mean footpegs in a more natural equine riding position. Straight down so you can lift yourself off the seat at a rough railroad crossing and you don't have to get pounded on the coccyx.

Couple of decades ago, it wasn't just the UJMs that had that seating position, it was virtually every motorcycle. There wasn't any elaborate linkage back to the shifter. It was a simple L-shaped lever mounted directly on the input.

I just don't personally like having the footpegs mounted up in front of the engine. It's unnatural to me like having the stirrups in front of the horse's neck. I usually end up fighting to keep my feet on the pegs at freeway speed and for some reason, many forward controls have a weird tilt to the brake pedal to where I have to reach my toe up and in to use the rear brake.

 

[Robenstein]

It is only unnatural if you are really stretched out there in regards to forward controls. On most UJM bikes I don't have much legroom. I can see how anyone under 6'0 would like them though. To me forward controls are much more comfy. Only bad part, as mentioned, is you cannot lift up on the pegs for rough bumps. That is when you want a nice plush seat.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
I'm not talking about rearsets. I mean footpegs in a more natural equine riding position. Straight down so you can lift yourself off the seat at a rough railroad crossing and you don't have to get pounded on the coccyx.

To be honest, this CTX700 appears to have a similar footpeg/leg position to my Vulcan 500. I actually don't find it difficult at all to lift myself off the seat when crossing rough terrain.

 

[Mik]

Bears a striking resemblence to the ill-fated DN-01.... not exatly a compliment.....

 

[Quattro Pete]

Yeah, I've seen people compare it to the old DN-01. Alas, this CTX is half the price, 100 lbs lighter, and can be had with a traditional manual trans.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: newfiecharger
Honda is really bring out some nice bikes last year in the NC700 and now the CB500X and F models.

Yeah, the CB500X looks quite interesting as well and it has a slightly lower seat height compared to NC700X. Alas, Honda still hasn't provided an actual release date for CB500X in the US...

 

[simple_gifts]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog
parallel twin.

Everybody laughed when Kawasaki introduced the EX500 parallel twin in 1987. Nevermind that it performed virtually identical to the V-Four VF500F Interceptor.

Vulcan 500 Parallel twin cruiser? They laughed then too. Nope people would want a V-twin. Again nevermind that the 500 outperformed many cruisers double it's size.

Looks like Honda has a couple of parallel twins now too.



I don't much about engines, but my assumption was parallel twins would have a even crank rotation and equally spaced firing of the cylinders. Apparently this is not the case. The NC700 being a "270 degree crank." Can anyone explain why this is a design feature and how it impacts the performance of the engine?

Am I misunderstanding it?

edit: i guess this explains it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straight-twin_engine

I would think the out of balance would prohibit this design.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Yeah, they basically wanted to mimic the feel of a V-twin. This document has some more detailed info about the development of this 670cc Honda engine:

http://www.honda-geneve.com/catalog/2012/Integra/116052.pdf

Quote:
To concretely arrive at a “ride to suit cultivated tastes,” a choice had to be made between even and uneven firing intervals. Uneven interval firing with a 270º phase crank was chosen over orderly and smooth even-interval firing in order to achieve a throb close to that of a 2-cylinder V- engine, because this would result in an emotional yet comforting means of daily transportation.


Quote:

With a 270º phase crank, eliminating primary vibration through the mutually reciprocating motion of pistons between two cylinders is theoretically impossible; however, secondary vibration can be eliminated in this way. By adding a uniaxial primary balancer, however, it is possible to eliminate both the primary and secondary vibrations with a 270º phase crank.

Incidentally, when a balancer is uniaxial, a primary coupling vibration proportionate to the distance between the crank and the balancer shaft remains, but if a second axis is introduced using a biaxial primary balancer, it is possible to eliminate this vibration. Since the 270º phase crank does not generate any secondary vibration, elimination of the primary vibration allows the engine to have as little vibration as the CBR1000RR’s in-line, 4-cylinder engine with a secondary balancer attached or the GL1800 GOLD WING’s horizontally opposed, 6-cylinder engine.

However, in order to achieve the emotional comfort of a slightly rough throb and satisfy the development concept of a “ride to suit cultivated tastes,” the team made a deliberate decision to keep the vibration and go with the uniaxial primary balancer instead of its vibration-eliminating biaxial cousin.

It's interesting to see the thought process that went into this and the decisions they made to appease the potential target market.