HONDA NC700X

733 replies [Last post]
cw47
Offline
Joined: 28/11/2011
Re: HONDA NC700X

Hi Kevin. I attended the NEC show last Tuesday with a few old biking buddies (we are all >50 years old now!) and was waxing lyrical that the Honda NC700 was by far the most intersting and relevant product on disply. They looked at me like I was on another planet and pointed to the Ducati Panigale (tag line "revolution not evolution"). Rubbish - the 1199 is merely a very accomplished development of Ducati's historical V-twin sports bike. It is very impressive, but not revolutionary. The Honda is a big step forward, is technologically interesting and, I hope, will contribute significantly to the continued success of bikes as both commuters and a source of fun.

So I was especially pleased to read your NC700 test, which boradly aligns with my position, and have forwarded the link to my friends as justification of my views. The Honda NC700 (especially with the DCT) is interesting for two groups of people - the technophiles (like me!), who are keen to pore over any new technical trends, and those wanting high quality, reliable and easy transport with a twist of fun. It is not aimed at riders like me (35+ years of experience), but I welcome it's arrival and salute Honda for their forward-thinking product planning.

IrlMike
IrlMike's picture
Offline
Joined: 28/11/2011
Re: HONDA NC700X

I get the concept of this bike & Kevin's praise for it. Fuel efficiency combined with a bike that's still fun is right up my alley. However, I'm not convinced Honda have really done well enough with this bike.

At 228Kg wet, it's still pretty heavy for its capacity/power. One look at the frame & skinny forks & swing arm & you can see it's far from optimal & not at all surprising the handling isn't great esp over bumpier tarmac. (Come & test in Ireland & you'll soon see.) Nor is there much gained in a lower seat height & an opportunity to reduce the height dimension of its front profile - at least on this variant.

I'm often playing fantasy 'what if' considering an extra bike to reduce the miles I do on my present bike. One that might still have a bit of performance but better economy for the more hum drum trips.

The bike I've had for the last 3+ years is a Triumph Legend 900, with a few easy mods to boost it to 80hp & some suspension swapping from early 2000s sportbikes. I added a 90s vintage Sprint fairing. I now have a bike that consistently delivers 55+ mpg on normal roads (& I'm not slow) & only drops ~2mpg cruising at 80/85 on a motorway. This engine has a mere 3 deg of valve overlap which helps to give it high torque at lower revs & good efficiency. Peak torque appears around 4,500 rpm (similar to the NC!), but it will pull like a train to 9k no problem when the need arises. Tho' it hardly ever needs more than 6k (if that) to overtake anything I want (4 wheels wise). Other mods include a 3-1 exhaust saving ~ 10Kg over the listed 212Kg dry weight. Even adding a few Kgs back on for the fairing I doubt it's much heavier than the NC700. I've 1 tooth to gearbox sprocket for lower cruising revs - accel seems barely affected.

I get what Kevin says about a bike that has good low/mid revs torque feeling like a bike that has a lot more power - up to a certain speed, probably, say 90mph for the this Triumph. And it does all this with only carburettors (remember those?) & good solid engine design. Real world, this does 95% of what much more powerful & thirsty bikes do, even without modern fuel injection.

The Honda seems to be tilting in this direction, but from what Kevin says - & I agree - 70mpg seems about it in normal riding. Probably at a pace slower than I'm used to, with far less capable handling & dropping to what, 60mpg on a m'way at 80/85 cruising (if you can hang on without a fairing)? Not rubbish, and way better than a lot of 'fours' but a bit underwhelming imo.

Overall, with a gap of 10 years & significant technology improvements in fuel management (fuel injection), the economy of the Honda just doesn't seem enough improvement to me.

Maybe what we really need is direct injection, like the US Motus. It will be interesting to see what that V4 does for mpg if/when customers get their hands on it. I don't need 160hp tho', half of that in a torquey, light, aero efficient package would do me nicely. But I think this would be a much better engine tech direction for Honda. And don't leave out the light but rigid frame design & decent, adjustable suspension. Just because I don't want/need 100hp+ doesn't mean I want a bike that wobbles, weaves & heaves at the first sight of a bump on a bend.

kevash
kevash's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/10/2008
Re: HONDA NC700X

I'm planning a comparison at some point when I get an NC700X in the UK, probably early in the new year (if the weather lets me...), against a BMW F650GS (the 800 twin) and also an especially economical small car, riding/driving all three at the same speed on a variety of roads including in and out of London. I'll also do the GS v the NC without the car for more real world bike riding.

I do agree that the Honda's figures are slightly disappointing so this will give them some perspective.

Rupert Bear
Rupert Bear's picture
Offline
Joined: 28/02/2011
Re: HONDA NC700X

I had a Suzuki AN 400 for three years in a chiswick to city or heathrow commute -60 mpg, auto,100 mph .Luggage space under seat stowage for A3 pilots brief case or helmet and water proofs...how have we moved on ? It cost £4250 brand new.

I grant you the braking was a bit under par in the wet as a result of failure to transfer weight onto the front wheel when anchors applied...changed front tyre rubber compound, and soon sorted that though, and it did have dual front and rear brakes from the handle bar lever.

My ideal 21st century spec would be:

Scooter body protection in poor weather...
0-40 mph in 2.5 secs, top speed need only be 100mph, Ok 120 mph...
100 mpg in genuine every day conditions
Luggage space without panniers or top box for full face helmet plus waterproofs or an 17" big laptop bag.Optional folding rear box(into under seat compartment) and smart rack system.
Range 150 miles.
Braking distance from sub 50mph to be the same as a Ford focus or similar in the wet due to suspension and tyre compound and profile design.Without ABS.
Super smart integrated colour coded premium helmet with head up sat nav(yikes) and speed display, night vision( more yikes), bluetooth ipod and smart phone connectivity that a three year old could use due to its auto detect and simple set up. Rechargable battery facility when helmet placed under seat in compartment without a plug.(bit like ye rechargable toothbrush).

Price £4000 plus £650 option for the full monty helmet.(which will reduce insurance group by a lot due to night vision etc.)

Seems a winner to me.The secret is the combination of smart helmet and chassis packaging. Every thing else exists more or less.

Rupert Bear

unconventional rebel
unconventional rebel's picture
Offline
Joined: 16/01/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

This post reminds me of the launch of the CX500. From memory the press and most 'bikers' slagged them off for weight, handling. lack of power etc..., then high milage folk like dispatch riders (inc. me) et. al. bought them by the truck load, and many are still going. It was a cheap to buy, cheap to run very comfortable & reliable (cam-chain!) bike capable of decent real world riding.

I'd like to see this bike doing the same, I think it's in the same mold and will consider one myself when the time comes. Well done Honda for introducing a new direction in riding, high time for this type too IMO.

kevash wrote:
I'm planning a comparison at some point when I get an NC700X in the UK, probably early in the new year (if the weather lets me...), against a BMW F650GS (the 800 twin) and also an especially economical small car, riding/driving all three at the same speed on a variety of roads including in and out of London.

The problem with comparing cars is that you can drive them really slowly without getting bored, just turn up the heating, settle back in the big seat & stick something good on the stero. I like cruising on a bike but there is a limit!

jcsh
Offline
Joined: 30/11/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

It sounds to me like this engine could be a very good basis for an Africa Twin replacement. It'll need a big tank though (Helloooo. KTM,!.. Why are both my ktms so thirsty and have such small tanks) marry it to a low weight frame and good suspenders and hooray! Well in fact, marry it to a 690 enduro frame, put a big tank on it and an aerodynamic screen and it would be a superb real world traveller bike. Q: why are KTM Incapable of fixing the aero on the Adv bikes?.?

BatuKMan
BatuKMan's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

I've read the review and it's a bit like a women which it's best attribute is how much money she doesn't spend, albeit a good quality, it doesn't make anyone excited or interested about.
Between the NC700X and a Versys or the NC700S and the ER-6F the Kawasaki seems to be a much more fun option for about the same amount of money and except for the tree huggers don't see the difference in mpg being that significative.

jcsh
Offline
Joined: 30/11/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

I thnk the now-problem is that the 'tree-huggers' were right. The end of cheap fuel is very very close to being here. Add to this the fact that jobs are hard to come by and when they are will most probably involve travel and the case for an uncompromised form of transport is getting stronger all the time. I have a distance of 50km (boring and police ladenm so its just a grind) travel to the nearest town, I could visit once every 2 days but I think of the fuel cost and mostly leave it to once every 4 or more. This means I see less of my family and friends than I otherwise might, and this is with fuel prices as they are now - In 3 years time fuel may well be 5 times what it is now.

Sprint special
Offline
Joined: 07/08/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

OK, let's establish one all important point. As a basic premise 2 wheels will always be more fun than 4 wheels.

So a boring motorcycle is always going to be more fun than an interesting car. It may be less interesting than a bike with more "character", but everything then depends on what you do with your motorcycle. Most ultra sporting machinery is a literal pain in the neck when it comes to threading your way through rush hour London traffic, or even sitting at a steady 80 on the motorway for 20 minutes or more. In such situations I'd rather have boring and a bit of comfort. Sod the image!

Whether fuel consumption is relevant depends on what we do with our bikes. Fuel consumption is utterly irrelevant on my track bike, but it is extremely significant, along with all the other running costs, on my ride to work bike which racks up 70 miles on most days.

Perhaps the importance of the new Honda is that it seems to come much closer to addressing the needs of what might be called "the working motorcyclist". This is a market sector which has been almost abandoned by most of the manufacturers, especially the Japanese, over a surprisingly long time. I have sometimes wondered whether there are so few "working motorcyclists" left that we have become insignificant as a market sector.

The new Honda may or may not be boring, but commuting is a fairly boring business. If I can do it and save a significant amount of money in the process, which can then be spent on other aspects of my favourite hobby, I might just be in the market for that motorcycle.

jcsh
Offline
Joined: 30/11/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

@ sprint special
I totally agree. When I was commuting from J13 M1 into Vauxhall I went through a variety of bikes, I also wanted the bike at the time to be a sunday thrasher and to be able to do the yearly week away to the continent with my other biking mates. The brief for that 'raid' was to explore as many of Europes finest roads as we could find, this meant Col's and Passes. Getting to these in reasonable time meant a certain amount of straight road, esp thru N. France of course. This was a real test for a motorcycle, and even though we were all earning good money in those days, the fuel costs were still pretty surprising at the end of the holiday when the tallies were totaled.

On my commute, honestly any bike was better than sitting in a car in a traffic Q. Inside London a twist and go scooter was much nippier than me and I soon got bored with all the stop start of traffic lights. I do own a t&g now (italjet dragster) and its a hoot in town, leaves everyone for dead at the lights :) I imagine the auto version of the NC700 will be the same.

Again I think this bike (in lighter form hopefully!) could be a great all terrain long-distance bike, esp if it can have a mapping for marginal fuel (KTM thought of this) all we need now is cheaper to run tyres and chains (hmm I wonder if a 530 chain or suchlike on a low power bike would answer this issue? KEV: any idea which size chain is fitted to this bike as std?) Then we will have a contender to my brief I think.

Finally,Here in NZ, Ive come to realise that the makers have not entirely abandoned the concept of low cost utiltitarians, Honda etc make what are know as 'farm bikes' which are 4 stroke 200cc (ish) items which have racks and heavy duty bits and bobs, Im imagining they do lots of MPG, afraid Ive no stats to prove, but they are comfy-saddled and generally outfitted to be ridden around the farm all day like a quad bike is. I read somewhere that Husky or KTM are going to introduce a 350cc trail bike - designed as an all day bike. Presumably this means greater than 10 hours between oil changes!

vroum_ninou
vroum_ninou's picture
Offline
Joined: 14/03/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

Well, here is a summary of a review by a French website: "Bilan : polyvalente oui, fun non-"

http://www.moto-net.com/actualites-motos-p3-4557-Essais-et-Tests-TEST-NC700X-:-pratique-et-volontaire-!.html

The translation being "Conclusion: versatile yes, fun no..."

As they say here, you could say it louder, but you could not say it clearer.

Are we so short of commuter bikes? How much do you expect to save on commuting compared to, say a BMW G650GS? Same power, same fuel economy, same price and negligible difference in maintenance schedule. Except the G650GS is a fun little bike, 36 kg lighter than the honda...

Sorry but commuting does not have to be boring.

Captain Scarlet
Captain Scarlet's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/12/2009
Re: HONDA NC700X

It's easy to get obsessed with either weight or power. Is a Rocket 3 a lardy 300 kilo bike? Or is a Rocket 3 an awesome 140 lb.ft engined beast? Well, it's both of course, but we tend to concentrate on one or the other; which isn't really fair. The CrossTourer is now king of torque in the Adventure stakes, but when you allow for it's weight it's lb/ft ptw ratio isn't as strong as the eXplorer. The NC700X may weight more than the G650GS, but I bet it's power is more accessible and enjoyable to use. It doesn't make it better. It doesn't make it worse. But the chances are it doesn't make it boring by default. It's just preference. As I mentioned in another thread it's a good job that we don't ride motorcycles on paper (specs). If we haven't ridden it ourselves, best to take a lead from someone you respect who has. The only person I know who fits into that category quite liked it for what it is. I dare say others will too.

jcsh
Offline
Joined: 30/11/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

@ vroum
Interesting!
I rode a 650GS in Iceland, my actual bike for the trip was a KLX650, the GS was the only bike Ive ever ridden that I was actually nodding off on! Seriously, I had to hand it back to my mate as I was closing my eyes and literally falling asleep. Now maybe this is a sign of how good it is but I think of it as how boring it was to drive. Can the Honda be the same?

vroum_ninou
vroum_ninou's picture
Offline
Joined: 14/03/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

Captain, you bought the Diavel over the Vmax, didn't you? I think that the fact that the Diavel was 80 kg lighter had probably a lot to do with your decision...

The N700 is not just heavier than the the G650GS, it's A LOT HEAVIER than the G650GS. A 670 cc bike that is 36 kg heavier than a 650 cc bike!

The redline is basically the same, the power is the same and the torque is the same with a difference of about only 500 rpm as to when it hits peak.

Even without knowing the exact gearing, I'm pretty sure which bike will be more fun.

And the French site has actually ridden it and their conclusion was that it was not a fun bike. How many times do you see that kind of statement in a motorcycle review?

Jcsh, well I can't say anything about what you felt when riding the bike. I know that I can have a lot of fun riding in the twisties on G650GS.
And if you found that bike boring, I can't see what will make the N700 more fun.

I'm repeating myself but it's fine for honda to make that kind of bike... why not? But don't make it a porker! It will be more fuel efficient and handle better! Desirable things no?

The line between scooter and motorcycles is blurring, but when others like BMW or Yamaha or Aprilia tend to make the scooter more motorcycle-like, Honda is scooterizing motorcycles: heavy, clutchless, bland...

vroum_ninou
vroum_ninou's picture
Offline
Joined: 14/03/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X
unconventional rebel
unconventional rebel's picture
Offline
Joined: 16/01/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

Everybodies idea of boring is different, indeed as is our ideas of fun. Vive la differance!

The best fun I've ever had on a bike was riding a Ural outfit. Heavy? Oh yes! underpowered? definately. Handling? don't even ask.... Reliable? Nope. Smile? Oh yes, a yard wide - when I wasn't actually laughing out loud.

It's always a bit hard judging a bike when you've not ridden it.

roundincircles
roundincircles's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/01/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

unconventional rebel wrote:
Everybodies idea of boring is different, indeed as is our ideas of fun. Vive la differance!

The best fun I've ever had on a bike was riding a Ural outfit. Heavy? Oh yes! underpowered? definately. Handling? don't even ask.... Reliable? Nope. Smile? Oh yes, a yard wide - when I wasn't actually laughing out loud.

It's always a bit hard judging a bike when you've not ridden it.

Your so right. There are many Pan Europeans on th road. Very competent, built for lifetime ownership blah blah. Was I relieved to sell mine but for many it hits the spot. No problem just take a test ride at least twice.

What we can have is prejudice gained from experience. I like my bikes to be around 200 to 220 kilo wet, have grunt two up,and be comfortable and smile inducing.........so why have I got a 360 kilo K1600......because I like bike riding.

vroum_ninou
vroum_ninou's picture
Offline
Joined: 14/03/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

unconventional rebel wrote:

It's always a bit hard judging a bike when you've not ridden it.

Yes, but the point is, the reviewer for the French site actually rode the bike! :-P

I'm not here to try and convince people not to buy that bike. I'm just saying that the exact same bike would be a lot better if it were 30 kg lighter.

That and the fact that I'm disappointed that such a leading motorcycle manufacturer as Honda does not lead the way in making lighter bikes. It does quite the contrary... :-(

jcsh
Offline
Joined: 30/11/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

vroum_ninou wrote:
Now, that is something I'm looking forward to!

http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2011/11/husqvarna-strada-paris-concept-signals-new-production-street-single/

A nice idea, but haven't KTM already cornered this market with the 690 variants? The 690 SM is a good allrounder but nothing special, the SMC is far better with its more adjustable suspension, the Duke is a good low cost to run roadbike and the versatile Enduro is probably going to be my next bike with a set of road wheels for twisty raids :)

vroum_ninou
vroum_ninou's picture
Offline
Joined: 14/03/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

BMW, through Husqvarna, clearly has KTM in its cross-hairs. I'm a big KTM fan, I own 3 of them! But more choice is always a good thing!

For me (twisties, long riding days, SPORT-touring, occasional two-up, commuting, no off-road) the perfect all rounder is the 990 SMT. I love this bike!

For sheer fun, the SMC is better if you're gonna stay in the twisties all the time, don't do very long riding days and do not need to carry much luggage.

If you actually do some off-road and also hit the twisties, then your idea of a 690 enduro and a set of road wheels is pretty good! The change of wheels will not make it instantly an SMC (front brake and suspension travel) but I don't think it would be too shabby!

roundincircles
roundincircles's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/01/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

vroum_ninou wrote:
BMW, through Husqvarna, clearly has KTM in its cross-hairs. I'm a big KTM fan, I own 3 of them! But more choice is always a good thing!

For me (twisties, long riding days, SPORT-touring, occasional two-up, commuting, no off-road) the perfect all rounder is the 990 SMT. I love this bike!

For sheer fun, the SMC is better if you're gonna stay in the twisties all the time, don't do very long riding days and do not need to carry much luggage.

If you actually do some off-road and also hit the twisties, then your idea of a 690 enduro and a set of road wheels is pretty good! The change of wheels will not make it instantly an SMC (front brake and suspension travel) but I don't think it would be too shabby!

Vroum. I sold a 690 Duke last year and miss it, so light,agil and punchy. Saw the new one last week and became lustful again. How do you rate the 690?

By the way the new one had a wide and comfortable looking seat

vroum_ninou
vroum_ninou's picture
Offline
Joined: 14/03/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

Hey Ric,

I have refused to even try the 690 Duke... I already have 3 KTMs, I don't want to buy a fourth one! :-)

Everybody I know that has one or has tried one, raves about how fun it is. How could a 690 single cylinder engine making 70 hp in a 160 kg agile chassis equipped with WP suspensions and Brembo brakes not be?

For day rides in the twisties or fun commute in fair weather, that has to be the bomb!

You're right, the new one has a lower seat that also seems to be a lot more comfy. May be that's the first step towards a 690 Duke T (Travel as in SMT)? :-)

Oh come on Ric! I'm now lusting for one!

Captain Scarlet
Captain Scarlet's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/12/2009
Re: HONDA NC700X

"Captain, you bought the Diavel over the Vmax, didn't you? I think that the fact that the Diavel was 80 kg lighter had probably a lot to do with your decision..."
... not really. Importance of specific criteria has different weighting values depending on both the genre of the vehicle in question as well as individual preference. Example: light-weight in sportsbike riders circles is the holy grail, seat padding is not. The opposite is probably true in cruiser circles.

The VMax is a hell of a lot more powerful, but that didn't sway me. The Diavel isn't a light bike, but that wasn't the key thing either. I couldn't be too precious about the lard factor when buying 300 kilo plus Harley's either. To me the way the Ducati looked, sounded, stopped and handled were key considerations, along with the hard to qualify passion that goes with such a brand over clinical efficiency - the latter of which sometimes floats my boat, dependant on where my head is at around the time of purchase! :-D

Numbers, as Kev kind of put it somewhere, are just numbers; to an extent. And I agree. Which sounds an oxymoron from someone who likes to mess about with spreadsheet stats like me. But what I mean is, that it's easy to look at say the CrossTourer and say wow 175 kilo road ready, how on earth did they manage to make it such a bloater? That could be a valid view couldn't it? It's debatable I suppose. But what isn't is that it's lighter than the bike it replaces whilst adding 200 cc and about 35 hp. A decent improvement by any other name.

"Everybodies idea of boring is different, indeed as is our ideas of fun. Vive la difference!"
... now there's a view that's hard to disagree with. As I said 'the chances are it doesn't make it boring by default. It's just preference'. I do love forums to air views and take on board what makes sense to us. But not everyone will agree with what we post, anymore than we necessarily agree with theirs. The thing I like the most about this forum is the lack of restriction, yet the immense respect and intelligent posting level. Keep it up guys!

jcsh
Offline
Joined: 30/11/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

Here in NZ tarmac often turns to gravel with not much notice at all. My 990 adv is a very good package for 2 up riding on all roads. However even though it will hang with just about any other bike in all conditions and be better than most at a lot of them, it isnt a whole lot of FUN. In that it just does it all so well. Not quite as 'as if Im watching it on TV' as I found the new MS to be, but nevertheless not raw enough for me. I tried an SMT in UK last year, back to back with the new MS - for me it was way the more fun bike and the one I wanted to own. Back here in NZ only new were available and I couldnt get a decent trade in on my ADV. So I opted for a 950 SM. A great bike but strangely I just cant get the suspension how I want it, even on full soft it still throws off line at a bump mid corner. ADV rides right over them. ADV is a bit of a handful on the loose sometimes so I dont go looking for gravel roads. So now I think I'll sell the SM and get the 690 enduro as above and keep the ADV for 2 up riding, its such a great battleship. Now if KTM could only address the blasted screen, I and a considerable number of other ADV owners would be very happy bunnies, its sooo much more fun than my old GS's.

vroum_ninou
vroum_ninou's picture
Offline
Joined: 14/03/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

Captain Scarlet wrote:

The VMax is a hell of a lot more powerful, but that didn't sway me. The Diavel isn't a light bike, but that wasn't the key thing either.

It isn't a light bike, but it is a very light bike in its category!

Captain Scarlet wrote:

To me the way the Ducati... stopped and handled were key considerations...

I'm pretty sure the way it handles has a lot to do with its weight... ;-)

Captain Scarlet wrote:

But what I mean is, that it's easy to look at say the CrossTourer and say wow 175 kilo road ready, how on earth did they manage to make it such a bloater?

I think you're missing a full 100 kg on your quote weight captain!

Captain Scarlet wrote:

That could be a valid view couldn't it? It's debatable I suppose. But what isn't is that it's lighter than the bike it replaces whilst adding 200 cc and about 35 hp. A decent improvement by any other name.

That's one way to judge progress, sure... Another way is to compare it to its current competition...
MTS 1200 Touring, 234 kg.

Yeah, numbers are numbers, but still they do mean something in real life.
A 10 kg difference is a big difference for a sportbike, not so much for a tallrounder (copyright El Captain). I think 40 kg is though...
Generally, lighter is better, definitely, but depending on your riding style or preferences the difference might not bother you.

unconventional rebel
unconventional rebel's picture
Offline
Joined: 16/01/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

vroum_ninou wrote:

....depending on your riding style or preferences the difference might not bother you.

I think this just about nails it re: the NC700. I doubt prospective buyers will be bothered, I know I wouldn't be for what I'd buy it for.

Lighter weight would be useful for tyre/fuel consumption but not if it came at a cost of increased service intervals, cost and build quality.
Of more importance is, will it stand up to high milages and staying covered in salt through the winter, 'cause I can't be bothered to wash a bike every night when I get home from work. I think this is more Honda's target buyer rather than a fun sunny day through the twisties rider.

Captain Scarlet
Captain Scarlet's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/12/2009
Re: HONDA NC700X

"Another way is to compare it to its current competition..."
... I don't see the Multistrada as the CrossTourers competition at all actually. I see the Adventure scene now clearly split three ways:

Segment: Adventure-Tourer
Machines: GS, X-Tourer, Stelvio, eXplorer, Tenere
Attributes: Chunky, pillion-friendly, touring road-orientated, comfortable, low-maintenance, big-bore, shaft-drive

Segment: Adventure-Sports
Machines: MTS12, Versys 1000, 990SMT, Tiger 800
Attributes: Decent ptw, well handling, sporting road-orientated, fairly comfortable, large engines, chain-drive

Segment: Dual-Sport
Machines: Tiger 800 XC, F800GS, KLR650
Attributes: Agile, genuine off-road in dry-weather on gravel / fire-roads ability, mid-size engines, chain-drive

Try comparing the X-Tourer with it's actual four other direct peers and it comes out similarly - topping torque and second most powerful even if it's highest (genuine compared with some competition?) weight takes the edge off slightly when ptw is considered - probably should be in the XTourer thread, so apologies to would be NC7 owners for slapping in here, but see below anyway.

People (who ride orange bikes ;-D) get very hung up on weight and power figures. And if this was a Panigale thread, then quite rightly. But it's not. Adventure-Touring riders are most probably just as interested in comfort, practicality, reliability, build quality, low-maint, tank range, smoothness, airflow and so forth; areas I'd expect the Honda to score well.

Displacement:

1200 eXplorer
1200 GS
1200 Stelvio
1200 Tenere
1200 X-Tourer

Cooling:

Liquid eXplorer
Liquid Tenere
Liquid X-Tourer
Air GS
Air Stelvio

Drive:

Shaft GS
Shaft eXplorer
Shaft Stelvio
Shaft Tenere
Shaft X-Tourer

Capacity (Fuel in Litres):

22 Tenere
21.5 X-Tourer
20 eXplorer
20 GS
18 Stelvio

Weight (kilo weights are for road-ready trim bikes. I.e. With battery, fluids and full fuel tanks):

275 X-Tourer
267 Tenere
260 eXplorer
251 Stelvio
246 GS12

Horsepower (HP claimed @ crank):

135 eXplorer
127 X-Tourer
110 GS
110 Tenere
105 Stelvio

PTW HP (bhp per kilo, power-to-weight, ratios):

0.52 eXplorer
0.46 X-Tourer
0.45 GS12
0.41 Tenere
0.42 Stelvio

Torque (lb.ft claimed @ crank):

92 X-Tourer
89 GS
89 eXplorer
87 MTS
84 Tenere
83 Stelvio

PTW Lb.ft (Lb.ft per kilo, power-to-weight, ratios):

0.36 GS
0.34 eXplorer
0.33 X-Tourer
0.33 Stelvio
0.31 Tenere

Standard Spec (U.S.):

ABS . TC . CC eXplorer
ABS . TC X-Tourer
ABS . TC Tenere
ABS GS
ABS Stelvio

Price (U.S. *=tba guess):

$16,150 GS
$15,995* eXplorer
$15,995* X-Tourer
$14,990 Stelvio
$14,500 Tenere

Naturally I will be disappointed if you don't find fault in the above stats! ;-D

vroum_ninou
vroum_ninou's picture
Offline
Joined: 14/03/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

I don't find fault in your stats, Captain, they show that compared to its competition, as defined so exhaustively by you, the Honda is the heaviest by as much as 29 kg! :-P
The GS is listed at 229 kg wet, but I'll give you the extra 17 kg (!) to account for at least the side cases and the usual options. Although, do the 275 kg listed for the Honda include options and cases?

Anyway, it will probably be a very good bike, like most honda bikes.

It just could have been better with less weight. That's all.

Captain Scarlet
Captain Scarlet's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/12/2009
Re: HONDA NC700X

I don't understand the reason for your Honda weight comment vroum - did I not only say it was the heaviest but also typed the differences for you to see too?

Regarding the BMW, you're mistaken. BMW do not list 229 as a wet weight. They list it as a kerb weight. Most manufacturers listing kerb include oil and battery but not fuel. Clearly this figure does not. All my figures are from manufacturers site, plus fuel where not explicitly stated by them. However, the actual figure for the BMW is quoted on this site as coming from Motorrad magazine who actually weighed it with full tank. I probably should have put that qualifier in, as I did previously on this site: http://www.crosstourer.com/index.php/topic,865.0.html

I think we all agree it's likely to excel perfunctorily speaking and that it probably would gain more than it lost if the end product weighed less. That is certainly a valid comment of yours, but perspective wise I think it can be normalised by saying that the same criticism can rightly be levelled at the Tenere, eXplorer, Stelvio and more than likely the forthcoming liquid-cooled GS too. It's perhaps fortunate that weight won't be the highest importance criteria for most buyers of the Adventure-Tourer segment as I've deemed it.

If we need to talk more CT, lets put it in the right thread...

vroum_ninou
vroum_ninou's picture
Offline
Joined: 14/03/2010
Re: HONDA NC700X

My comment about the Honda's weight was in response to your assertion that it should not be compared to bikes like the multistrada. I was just saying tongue in cheek that even using your own market (sub)segmentation of tallrounders (copyright you), it was still heavier by as much as 29 kg.

Regarding the GS weight, I think that you more mistaken than I am. First, in Spain, the technical documentation for motorcycles requires the manufacturer to list the wet weight, gas included. We have a fleet of more than 50 R1200GS so I have seen that data quite a bit! It clearly states 229 kg.
Now, as mentioned earlier, this is the base bike, with no options and no accessories (cases).
Second, BMW does not list a kerb weigh. BMW does list a dry weight (Unladen weight without fluids) AND a wet weight (According to guideline 93/93/EWG with all fluids, fuelled with at least 90% of usable tank volume).
You can check the data for yourself from the horse's mouth right here: http://www.bmw-motorrad.com/com/en/
Click on "motorcycle" and pick your model. There will be a "Technical Data" tab below the picture of the model. You will see the info there. It lists the R1200GS at 234 kg wet weight with the definition of what wet weight is at the bottom: "According to guideline 93/93/EWG with all fluids, fuelled with at least 90% of usable tank volume."
There is a 5 kg discrepancy with the 229 kg listed on the Spanish official paperwork for this model. Not sure exactly why.

Again, I'll gladly grant you your stated weight of 246 kg, since this is a more realistic weight in the sense that most R1200GS are sold with a bunch of options like ESA or ABS that do add weight, and accessories like top case and side cases that add even more. Motorrad weighted an R1200GS with a full tank, but also with options and possibly a top case or side cases.
But then again, what does your Honda stated weight include? Does it include options and cases?

Anyway, I agree with you, and do think that the Tenere is too heavy. Still, the honda is heavier yet.

That was just to clarify that I don't pull those numbers out of my ***! :-P

Numbers don't tell the whole story, far from it (although they do tell part of the story), so you'll let us know your impressions when you try the honda!