[sleepngbear]

Not a whole lot new here, other than mention of 84 hp @6000 rpm, which I hadn't seen before. Not bad, I guess, but then torque and gearing are more important for moving that kind of weight anyway.

For your reading enjoyment:

http://www.moto123.com/motorcycle-reviews/article,2014-honda-ctx1300-preview.spy?artid=163044

 

[Bigdawg]

I doubt that horsepower figure is accurate. The ST1300 typically is listed with around 125 horsepower and 85 foot pounds of torque. If honda took 40 horsepower away from that wonderful motor I will be much less interested.

 

[sleepngbear]

Yeah, I thought that was kind of a big drop from the ST's numbers, too. Though there are many heavy cruisers out there with lower. I'd be more interested in low-end grunt off the line. More to come, I'm sure!

 

[bob]

Depends if that HP reading is SAE or BHP. The ST1300 HP varies depending who you're reading. Over on the ST-Owners board there was a discussion about the HP and torque, many actually. On one thread it was listed as 125 SAE HP, 112 BHP which is still higher than 84 HP (BHP?). An older chart on the Sport Rider web site comparing the ST1300 with 2 other competitors indicated dyno reading peaking at 112.9 HP @8000 RPM. Don't know how the CTX1300 really compares with all that until we see some dyno tests but I expect it to be significantly less than the ST, yet more than many cruisers. A GW has 118 HP @5500 RPM but expect that bike to have more grunt anyway being significantly bigger cc.

 

[sleepngbear]

HP numbers alone can be very misleading. That being said, now I'm looking back at hp & torque ratings for the stock 1600 Thunderbird, and it too is 84 hp (for some reason I thought it was 90 -- could be thinking of the VTX1800) -- but 108 lb/ft of torque. A 1300 V-4 will have a hard time getting near that torque number; but the right gearing, especially in the lower gears could make up for most of that.

Only one thing is going to answer this definitively, and that's to get butts in the saddle and crack it for ourselves.

 

[SoCalRyder]

HP numbers alone can be very misleading. That being said, now I'm looking back at hp & torque ratings for the stock 1600 Thunderbird, and it too is 84 hp (for some reason I thought it was 90 -- could be thinking of the VTX1800) -- but 108 lb/ft of torque. A 1300 V-4 will have a hard time getting near that torque number; but the right gearing, especially in the lower gears could make up for most of that.

Only one thing is going to answer this definitively, and that's to get butts in the saddle and crack it for ourselves.

DCT with that engine should do good, i think it's one of the better or best ways to push the engine and really get the most from it.

 

[DonaldD]

I'm not too worried about the hp of the CTX1300. I don't think that Honda would do us over and take away that much power from the engine. Like we've been saying though, it is more about the torque really. I'm in a place similar to you guys: let me take it for a ride and I'll let you know what I really think.

 

[rosy thorn]

i just stumbled into this:

it (CTX1300) puts out around 83 hp at 6000 rpm and 109 Nm (80 ft-lbs of torque at 4500 rpm. Electronic traction control helps you keep the rubber side down.

http://canadamotoguide.com/2013/11/04/eicma-update-hondas-new-ctx1300/#_

 

[sleepngbear]

i just stumbled into this:

it (CTX1300) puts out around 83 hp at 6000 rpm and 109 Nm (80 ft-lbs of torque at 4500 rpm. Electronic traction control helps you keep the rubber side down.

EICMA update: Honda's new CTX1300 - Canada Moto Guide

Well, that's not likely to give anyone a case of whiplash for cracking the wick too hard, but it should do alright.

 

[Bigdawg]

Again, I'm skeptical. To my knowledge Honda hasn't released HP and torque numbers yet, but they have stated that the CTX motor will make more torque than the St1300 and the torque figure mentioned above of 80 is less than the ST1300.

 

[sleepngbear]

Again, I'm skeptical. To my knowledge Honda hasn't released HP and torque numbers yet, but they have stated that the CTX motor will make more torque than the St1300 and the torque figure mentioned above of 80 is less than the ST1300.

Good catch. Then I must concur with your skepticism.

 

[cheeken]

well i was expecting more... i will wait for official numbers on the honda website or dynos.

 

[bob]

It also matters at what RPM they are measuring torque. It may be at the same RPM the ST1300 is less than the CTX1300, at least at the lower end for this implementation of the v4 engine. I am also looking to see the dyno results. My guess is that the CTX13 will have higher torque at lower RPM and then flatten out or fall off sooner compared to the ST13. That would be fine for me. I ride my ST1100 like a tourer or even a cruiser anyway. I know I keep my RPM lower than many ST riders and shift sooner too. Since I pull a camper sometimes I really want more power at lower RPM so if that is what this bike has

 

[SoCalRyder]

It also matters at what RPM they are measuring torque. It may be at the same RPM the ST1300 is less than the CTX1300, at least at the lower end for this implementation of the v4 engine. I am also looking to see the dyno results. My guess is that the CTX13 will have higher torque at lower RPM and then flatten out or fall off sooner compared to the ST13. That would be fine for me. I ride my ST1100 like a tourer or even a cruiser anyway. I know I keep my RPM lower than many ST riders and shift sooner too. Since I pull a camper sometimes I really want more power at lower RPM so if that is what this bike has

Good point. Camper is something I have yet to get and go out into the woods in. Power in low RPM range definitely helps.

 

[Davetac1]

I read that the ST1300 made either 124CHP [crankshaft horse power] or BHP [rear wheel horse power] and the CTX model [slightly detuned for touring] made 117 CHP or BHP,but can't remember which!! DUH!! At any rate either or is pretty respectable.My Bird makes around 98 HP at the crank and 85 BHP at the rear wheel,which is also pretty respectable.And when driven nice,the Bird will easily do well over 50MPG.[I got a BEST of 56.2 mpg]So let's hope that the CTX will be somewheres in that range. Dave!!!

 

[SoCalRyder]

I read that the ST1300 made either 124CHP [crankshaft horse power] or BHP [rear wheel horse power] and the CTX model [slightly detuned for touring] made 117 CHP or BHP,but can't remember which!! DUH!! At any rate either or is pretty respectable.My Bird makes around 98 HP at the crank and 85 BHP at the rear wheel,which is also pretty respectable.And when driven nice,the Bird will easily do well over 50MPG.[I got a BEST of 56.2 mpg]So let's hope that the CTX will be somewheres in that range. Dave!!!

would you ever consider getting a baseline dyno run?
might be a good idea just to see where it's really at.

 

[Davetac1]

Why would I wanna dyno it?? I'm not running on the track,I'm driven on the street.Plus,at this point in my life,I really don't care how much HP it makes or how fast it'll go.Those days are loooooooooooong gone for me.lol I'm happy if she has decent power,gives a decent ride,gets decent fuel mileage,AND,only requires reasonable maintenance,unlike some machines on the market.

In my younger days there was never any such thing as too much HP or speed as there was never enough as we always wanted more.lol And then,I've seen too many fatals where speed was the factor and it was tuff if you were the guy who had to tell the operator's love ones that they weren't comin home anymore.That job sucked BIG TIME.Today,I'm just happy I can swing my leg over the saddle to mount,dismount,and ride my scooter,never mind worry about how fast it'll go.lol lol I know a lot of guys close to my age,and some even younger,who have a hard time mounting, dismounting,and holding their scooters upright at an intersection.I don't have that problem----------YET!! lol lol Dave!!!

 

[rosy thorn]

like bob said all about that low down grunt.

Honda Worldwide | CTX | CTX1300 Engine

The CTX1300 is equipped with a liquid-cooled V4 1261.4-cc engine-the same engine type adopted on the STX1300.
For equipping the CTX1300 with this engine, the development team has successfully improved torque in the low- to mid-speed ranges in order to achieve engine characteristics for even better ease of handling on city streets.

consistent with what you guys said above...

although also of note the link mentions an altered compression ratio allow the use of reg fuel, could be a factor...

 

[SoCalRyder]

more torque in the low-to-mid speed range = more fun during regular commutes, no need to find some big open road