[ballward]

British article gives 62kW power and 106 Nm torque which convert ( I think) to 83HP at 6000 rpm and 78 Ft Lb at 4500rpm

 

[sleepngbear]

That's about what other sites are reporting -- 84 hp's, 78 torques. But real rideability depends on gearing and where that torque is; and everything I've read says the torque comes up at pretty low RPM and stays mostly flat right up through 4500. Honda doesn't usually put out many dogs from a performance standpoint; this thing may not set records in the quarter-mile, but I'm expecting it will do alright for itself.

 

[rosy thorn]

worst comes to worst you can fiddle with the sprockets...

 

[sleepngbear]

worst comes to worst you can fiddle with the sprockets...

Which sprocket, the one at the front of the shaft, or the one in the back???

If performance really isn't up to snuff, I'm sure there will be tuning kits, after-market air boxes and exhausts soon enough, especially if it sells well. Plus whatever there is out there for the ST I'll bet will be easily adaptable to the CTX.

 

[SoCalRyder]

Now how much longer till we see those tuning stuff? and what brands would you guys expect to come out with them?

 

[sleepngbear]

Now how much longer till we see those tuning stuff? and what brands would you guys expect to come out with them?

Dunno. But here are just a few of the goodies you can find for the ST1300; I'd expect that it shouldn't be long before they are available for the CTX, if they don't plug right in as is.

ST-Owners.com Forums

Honda ST1300 Motorcycle Exhaust | MotoSport

HP Dyno Boost Performance Chip Honda ST1300 VFR800 vtec VT750C Shadow CBR929 RR | eBay

 

[cheeken]

not too concerned. i think it is fast enough

its not a small engine

 

[rosy thorn]

Which sprocket, the one at the front of the shaft, or the one in the back???

If performance really isn't up to snuff, I'm sure there will be tuning kits, after-market air boxes and exhausts soon enough, especially if it sells well. Plus whatever there is out there for the ST I'll bet will be easily adaptable to the CTX.

in the font OBVIOUSLY HEHEHEHHH

mental slip up, although you COULD with the right know how and a whole lot of time to waste hehehh

 

[sleepngbear]

in the font OBVIOUSLY HEHEHEHHH

mental slip up, although you COULD with the right know how and a whole lot of time to waste hehehh

Well, on that subject, what's always surprised me is that they (or some third party) never offered replacement final drive gears for shaft-drive bikes. The VTX1800 guys were lucky in that regard, because the VTX1300 had a lower ratio set from the factory that made all the gears in the 1800 taller and was a direct swap for the original. A company that built trikes out of the 1300's used to sell the clusters to 1800 guys looking to relax the ride a bit more. I was always happy with mine (although red line came up REAL quick in 1st when you whacked it), but plenty of guys did swap them out. The original Valk had a stump-pulling final drive out of a cement truck that I know a lot of riders would like to have been able to stretch out. Then again I guess I'm not really that surprised -- there's probably nowhere near the demand for it to justify the R&D that would be needed for each individual model to make it cost-effective and affordable to the average rider that wanted a change.

 

[csdexter]

Designing and machining a chain drive sprocket is child's play compared to a pair of hypoid gears for a shaft drive. Like you said, it would never be cost effective for any other company than the OEM to invest in R&D and tooling to get it right.

 

[westgl]

84H.P. and 78 lbs/ft of torque.

I would be ok with that power.

If that torque figure were to be mostly had at off idle, and right up to red line.

Definitely a de-tuned version of the ST1300.

Which I dont mind if Honda were to be able to sqeek out some fairly impressive increases in MPG figures.

Any bike that has a Power to weight ratio of less than 10-Lbs /H.P. will move pretty good.

The CTX1300 has about a 8.7-lbs / H.P. ratio.

Not to many cars, that get 40mpg, in that Power to weight category.

Like 50++ MPG.

I am also interested in the torque being were I need it most and making the engine extremely efficient.

 

[bob]

See the review at my post HERE.
There is a dyno chart in that review. I still am firm about the lapse in the reviewer's judgment in not starting the dyno measurement at 2000 rpm or below rather than starting the capture at 2800 rpm. The chart as it is shows torque over 70 lb ft from at least 2800 rpm to around 5500 rpm. I would dare to say it's still about 70 lb ft from 2500 rpm or maybe a little less. 90% of your riding would be well within that range. In 5th gear at 45 mph I am at about 2500 rpm, and at 65 mph I am still only about 3500 rpm! So have LOTS of grunt left to go.

 

[westgl]

Thanks Bob,

Great site and they provide the most info and Different info from what every other site has on it, That site actually had some very good details, that i had been looking for.

Torque at 2800 is about 60+ lbs/ft

and it looks like it drops rather abrutly but cant really tell where it levels of at,
so if it still made 40-50-lbs 1800rpm it would have very good roll on power and pull well in top gear from a lower Rpm.
I would think pull in 5th from 2k rpm would still be good if you for got to down shift.

or less shifting riding through the twisties, you could stay in gear longer, so less shifting.

I like it.

MPG: 86 PON min. (low/avg/high) 33.2/40.2/46.3
Estimated Range: 205 miles
Indicated RPM at 60 MPH: 3,250

 

[bob]

On many of my trips out of town on county highways I'll go through small towns where the speed limit drops to 35 mph for a while and if there are no stops I'll just leave it in 5th gear and on the way out of town pull out back up to 55 mph no problem. I think the tach shows about 2000 rpm at 35 mph in 5th gear and it pulls away just fine. The torque curve as shown in that review (at the bottom) is very flat. I've said it here and on the ST forum that the CTX has more torque and hp than the ST at below 5000 rpm, about the same AT 5000 rpm, and the ST pulls away above 5000 rpm. But on the CTX I'd be going faster than any legal highway speed, about 90 mph I think, at that engine speed. The CTX still has just a little torque beyond that before it drops off much.

 

[westgl]

That is some good Information you provided Bob.
Real world riding and a comparison to the closest bike on the road.

I like to ride a bike on its torque, I will rarely go above 5k rpms during normal commutes, but also like to stretch a bikes legs every so often

one of my bikes is a 86' GL1200 4-cylinder Goldwing that is now naked, and Now at 550-lbs
97 h.p. @7000-rpm, 80.5 ft lbs @ 5500-rpm
Redline 7500- rpm
(0-60 in 5.1 sec. stock at 700-Lbs stock weight)

I wonder what the 0-60 time is for the CTX1300, non traction control model vs Traction control bike.

On many of my trips out of town on county highways I'll go through small towns where the speed limit drops to 35 mph for a while and if there are no stops I'll just leave it in 5th gear and on the way out of town pull out back up to 55 mph no problem. I think the tach shows about 2000 rpm at 35 mph in 5th gear and it pulls away just fine. The torque curve as shown in that review (at the bottom) is very flat. I've said it here and on the ST forum that the CTX has more torque and hp than the ST at below 5000 rpm, about the same AT 5000 rpm, and the ST pulls away above 5000 rpm. But on the CTX I'd be going faster than any legal highway speed, about 90 mph I think, at that engine speed. The CTX still has just a little torque beyond that before it drops off much.