ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Bikes > Road warriors
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-01-2012, 02:05 AM   #2521
bluesman
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Location: Hoegaarden, Belgium
Oddometer: 3,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTDTDI View Post
Your right bluesman, but the long stroke helps provide torque at lower revs. The torque at lower revs makes this a enjoyable ride.
I short shift my Goldwing also but if I shift into a higher gear to soon, my GL will let me know it. The NCX will just accelerate out of it without any complaints.
My Goldwing has 77.4 ft. lbs and the NCX has 45.7 ft.lbs. but its where the peak torque is that makes this a little tractor and a blast to ride.

The torque curve on the NCX is one of the best things about it. The other is the low center of gravity.
If you have driven diesels you can understand where I'm coming from.
I am driving ONLY diesels. For last 8 years.
Nobody doubt that long stroke motor moves torque down.

But the torque curve/location of this motor is not any more spectacular that 100 motors out there. This is popular opinion - but check actual motor graphs.
So here is "long in the tooth" Vstrom vs NC


And here is let say bike I have now - Tiger 800



and here is F800ST dyno


I won't even pull F800R dyno in.
Granted, those bikes are more expensive. Costs are not reason I brought it up of course.

Again - not slagging off NC, it totally does it's job well, just trying to get to technical part instead of marketing talk that people so gladly accept.

And - check gearing rates for NC. This will give you more to think of.
Lot of talk about short shifting in fact has lot more to do with gearing than motor.
bluesman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 02:07 AM   #2522
Mike Cash
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jul 2012
Oddometer: 121
I drive a sixteen liter diesel for a living; I know exactly what you mean.
Mike Cash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 02:09 AM   #2523
bluesman
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Location: Hoegaarden, Belgium
Oddometer: 3,145
This is better detailed graph than bol...s "estimate" on first one I posted.
bluesman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 03:04 AM   #2524
turbodieseli4i6
Gnarly Adventurer
 
turbodieseli4i6's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Location: SW Missouri USA
Oddometer: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesman View Post
I am driving ONLY diesels. For last 8 years.
Nobody doubt that long stroke motor moves torque down.

But the torque curve/location of this motor is not any more spectacular that 100 motors out there. This is popular opinion - but check actual motor graphs.
So here is "long in the tooth" Vstrom vs NC


And here is let say bike I have now - Tiger 800



and here is F800ST dyno


I won't even pull F800R dyno in.
Granted, those bikes are more expensive. Costs are not reason I brought it up of course.

Again - not slagging off NC, it totally does it's job well, just trying to get to technical part instead of marketing talk that people so gladly accept.
And - check gearing rates for NC. This will give you more to think of.
Lot of talk about short shifting in fact has lot more to do with gearing than motor.

Thanks for the torque curves!
I see now why I like it so much, it does have the torque just off idle where it takes the SV almost 6k rpm to get to where the NC starts at.
Its nice not having to rev the piss out of a engine to get it to move.

turbodieseli4i6 screwed with this post 08-01-2012 at 03:16 AM
turbodieseli4i6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 03:10 AM   #2525
turbodieseli4i6
Gnarly Adventurer
 
turbodieseli4i6's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Location: SW Missouri USA
Oddometer: 420
The thing that I like about the torque on the NC is its almost flat.
I'm not knocking any other bike out there. Its just the NC is just so easy and enjoyable to ride.
Its going to be hard to beat for $7,000.
turbodieseli4i6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 03:53 AM   #2526
GrahamD
Beastly Adventurer
 
GrahamD's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2009
Location: Blue Mnts Ozstralia
Oddometer: 5,004
Now If you go and find some graphs of pumping losses, intake resonance and volumetric efficiency across the range we might have a better idea about what Honda did in the grander scheme of things.

If a bike has VVT and Variable intake length then the low RPM efficiencies may make anything work at low RPM because most of the intake variables can be normalized over a large RPM band.

But without that wiz bang stuff you are pretty well stuck making a compromise the wider the RPM band you want to use.

Generally for a given intake length, width, valve overlap, exhaust tuning etc you have a set point where the engine is working best. If that is at lower RPM then the fuel economy will be better in that zone and so will the torque.

This means that the engine will make less power. If an engine is tuned for high RPM then it WILL work at lower RPM but the intake charge will generally be less efficient there.

That doesn't mean that the engine is making nothing but it may mean that the compression and combustion isn't optimal at those revs AND fuel is not being burnt as efficiently.

While a 125 race bike could be made to make as much power as the NC the riding experience would be very "high tension" while the NC will be very relaxed, meaning after a few hours one person is getting drained and the other isn't.

But this king of argument has being going on about fast fours Vs big Iron in the car world for years.
__________________
"It's better to ride a boring bike than push an interesting one" ... Canuman

"I just may as well admit that my other bikes are toast. I don't ride them. Plain and simple. I didn't want this. It wasn't the plan." - snakebitten
GrahamD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 04:36 AM   #2527
bluesman
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Location: Hoegaarden, Belgium
Oddometer: 3,145
I know quite well whole variable intake story.
I used to have VTI Civic. Which is VERY different from same period VTEC civic as it has 3 stage variable intake.
Now, NC700 does not have that full-variable VTI. From what I read everywhere NC have quite basic version. 2 timings, that's all.
I worked in Bandit 400 Vtec, CB400 with Vtec (grey import) VFR with "dumb" VTEC that everyone hated...so I do understand how it helps. I think it is not wiz bang stuff thou it helps indeed. This also explains some rpm limitations.
I also firmly believe that well designed motor can do it no matter what. VVT or not.
But this also means that people, that now talk of "bettering" performance of NC and converting it to something else won't have much luck doing so. This is not the point of that bike.
And to proof this I did post before curves of Tiger 800. Check this out and compare. It does make significantly more torque at same rpms, starting from same rpms and ending much further. New Beemer twins same. And they all have same flat wide torque curve. New bikes achieve that by different methods.
Still, at price tag for NC it is hard to beat indeed. Anyway - more the merrier.
bluesman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 05:01 AM   #2528
Cortez
BAZINGA!
 
Cortez's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Location: Croatia
Oddometer: 6,751
Here's something new for the NC series, announced 2 days ago.

__________________
'08 Yamaha FZ6n S2 ABS

SOLD: '03 Peugeot Speedfight2, '07 Kawasaki ER6F ABS, '06 Kymco Agility 125, '12 Kymco Downtown 300i ABS
My Flickr gallery --- My 500px gallery
Cortez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 05:20 AM   #2529
GrahamD
Beastly Adventurer
 
GrahamD's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2009
Location: Blue Mnts Ozstralia
Oddometer: 5,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesman View Post
I know quite well whole variable intake story.
I used to have VTI Civic. Which is VERY different from same period VTEC civic as it has 3 stage variable intake.
Now, NC700 does not have that full-variable VTI. From what I read everywhere NC have quite basic version. 2 timings, that's all.
I worked in Bandit 400 Vtec, CB400 with Vtec (grey import) VFR with "dumb" VTEC that everyone hated...so I do understand how it helps. I think it is not wiz bang stuff thou it helps indeed. This also explains some rpm limitations.
I also firmly believe that well designed motor can do it no matter what. VVT or not.
But this also means that people, that now talk of "bettering" performance of NC and converting it to something else won't have much luck doing so. This is not the point of that bike.
And to proof this I did post before curves of Tiger 800. Check this out and compare. It does make significantly more torque at same rpms, starting from same rpms and ending much further. New Beemer twins same. And they all have same flat wide torque curve. New bikes achieve that by different methods.
Still, at price tag for NC it is hard to beat indeed. Anyway - more the merrier.
I am not saying that the NC is Vtec or any of the bikes put up in the torque curve comparisons, I was taking about what happens to the efficiencies of "standard" motors (Just plain cams, fixed intake runs etc).

While you may be able to extract a similar amount of torque from a "higher revving" engine the efficiency (fuel input to do the work) may not be as high at those same engine speeds.

I also make the assumption that after 60 odd years Honda knows a bit about motors and how to make engineering compromises in that department.

I also wonder what the bike would be like if they employed continuous variable valve timing and lift AND variable intake technology on the bike. Probably not as cheap as it is now.

On the other hand they could do a bit better by running 12.5:1 compression and forcing people to use only top level premium but that may not equate to "economical motoring"

Maybe an economy war will break out and we will see.
__________________
"It's better to ride a boring bike than push an interesting one" ... Canuman

"I just may as well admit that my other bikes are toast. I don't ride them. Plain and simple. I didn't want this. It wasn't the plan." - snakebitten
GrahamD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 05:27 AM   #2530
Cortez
BAZINGA!
 
Cortez's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Location: Croatia
Oddometer: 6,751
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrahamD View Post
I also make the assumption that after 60 odd years Honda knows a bit about motors and how to make engineering compromises in that department.
+1

It certainly doesn't feel like an engine that was thrown together without
thinking about it for some time.
__________________
'08 Yamaha FZ6n S2 ABS

SOLD: '03 Peugeot Speedfight2, '07 Kawasaki ER6F ABS, '06 Kymco Agility 125, '12 Kymco Downtown 300i ABS
My Flickr gallery --- My 500px gallery
Cortez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 05:40 AM   #2531
pachap
Studly Adventurer
 
pachap's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: Crap-vannah, GA
Oddometer: 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by twinrider View Post
Nice demo showing that skill trumps inseam.

That is awesome. I wish I were half that good.

Yeah, just wanted to say I'd rather ride a bike than argue about fuel mileage.
__________________
What's the difference between fibromyalgia and MS? Neither does my doctor....
pachap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 05:53 AM   #2532
bluesman
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Location: Hoegaarden, Belgium
Oddometer: 3,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrahamD View Post

I also make the assumption that after 60 odd years Honda knows a bit about motors and how to make engineering compromises in that department.



Maybe an economy war will break out and we will see.
I certainly hope so on both accounts. Let's see how it will unwrap

I did ride NC, I did not like it (I think it will be unfair to mention it here as I do not plan to buy one) but I fully accept there is plenty of people that do like it and that fits them as glove. That indeed may lead to competition. Which is good.
bluesman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 07:28 AM   #2533
sendler
Studly Adventurer
 
sendler's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Location: Syracuse, NY USA
Oddometer: 662
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesman View Post
But the torque curve/location of this motor is not any more spectacular that 100 motors out there. This is popular opinion - but check actual motor graphs.
So here is "long in the tooth" Vstrom vs NC

Thanks for the charts. You can see that the NC700 engine is indeed totally different than most other bikes which are normally designed with high power vs displacement in mind. The new Honda's first torque bump is off the chart toward idle. This is accomplished through the combination of long stroke, and cam timing and intake runner tuning which is optimized for low rpm, This equates to superior fuel efficiency through reduced friction losses at the lower rpms. The long stroke/ small bore reduces combustion chamber surface area which minimizes heat losses. And the "not too much extra power" increases efficiency by allowing the use of greater throttle angles more of the time which reduces engine vacuum and pumping losses. I'm sure Honda's marketing team fully anticipated the back lash of whining from traditional motorcycles guys who are accustomed to 10,000 rpm redlines and 100hp per liter outputs. And they built the NC700 anyway. This shows Honda's major commitment to providing fuel efficient and affordable transportation for the masses such as the NC700, CBR250R and PCX125 along with new ultra cheap 110cc air cooled bikes for India. And they are leading the way to show the rest of the world that two wheels can be more than a toy.
.
.
I'm sure the NC700X owners would rather get back to discussing riding and accessorizing the bike, instead of constantly defending their choice, and there may be other ADV inmates who are interested engine design and it's role on fuel economy so I am going to move the debate to a new thread. here.
.
.
http://advrider.com/forums/showthrea...0#post19260620
sendler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 08:00 AM   #2534
larryboy
Paint it black.
 
larryboy's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Location: Über Alles,Ca
Oddometer: 13,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by sendler View Post
Normal riders on the CBR get 68. I would like to see that higher as anybody that tries at all will break 75 but it is a sporty bike so many guys are fair weather riders who never bother to go out unless they are out to see how much rubber and fuel they can burn.
.

I've looked at the Fuelly site and it's pure slanted BS, most of those people have tracked 3 or 4 tanks and some throw the average by claiming 268 mpg like I saw on one. I'm not out to burn fuel and would love to see 75 mpg on the CBR250 and 64 mpg on the NC700X, but it ain't gonna happen my friend.


On another note, my dealer has all the extras ordered for the 700x except the sidebags, some kind of hold up on those.
__________________
Be sure the safest rule is that we should not dare to live in any scene in which we dare not die. ~Lewis Carroll~
larryboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2012, 08:18 AM   #2535
larryboy
Paint it black.
 
larryboy's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Location: Über Alles,Ca
Oddometer: 13,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTDTDI View Post
If you can't back it up with facts, its best not saying it.
That's the thing, I am backing it up with facts. There has been a good real world test of the 700x and the tester rode it hard like it will be ridden and returned 47 mpg and that sounds about right to me for a low hp naked bike.

I know sendler wants to discount what I'm saying about these "new" Honda's as he puts it, but the facts are that I'm filling up twice a day on the new CBR250R and riding 175 miles per day and after one month my average mpg is 58, no way around it and I'm being sensitive by NOT mentioning my worst tank. I intend to get the 700x in the fall and will use it as intended and dream of 64 mpg, but a current test of the bike has returned 47 mpg.

I have had one bike that I averaged better than anybody else in that "group", 2007 TE610 with a carb, 60 mpg. It's too bad the engine wears out so quick as it'd be a great commuter.

Fact.



Quote:
Originally Posted by GrahamD View Post
On the other hand they could do a bit better by running 12.5:1 compression and forcing people to use only top level premium but that may not equate to "economical motoring"

Where do I sign up for one of those?
__________________
Be sure the safest rule is that we should not dare to live in any scene in which we dare not die. ~Lewis Carroll~
larryboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 07:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014