6 NEW bikes from Honda USA for 2013

[vicster]

You may be right about who it's aimed at, but during the brief period I stood around the bike at the IMS, I think I was the only non-Wing owner asking questions. Myself I'd go for the Victory XC or XC Tour as even the F6B doesn't have nearly the leg room of those two. Or maybe the Rocket 3 bagger.

I see where Honda hasn't announced the X price yet and won't make it available in the States until July. Maybe to give the NC700 a better chance to establish a foothold? Bastids!

[markjenn]

Originally Posted by vicster

I see where Honda hasn't announced the X price yet and won't make it available in the States until July. Maybe to give the NC700 a better chance to establish a foothold? Bastids!

Might be. I bet the CB500X cannibalizes a lot of NC700X sales.

- Mark

[GotMojo?]

Originally Posted by AdrianB1

The CBR500 is a bit ugly. Not really ugly, but for 2013 it does not look anywhere close to Fazer or R6. It was not the reason I recently changed my old CBF 600 Honda with a new Fazer (FZ6, not FZ8), but this also matters to some people.

I think it looks pretty sharp, and will look much better with an aftermarket exhaust and rear fender eliminator kit. Check out the 360 spin here... it looks especially sharp from the front: http://powersports.honda.com/2013/cbr500r/360.aspx

[RaY YreKa]

Originally Posted by markjenn

Might be. I bet the CB500X cannibalizes a lot of NC700X sales.

- Mark

I think so too.

Almost the same mpg, slightly better bhp, easier to carry luggage and refuel.

[YJake]

I have a Ninja 250 as my city/sometimes commute bike right now and think the CB500 in F or X trim would be a good step up for what I use the Ninja for. I don't care so much about the power difference, but the Ninja is just too small for me size wise and if I can average 55mpg with the Honda I'm sold on it.

My daily commuter is a nekkid Bandit 1200 with windscreen and Givi monokey luggage system.

-Jake

[Kerfuffle]

Originally Posted by RedRocket

You are pretty far out of touch in regards to the business.

Sports cars typically have a 5 year shelf life before buyers move on to whatever is newer and better. The S2000 was sold for 8 years if I remember correctly. With the increasingly tough safety standards it would have needed a total redesign, and there was enough of a business case for building today, they would.

NSX; same thing, it sold for almost 15 years, and when it was time to decide to build a new one the recession hit.

Civic Si; in its most recent redesign it lost 50 pounds, and gained about 40 ft.lbs of torque, along with 7 or 8 hp.


CRX? There is no such thing. The CRZ is NOT a CRX. How many other successful low priced 2 seaters are available today other than the Miata?

Never said I was in touch with the business. Just the cars, which Honda doesn't appear to be.

How hard would it have been to update the S2000 and build a AP3 version? Honda refreshes every other model every 4 years or so. They can make cars competitive with others in their market segment - that is what made Honda great. Your comment about sports cars having a 5 year shelf life is exactly my point - Honda decided it was better to kill the S2000 than update it.

As for the NSX, clearly, there is no market for such a car. That's why there's the GT-R, right? And the 911? And the Z06 and ZR1? And the M3? And the R8 and RS5? Go to your local track day and count the GT-Rs you see. I always see tons of them, maybe a third of the cars there. I have to smile when I see the occasional NSX, and then want to cry for what could have been.

I will grant you the specs of the SI are better than the previous version. Its up to 200 Hp and down to 2950 lb. That puts it in the same power/weight of the GTI, which is a great car but not exactly a rocket ship. And I haven't driven it, so I can't comment on the handling balance. But its well behind other hot hatches (Mazdaspeed3, Focus ST) in terms of power. And where is the hatchback version? Ford is selling hot hatches in the US, but not Honda?

And the CRZ could have been a new CRX, but it wasn't. As far as what they could have built, witness the BRZ/FRS Toybaru twins. Yes, it technically has a back seat, but only for those without legs. And the "old" Honda wasn't concerned with building only what everyone else did, or you'd never have the CRX, NSX, groundbreaking 3rd gen Civic, etc.

You can point to the recession, market demand, whatever, but Honda has chosen to make cars that are, for the most part, boring. Nobody made them do this. Mazda stuck with the Miata through the Carpocalypse despite tough sales (they had $5000 incentives on them at one point). Nissan continued with the GT-R. Porsche revamped the Boxter. Toyota and Subaru made the BRZ/FRS. The Focus and Fiesta STs are coming to the US. The M3 lives on. The RS5 returns. The C7 is due out soon. The best that Honda can give us is a 200Hp, 2950lb FWD Civic SI?

[Gas Hog]

Originally Posted by Kerfuffle

Yes, it technically has a back seat, but only for those without legs.

Gary

[RedRocket]

Originally Posted by Kerfuffle

Never said I was in touch with the business. Just the cars, which Honda doesn't appear to be.

How hard would it have been to update the S2000 and build a AP3 version? Honda refreshes every other model every 4 years or so. They can make cars competitive with others in their market segment - that is what made Honda great. Your comment about sports cars having a 5 year shelf life is exactly my point - Honda decided it was better to kill the S2000 than update it.

As for the NSX, clearly, there is no market for such a car. That's why there's the GT-R, right? And the 911? And the Z06 and ZR1? And the M3? And the R8 and RS5? Go to your local track day and count the GT-Rs you see. I always see tons of them, maybe a third of the cars there. I have to smile when I see the occasional NSX, and then want to cry for what could have been.

I will grant you the specs of the SI are better than the previous version. Its up to 200 Hp and down to 2950 lb. That puts it in the same power/weight of the GTI, which is a great car but not exactly a rocket ship. And I haven't driven it, so I can't comment on the handling balance. But its well behind other hot hatches (Mazdaspeed3, Focus ST) in terms of power. And where is the hatchback version? Ford is selling hot hatches in the US, but not Honda?

And the CRZ could have been a new CRX, but it wasn't. As far as what they could have built, witness the BRZ/FRS Toybaru twins. Yes, it technically has a back seat, but only for those without legs. And the "old" Honda wasn't concerned with building only what everyone else did, or you'd never have the CRX, NSX, groundbreaking 3rd gen Civic, etc.

You can point to the recession, market demand, whatever, but Honda has chosen to make cars that are, for the most part, boring. Nobody made them do this. Mazda stuck with the Miata through the Carpocalypse despite tough sales (they had $5000 incentives on them at one point). Nissan continued with the GT-R. Porsche revamped the Boxter. Toyota and Subaru made the BRZ/FRS. The Focus and Fiesta STs are coming to the US. The M3 lives on. The RS5 returns. The C7 is due out soon. The best that Honda can give us is a 200Hp, 2950lb FWD Civic SI?

Blah blah. They're not dead yet. Thankfully they're still making money, and the cars are coming back. Go try a new Accord. The NSX IS returning. At least their quality hasn't taken a nose-dive.

[cogitate]

Originally Posted by RedRocket

Blah blah. They're not dead yet. Thankfully they're still making money, and the cars are coming back. Go try a new Accord. The NSX IS returning. At least their quality hasn't taken a nose-dive.

So true. The four cylinder six speed manual Accord does 6.6 sec zero to sixty! I think the v6 with the manual does like 5.6, correct me if i am wrong on that one.

I am a big Honda freak. 99 percent of all my cars and bikes. I am now car shopping. It is hard to go spend my money on cars that interest me on paper, even nice to drive, but leave me cold with fear regarding quality and reliability
For me, 20 to 30k does not grow on trees.

So, the Focus ST has some build quality issues. Ford is not allowing some to go to dealers until they have been checked, some folks are returning their cars to get a new one.

Mini Cooper S: terrible reliability, clutch replacement is 2400, brakes 1000, not to mention the timing chain issues and the car catching on fire because of the secondary fuel pump. This has been corrected, but what next?

While I am not smitten with the latest cars from Honda, exterior styling, i find that i can deal with that when you factor in what you get.

Just for the record, i had one Subie, and one Toyota. Before i buy anything, I want to check out/drive a BRZ/FRS.

[cogitate]

And bikes: since my Hawk GT is NOT dying anytime soon, I have not found any bikes that I just had to have. I can wait for something to interest me. That said, the CBX500 and NC700x are two examples that do interest me.

[markjenn]

Originally Posted by cogitate

Mini Cooper S: terrible reliability, clutch replacement is 2400, brakes 1000, not to mention the timing chain issues and the car catching on fire because of the secondary fuel pump. This has been corrected, but what next?

While Honda does have a excellent reliability reputation and Mini's aren't great, let's keep our exaggerations a little under control. I have 60K on my MCS original clutch and get 25K out of brakes with a few track days. There are documented cases of folks getting 100K+ from brakes and 300K+ from a clutch. These are wear items with lifespans determined by the driver, not the car.

- Mark

[africa twin]

Originally Posted by markjenn

While Honda does have a excellent reliability reputation and Mini's aren't great, let's keep our exaggerations a little under control. I have 60K on my MCS original clutch and get 25K out of brakes with a few track days. There are documented cases of folks getting 100K+ from brakes and 300K+ from a clutch. These are wear items with lifespans determined by the driver, not the car.

- Mark

I think he means dollars not miles

[markjenn]

Originally Posted by africa twin

I think he means dollars not miles

That makes more sense. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Mini service is a little more expensive - not a great car if overall cost of ownership is a big concern. For both BMW cars and motorcycles, my experience is that everything costs about 30% more. Not a deal breaker if you like the machine, but not the best value choice either. That being said, there is more to driving a vehicle than simply cost and I think it is well worth 30% more to drive a 3-series over an Accord.

- Mark

[cogitate]

Originally Posted by africa twin

I think he means dollars not miles

Yes that is what i meant. My friend had his transmission crap out at 59,900 miles in his Cooper, and was covered by warantee. But so what that it did not cost him a dime. He just sold it because he knew the next big repair was on his dime. I have test drove Coopers several times, almost pulled the plug and bought one, but would read the mini forums and realize there are more problems than not. I love small, fastish, fun cars.

FWIW I have had three or four Civics, three CRX SI, a Prelude, and a some i can't recall, drove them hard and long, for several hundred thousand miles (combined) and never had to replace a clutch. Since 1980.

[ArmSC]

I didn't think this thread would turn out this way...started on the new honda bikes and is now a discussion about the cost of mini/bmw service on cars. One wild ride of a thread