Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Land of the Rising Sun: ADV Bikes from Japan' started by cabanza, Nov 6, 2017.
Post it up!
18 wheelers were getting out of MY WAY!!
Impressive... I haven't heard anything about rackgate lately. Maybe there was a batch of 3 bad racks made. ;-)
You look..... ready. Go get 'em!
I see Honda have a nice app available now, that allows you to configure and see some of the Honda range in high quality. It’s a little clunky, but the new AT Sport is in it and it’s nice to get a chance to view the bike with the various options in 3D view.
The app came out two years ago......where’ve you been?!
Lost in the wilderness!
In my defence, Honda uk have put this on their website, so I thought it was new!
Got the 1/12th scale model, do you like it ;0)
Has anyone thought about what these changes actually cost (development, part/piece cost and assembly time) Honda? Does it appear to add up to the oft-quoted $2000? Would you have paid $2000 more for a '16 if it had had these features in the first place?
Africa Twin Adventure Sports has a larger fairing matched with an 80mm taller screen to offer greater wind protection, and comes standard with heated grips and a 12 volt accessory socket, facilitating longer tours in wide-ranging conditions (taller screen cost pennies for Honda, heated grips were a $200 or so option before, I expect Honda doesn't pay their supplier any more than $25 for the heated grips & control switch, or more than $10 piece-cost for the 12V socket)
Adventure Sports model comes standard with larger sump guard and front light bars, as well as brushed-aluminum cowling panels, rear mudguard, and easily removable steel rack (the sump guard appears to be just a larger version of the current paper-thin rock-deflector, nobody put any faith in the Honda "light bar" to offer any protection, Honda probably pays LESS for the steel rack compared to the high-falootin' plastic version)
Adventure Sports model has larger, 6.37-gallon fuel tank (compared to 4.97 gallons on the standard model), extending range (I'd be willing to bet the larger tank costs Honda just a few dollars more than the original)
Both CRF1000L Africa Twin models now have auto-canceling turn indicators (other than a possible change to the switch mech, this is a software addition)
Adventure Sports model's seat features a flatter profile and a 1.2-inch-taller height than standard model. The seat adjusts .8 inches, for a seat height of either 35.4 inches or 36.2 inches (compared to 33.5 inches and 34.3 inches). Handlebar position is 1.3 inches higher and .2 inches rearward compared to the standard version (neither of these cost more than a few bucks to Honda)
Adventure Sports model has a storage pocket on rear right
On both models, the rider's foot pegs are now wider and affixed via stouter steel mounting plates, whereas the passenger foot-peg hangers have been redesigned to allow more room for the rider's feet when standing (little cost to Honda to use different (already existing) pegs, change in mount position for pass pegs)
On both models, instruments are positioned at a shallower angle to allow the rider to see them more easily from a standing position (betting nearly the same cost to Honda as the prior version)
Adventure Sports model has updated, longer-travel Showa suspension, resulting in 10.6 inches of ground clearance (compared to 9.8 inches). On both models, shock preload, rebound damping, and compression damping are fully adjustable (okay, some real money here for Honda - what, $30 increase in piece cost?)
Both models have compact two-piece, radial-mount, four-piston front-brake calipers and "wave" floating rotors front and rear. The lightweight two-channel ABS can be turned off at the rear (again, some money for Honda - increased piece cost for new calipers and rotors)
Both models feature front and rear wheels in size 21 and 18 inches, respectively, with stainless-steel spokes for improved durability (SS spokes cost increase offset by reduced warranty claims)
On both models, the 998cc SOHC eight-valve parallel-twin engine is updated with a new airbox, now featuring a 20mm longer funnel length and matched to redesigned exhaust internals that significantly improve midrange response and sound quality (undoubtedly driven by new fuel tank design - I don't think they decided to suddenly update the airbox before the decision was made to change the fuel tank)
On both models, the engine's balancer-shaft weights have been lightened by 10.6 ounces for added character and feel in power delivery (little or no piece-cost increase to Honda)
Water pump is housed within the clutch casing, with a thermostat integrated into the cylinder head, while water and oil pumps are driven by the engine's balancer shafts, contributing to a compact engine and optimum ground clearance (no clue as to cost increase here)
New for 2018, a lithium-ion battery is 5.1 lbs. lighter than the previous lead-acid unit (Spendy for us aftermarket purchase, much cheaper for Honda)
Both versions available with Honda's advanced automatic Dual Clutch Transmission (DCT), delivering consistent, quick, seamless gear changes on-road or off. Rider can select from three different shifting modes, and a G switch enhances off-road functionality by reducing the amount of clutch slip during gear changes (is this any different from the current model?)
New for 2018, both Africa Twin models have Throttle-By-Wire system (TBW), opening the door to four (undoubtedly cheaper for Honda - the TPS sensors are already there, put another sensor at the handlebar and run wires instead of cables - much less hardware. This is existing technology.)
individual riding modes and an expanded Honda Selectable Torque Control (HSTC) system (software changes)
HSTC now features seven levels (up from three), to adapt to a wide variety of conditions. HSTC can also be completely switched off, and three levels of power and engine braking are available (again, a few software changes)
Am I way out in left field here? It just smells like Honda is getting an additional $2000 out of buyers for something that costs Honda far less than a grand. I think many are confusing the aftermarket costs to add these features vs. what it costs Honda to add them - so for some, $2000 sounds reasonable.
I don't understand staying with tube-type tires - it is clearly cheaper to go with tubeless from an OEM standpoint. No monkeying around with tubes during assembly. Fewer people, fewer parts required.
The lack of cruise control is just plain stupid, given the ride-by-wire system.
It feels like deja Vu !!! In '88 Honda released RD03 Africa twin , folks still say it was the most off road worthy AT . It's production lasted 2 years and then it got updated to RD04 bigger engine, updated body work, etc . Still I think 90-92 AT was the best all over adv bike , which was updated again in '93 to more of a adv tourer and less off road oriented bike , still a great bike though .Looking at new AT progression I smile and see the pattern ... Honda knows what they doing .
The 1290 SAR seems superior in every way except for DCT. I really want to try DCT but tube tires and no cruise? Fail. SAR’s can be had for 2000 off right now. Of course you’d become a KTM beta tester. First world problems.
I see your concerns, but it's not that easy on some of this stuff. Ride by wire means a stepper motor set of throttle bodies. More expensive due to motors, need to be set up properly (lots of testing including emissions certification) and the whole system needs to be properly calibrated to work with both manual and DCT. It's not just eliminating cable throttles, it's setting up your ECM to work with opening the throttles at the proper rates and percentage of travel. On a cable system, the throttle can be whacked open by the rider, and the ECM has to come up with fuel feed and ignition timing to make whatever throttle position you select work. It's not great, as whacking the throttle open is the worst thing you can do for emissions, and really screws with manifold pressures. Tuning with electronic throttles is an ENTIRELY different logic. First, when you're telling it to go WOT at 3500 RPM, you aren't getting full opening of the throttle blades if the factory found out that 75% throttle opening was optimum on the dyno. You're getting what they decided is the best power versus throttle request. With ride by wire, the throttle becomes a "torque request" to the ECM and the ECM makes all the decisions about what's best for the request and then outputs them. This requires a ton of time to make work properly and hopefully seamlessly with the DCT and traction control.
Next, traction control is controlled differently. You can have your throttle opened all the way, but as the torque request comes in, the ECM is now getting data from all over and making the throttle position decisions, not your right hand. This makes for much smoother traction control typically, as it can use throttle to modulate instead of having to work around you opening the throttle with the cable.
So you can see, just changing that one thing affects everything else in the powertrain. The whole system needs to go through an extensive development program from design to execution. Done properly, ride by wire is better than cable throttle simply because it gives the ECM control over all aspects of a torque request from the throttle hand. The ECM just slowing down the throttle opening slightly, really improves both emissions and transition. You won't feel it, but it's happening and enough of a change that emissions go down and smoothness improves. Torque improves through the powerband, because the idiot behind the bar holding the throttle wide open isn't getting what he wants in terms of wide open throttle, but he is getting the maximum torque the engine can deliver and put to the pavement. In most cases depending on load and traction, it's doing a much better job than the rider can do modulating the throttle. I'll bet the new setup delivers better fuel mileage mainly through better torque management. Sadly, the computer and the programmers and developers are smarter than we are. This development cost is probably one of the leading drivers for the higher retail.
Tall screen: With you. Not much of an upcharge probably.
Heated grips: $229, attachment kit $20. Not sure of their cost, but this it what they want for it. It's an upcharge.
Sump guard: Not sure, but it's more metal so more money. Probably not a lot, but I'm sure they'll market it up from the stock one.
Light bar: Honda wants $499 retail for it, so they're going to upcharge for it like it's an accessory.
Rear rack, brushed side panel, mud guard: There's some increased cost, no idea how much.
Larger tank: I'm sure there's more cost, as it's a larger steel tank. For an idea, we'll have to wait until part numbers show up for the new tank in the parts system. Then we can compare directly
Auto cancelling signals: Software, compares signals from the ABS. Development cost only probably
New cluster: Typical development costs, might be a slightly more expensive cluster, need to compare when parts prices are available.
Seat: Can't image there's much difference in cost.
Pegs front and rear: I agree, just a little more cost, plus development of a bracket for the rear pegs. Might be slightly higher.
Suspension: Here's a bit of a larger cost. Development and production of a different setup. Probably an updated coating process on the forks we hope. No idea of the difference, will need to compare when parts prices are released. Suspect Honda is pushing Showa for improvements on this given the issue with the old forks.
Traction control, ride modes, etc: New hardware to run better software, development cost to make the system work well. Driven by market mainly as other bikes in the price range have more modes/user selections. No idea of the upcharge, but probably needed to happen to compete. Lot of development time on electronic controls though.
I think they're within the ballpark at $2K, but it might be less. Remember, they ANNOUNCED approx a $2K price increase. They may come in at less when they finally release pricing to look like heroes. This would not be the first time. Honda is good at marketing.
Not to say I disagree but that’s a lot of thought into perception and feelings........and the reality is it’s just that,perception and personal feelings. Nobody on here “really” knows what any of this costs and considering they basically tweaked the current bike its probably less then we think.
To me, all this is very welcome because traditionally Honda hasn’t been good at staying current or updating product. Until a year or two ago visiting the Honda booth at the Moto show was like shopping for a washer and dryer.......BORING!!!
All these changes are to add gizmos and lure higher-end buyers because the current bike is fantastic to those that “get it”. To those that need “Ready to Race” or “Conductivity” this wont change much of their opinions ......it’s just talking points. The AT isn’t a spec sheet racer or winner but to those that do more riding then typing, the bike wins on value, usefulness, reliability, and character.
A company doesn’t stay a world leading manufacturer for 50 years by not turning a profit. If you don’t buy the product, that’s fine, somebody else will.
It’s pretty clear that Honda came up with $2,000 worth (percieved value) of baubles so that a “new” model’s price premium could pay for all the bikes (new base model included) to have throttle by wire. Pretty genius from a marketing perspective if you ask me, rather than asking every buyer to swallow a $500 (or whatever the amount would be) price increase for 2018 models with TBW and a few other upgrades.
How much more did you pay for this DCT model versus the manual one?
Cruise control for this price tag...and I'm in. I guess I'm that guy.
If you could source all the "additions" at Honda's price then you'd be right, but since you (we) have source them in the aftermarket, you're wrong. The price is fair.
Holy damn shit!! The bike has not even hit the dealer floors and some of you guys are picking apart the cost of shit to show it doesn't justify the added cost of the bike. Unbelievable.
I had no idea we have such smart internet jockey engineers around here. For crying out loud, have you ever considered the intake duct was lengthened for reasons other than just the big tank?
It's nice to have a discussion on a newly designed bike. But making such outrageous assumptions on something you have never actually seen is ignorant.
They're probably thinking from the perspective of upgrading, rather than a non-owner buying one. At least that's how I'm looking at it.