Deal or no deal: Honda Blackbird

[Flynt]

I remember those things but I did't know that was what they were called.

I recall somebody, maybe an uncle or grandfather asking for "the ZARF" and then pointing at the cup thingy when I looked puzzled.  I really didn't remember this until the clue about the soda somehow...

Frank

[Pat Conlon]

Is that what those brown plastic holders were, that held the paper cone cups with ice water?

[novaraptor]

Use of ZARF might be kind of regional also. I grew up in the Pacific Northwest US in the 50's and 60's, and recall seeing them, but don't think that I ever heard the term. If I had been pushed to guess, and given the era, I might have ventured "the sound your butt makes sliding across the seat of an International Harvester pickup".

[Dan Filetti]

Regarding the concept of heavy bikes and the feel of the weight, it is very hard to escape the feel of that extra weight, of course.  But it's not impossible, in some circumstances.  I have ridden a buddy's late model Goldwing. 1800CC makes for a good power plant with excellent grunt, and ground clearance was better than I expected. I was not able to make it touch down -but I did not push it hard.  But what surprised me most, was how 'light' it felt above say 10 mph. 

Honda has done a good job of hiding that weight (centering the mass around the roll access) and those moments of inertia (side to side transitions) are much more flick-able than I expected. I never got a chance to ride it in the real tight stuff and I figure that weight can't hide forever, and would eventually make itself evident.  But for the ~20 miles I got to ride it, including highway, around town and parking lot maneuvering, I was more impressed with handling than I expected to be.

Food for thought...

Dan

     

[Country Joe]

Regarding the concept of heavy bikes and the feel of the weight, it is very hard to escape the feel of that extra weight, of course.  But it's not impossible, in some circumstances.  I have ridden a buddy's late model Goldwing. 1800CC makes for a good power plant with excellent grunt, and ground clearance was better than I expected. I was not able to make it touch down -but I did not push it hard.  But what surprised me most, was how 'light' it felt above say 10 mph. 

Honda has done a good job of hiding that weight (centering the mass around the roll access) and those moments of inertia (side to side transitions) are much more flick-able than I expected. I never got a chance to ride it in the real tight stuff and I figure that weight can't hide forever, and would eventually make itself evident.  But for the ~20 miles I got to ride it, including highway, around town and parking lot maneuvering, I was more impressed with handling than I expected to be.

Food for thought...

Dan

Dan,
That was the impression that I had of the Goldwing that I owned. It felt much lighter than any 800 lb. motorcycle should feel.  That flat 6 is a jewel of an engine. But hopping from it to the FJ was a real revelation. Comparatively, the FJ felt like a 600 supersport, especially when it came to stopping.
All that being said, I could see buying another Goldwing down the road in a couple of years.
Joe

[Alf]

I´ve asked to my friend Miguel about the XX. He has been near everything in the motorbike world: competition rider, chief of mechanics, Bridgestone developer, tester & presenter, manager, race-school instructor.... Here there are his opinions about both bikes. Sorry if there are errors with the translation

Good question. Making memories and comparing side to side....
Starting with, I don´t like the CBR 1100 XX at all. I will never have one, I promise, and that Heaven punish me if one day I lost my head and I buy one. Its a nosense motorbike: it was made to win the performace race, lost in advance by Honda
More, even althought the first carburated series were better, it didn´t work properly with a lot of problems with the distribution chain, the same as the rest of the CBR Honda models. Its incredible that building that engines a lot of years from 1986, the tensioners continue being the weak point of this engines.
Very soft suspensions taking from the CBR 1000 series that discourage you of using all the power available and not too good finish, the quality is a bit dissappointing. You can like or dislike the Hayabusa but it is an impressive bike. The 1100 XX is not ugly. We could say that the Notre-Dame hunchback is Brad Pitt comparing with the bike. I would prefer a couple of boxing matchs with Mike Thysson that looking that bike for more than 30 seconds. I pray God that my eyes explode if I pass that time and I continue watching that bike.

We could consider comparable the FJ and the XX because both are bikes designed for fast touring, althought with 20 years of difference, but it is not this way: the FJ is a logic evolution of a very advanced sportbike of its era, the XX not.

To start with, the XX is a completely new bike with no precedents by Honda. Its an Honda try of showing to the competente that they have the best technology and the best engineering knowledges. So Honda got a CBR 900 engine, did an steroids treatment, installed a Ram-Air (kawasaki copied) and fit the thing in a Yamaha-copied chasis. Add CBR 1000 96 suspensions and  design an aerodinamic bodywork wind tunnel shapped. And presto!, you get 300 km/h... well, not!
The standard bike never get that speed. Only a bit of debris at the Ram-air scopes and the bike lost 7-10 cv

The XX have shorter axle lenght than the FJ, but the headstock geometries are much more conservatives. The Hayabusa have more agressive geometries and near the same lenght than the FJ.

The 1100 XX is not a akward bike, only the suspension and the rider position contribute to the oil-tanker feeling. With much more hard suspensions and with Bridgestone BT021 is much more flickable. The problem is the rider position: the FJ ergonomics are perfect and this make natural the movements on the bike, with low & back center of gravity. The XX have a very high center of gravity, that not only is worst moving the bike at low velocity. Braking, inside the curve or looking for acceleration is a bad thing too.

An FJ with modern tyres and std suspension but in good working order (and better brakes too) is more nimble, manegeable, effective in sport riding and more comfortable in all ways than a XX. I´m assure you than a STD FJ leave for dead an STD XX except in fast and straight roads. When the road started to get twisty again, the FJ owner will pass the same level XX rider and with a more relaxed riding.

More: a non experience rider on big superbikes with only 3 months in a GS 500, i.e., would ride faster & safer the FJ on a twisty road without problems, but not with the XX and he would be much more slower and less safer with the XX.

[FJscott]

So you think the FJ is a better bike...works for me

[Alf]

Well, not me that only have eyes for my BIG babe 

The amazing thing is that Miguel, with extensive experience about all types the motorbikes for the last 30 years consider so high the FJ

He is an ultra modified MT01 owner & recent FJ owner too. In my Spanish web I have published the work that he has been making with the FJ 1991 on suspensions because  it is impressive. Not for any spectacular mods. He has been working with OE elements with, to my judgement, the most delicate FJ to get good result of in sport riding mod

Well, the FJ was the most popular bike of the motorbike mag journalists in Britain. And they had a lot of offers on test bikes...

Soon I will finish of translate it and I will publish in my web, I promise 

[Pat Conlon]

Thank you Alf, that is a very interesting perspective from Miguel.

I have always enjoyed your website. Lots of good stuff there. I look forward to your update.

Pat

[rusjel]

Well, not me that only have eyes for my BIG babe  

And this right here is the most important factor. You've found a bike that you love and are willing to defend it to the death. I liked mine a lot too.

But if we are bringing other people's opinions into the mix, here's one from visordown about what they consider the top ten sportstourers in around 2006.

http://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-top-10s/top-10-sports-tourers/11412.html

And an owner survey on what they are like to ride, design comfort and build quality:

http://www.visordown.com/reviews/motorcycles/sports-tourers/honda-cbr1100xx-super-blackbird-1996---2008/review/177.html

When I was researching my next bike, I was particularly impressed by the comments that if the journos were all made redundant tomorrow they would probably buy 'Birds as their own bike.

Now the article isn't perfect, how could it be if the FJ didn't make the cut, but it does expose a wider view of the bike.

Me? I'd have one of each, like the member posted above. In a couple of years you will be able to ride an FJ under much cheaper classic rego and I can't wait!  

Edit: actually the above wasn't completely true, I really wanted a Sprint GT, but they were too expensive for me. Buying a 'Bird was a happy accident because one was available cheap. I almost didn't give it a go because of the interwebz experts telling me they were 'souless', 'not as fast as a 'busa' or that the brakes would kill me in the third corner! I'm glad I gave it a go.

I guess if I had the money I'd still prefer the GT as I really like triples, but there it is. In the meantime Alf, I look forward to meeting you one day and we can talk more about the many deficiencies of my bike raised by your very interesting friend! Enjoy your FJ!

[RD56]

The bottom line is these are all 2000 MY and newer. Other than a couple mutants, these still can't compare to the FJ numbers, 15 years their junior. I guess we'll have to wait for the 40 year Top #1 review.

[rusjel]

The bottom line is these are all 2000 MY and newer. Other than a couple mutants, these still can't compare to the FJ numbers, 15 years their junior. I guess we'll have to wait for the 40 year Top #1 review.

I think if we were comparing sports tourers as a function of how they compared with other bikes of their era, the FJ has to be right up there, It was the absolute stand out of its day.

I think the 'Bird is the best of the late 90s early naughties and so do a lot of other people, but the field is much tighter and it isn't the obvious standout of its era the way the FJ is.

The reviews were included to add a bit of perspective. As they show and with due respect to Alf's friend, comments that question the design integirty, function, build quality and effectiveness of the Bird are, on examination of a wider audience, a bunch of c__p!

Edit: His comments about the handling are no more of less subjective than mine and I'm happy to agree to disagree there. 

[Alf]

The reviews were included to add a bit of perspective. As they show and with due respect to Alf's friend, comments that question the design integirty, function, build quality and effectiveness of the Bird are, on examination of a wider audience, a bunch of c__p!

Edit: His comments about the handling are no more of less subjective than mine and I'm happy to agree to disagree there.  

I would like remember that Miguel has ridden, raced and dismounted near every bike since the RD 350 F to today. Even each riding style is a different universe, I respect a lot his opinions

To my discharge I have to say that I was very surprised about Miguel review. We have not spoken of the theme before. To my own judgement the Bird is a great bike, being the carb version it could be a buying option for me and I would recommend it. And I think the bike is gorgeous (it is an advantage that Miguel don´t speak English   ). But having riding the bike I only can conclude that except in straight roads the FJ is vastly superior in sport riding mod and easier of ride too, sorry

Reading the article about the sport touring bikes, I think that the first issue that we have to fix is the definition of the sport touring bike. To me, an sport toruing bike is NOT a bad or deficient sport bike. Here I don´t want to say those are bad bikes. Only sport bikes that can´t compite with other of this era

I.e. an Aprilia Falco is an excelent bike, but in no way an sport touring bike. Its an sport bike not at the level of the other of its age. And it may be a joke that BMW rs1100Rs or F800ST  are good sport touring bikes... well, the same that entry-level FZS 600 or Bandits, so much more expensive

And the GSXF 650... well, no comments

And where is it the touring side of the Hayabusa? try to acommodate a passenger... so an FJ is a BETTER sport bike than a Bird and a BETTER touring bike than a Hayabusa      

[ribbert]

A fully optioned Harley, complete with handlebar tassels and white wall car tyres is the perfect bike, the more chrome the better, IF that's what you want in a bike.

There is no universal standard by which bikes can be judged, even within a particular category. It is not a matter of which is better, it's a case of which one suits you best. Each bike has different characteristics that different people are drawn to and deem important.

Even within our FJ community, owners are attracted to and like their bikes for a whole range of different reasons.
There is a common habit of rating a bikes handling, brakes, flickability etc from a boy racers perspective. Not everybody rides like Rossi on the road nor wants a track day bike.
The appeal of power to some for example is only the secondary effect of low down torque, demanding no more of their bikes in terms of outright performance than a 250 would deliver.

Not everyone is going to favour a bike based on how it behaves at the limit.

The Blackbird vs the FJ? Both fine bikes with much to like about each one. Which is best all rounder? depends what you want your all rounder to do.
This, in my opinion, is a hair splitting argument with no winner.

Noel

[TexasDave]

I can't state my opinion on the subject as well as Noel but that is excactly the way I feel too. I think we might agree that for 30yr old the FJ still compares quite favorably to modern sport/tours. After reading the visordown reviews of the 10 best sport/toures I could not believe the Suzuki GSXF650 was listed. Seriously?  Dave