New 2010 Honda Fury

Legendary 300
Legendary 300
Posts: 306
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:20 pm
Sex: Male
Location: Texas

Unread post by Ryethil » Sat Jul 11, 2009 3:18 pm

Sorry, I should of written a reply late last night, but thinking that much hurt my brain so I wimped out. Also, I'm actually answering this post because it seems like fun not that you or I are positively wrong. Anyway...
HYPERR wrote:
Ryethil wrote: Now the Sabre shared the V45 motor with the Interceptor and the Magna. Now we come into what I'm ranting about. The V65 engine in the Interceptor 1100 made it into one of the fastest production bikes in the world. Honda played this up for all they could. But calling a fast motorcycle a Hyper-sportbike doesn't make it one. It was awkward and there was nothing that could be done to change this. So how many people were disappointed by the lack of a chassis to equal the motor.
Honda never made an Interceptor 1100. Back then(in the 1980s), it came in 500, 750, and 1000 versions. It later came in a Harley Tarrif beater 700 as well. The bikes were never awkward and was absolutely state of the art at the time. Absolutely nothing back then performed like the Interceptors. This was before the Ninjas, Hurricanes, and the GSXRs. They were Freddy Spencer's favorite bikes and he flat out back then said that the 500 Interceptor is the best handling street bike sold on the planet. I cannot recall any roadtests or anyone saying they were disappointed with these bikes at the time.
Also Honda never called the Interceptors Hyper Sportbikes. That phrase was "invented" by Suzuki for their stunning 1985 GSXRs.
First of all you are right and I wrong. The Interceptor was a liter bike created for a racing formula. However, we're not talking about specific bikes here but a general overview of a attitude to what is/was going on.

As far as state of the art over stiff and clumsy, Honda had the biggest mouth not necessarily the only one capable of talking. Ducati and others were quite capable of creating a bike that could really handle and won races. They didn't compete directly with Honda but even the American media could tell the difference between the two.

As for reviews, they acknowledge that the Honda street version was the best the Japanese could build, but even they talked of being changing their riding styles to over come diffencies in the way the bike handled as not to not crash. The media knew the difference. However, in the hands of the right rider (Freddie Spencer) the Honda's could be made to go very fast. So people accepted what Honda put out even knowing there was better that could of been created with the technology of the time.

Which gets to the heart of the matter, at least for me. Honda builds bikes as a series of compromises that were designed to offer an affordable motorcycle that appealed to the greatest mass market. They could of built an affordable motorcycle that still captured the essence the original race bike. The Brits did this and and for the longest time, the world expected it. In fact the common person could buy a factory racer if he had the money. And this bike was race ready though it became a war of not only the racing riders themselves but your engineers and the factory engineers too. But the racing bikes could be bought and a lot of them found their way to the public highways in Europe.

Irregardless of public opinion, what killed the Britsh bikes was management decisions, plain and simple and when they tried to fix the problem it was already too late and it all fell down. Though bikes like the CB750 helped, it was primarily the British doing themselves in. For the record, the Brit triple was considered the better bike than the CB750 but quality control and other problems like poor dealers killed the Brits in America and the rest of the world. Britsh cars went through a similar time too and for the same reason.

A second part of this was there was a "truth" that the American rider was unsophisticated and incapable of understanding the specialness of a full race motorcycle. However, European riders were considered sophisticated and constantly got motorcycles that put the bikes we got from the same company to shame. Freddie Spencer didn't differenciate between the two in the American media because of finacial complications since he was sponsered by Honda but in the international press he complianed bitterly about the discrepancy of the way motorcycles were allocated throughout world.

Oh, the complaints of how Honda motorcycles were built were there but the media was as unsophisticated as the American rider but the few that knew better were vocal about this point. Also, notice how the press's tune changed in the latter half of the 80s when the other companies started releasing motorcycles that actually were closer to factory replicas.

As for who actually came up with the world hyper sport bike is meaningless for we are talking many years after these wars were fought. And these words are part our common lexicon.

In actuality, the people that were active in motorcycling at the time say the late 80s was a great time to be motorcycling for Honda was force to actually try to overcome the other companies with technology instead of marketing. But whenever possible Honda fell back on what they thought they could get away with and built bikes that were destined to be popular with the greatest number of people than actually material superiority.

One problem is that as per ususal, the internet doesn't necessarilly remember things in the same way that were covered at the the time the incident was recorded. Also, in 1982, I wasn't born yet, though I was trying to get here as fast as possible. Ask my mom, she'll tell you. 8)

So what I understand comes from reading magazines and books of the period. My uncle was a fanatic about keeping this material sorted and in binders so I may have an advantage or a disadvantage because, I can't just scan all this material in an spit it out to you or anybody. Sorry!
HYPERR wrote:Honda's "The Fastest Production Bike Boast" you are talking about was for the 1982 V65 Magna, not the Interceptor. And under no stretch of the imagination did "Honda play this up for all they could". The only time they mentioned it was during that one awesome commercial with Jay Gleason doing burnouts and running the quarter mile. This was helluva gutsy move by Honda to have a TV commercial like that during prime time TV. the commercial was short lived and it was soon pulled off the air. Imagine a bike commercial like that in the US today!
The war for motorcylce dollars was never on TV. Where it was fought was in the written word and yes, Honda made a lot of use of the fact that the Magna/Interceptor motorcycles were so fast. Honda has had the advantage of being there firstest with the mostest. It doesn't mean that their product was that great but they were big enough to build any bike they wanted and be their first in a certain market. They did this with Dirt bikes. The first really so called competion dirt bike was made by Kawasaki called the Green Meanie. It was a 100cc bike that was actually made for TT/oval type racing and it had such a power band that it literally screamed. The only problem is that Honda circumvented it and created dirt bikes that the common man could ride around an open field. It then brought in race replicas that weren't really and the Americans just accepted them and bought them for the was little else at the time.

I'm not mentioning the XR750 for it was never meant to be used in the hands of the common man for it was too focused. However, yes, Harley used it's successes to create a lot of publicity for its Sportster models.
HYPERR wrote:
Ryethil wrote: However, let me say this about the CBR1000RR, it's lack of adjustments kept me from enjoying it to its fullest. Yamaha and Suzuki both had adjustable chassis and you could tailor them to however you want ride them. Why did Honda choose an unsporting way to create a copy of their factory racing bike and sell it as a direct copy. That is what makes me angry and I call such bikes appliances.
What exactly was it that was missing on the CBR1000RR that was on the R1 & the GSXR1000 that is so detrimental??
I never said that it was detrimental. OTHER people put those words in my mouth.

I said that the CBR1000RR could have better and "is" in Europe. As ususal , Honda is voting for the bike that will appeal to the greatest masses of people. Marketing has over come technology and we're the losers for it. Honda isn't the only company to do this. Honda just happens to be the maker of the Fury which is the bike we started talking about.

HYPERR wrote:
Ryethil wrote: Which gets me back to Honda and its false claims. The V45 Magna was trumpeted to the world that it was a cruiser without equal. The problem is that this is cr*p and a lot of people got the wrong impression of what a cruiser was about because they were told basically a lie. Compared to the Sabre it was uncomfortable and lacked the low end grunt that makes crusing type motorcycles so enjoyable. And Honda wasn't the only one to do this.
I recall no such claims from Honda. I would highly doubt Honda would make such a claim when the V65 Magna would be much more fitting of that title I don't even recall Honda calling them cruisers. I am not even sure if Honda themselves called them Power Cruisers at the time. If my memory is correct, it was the media that coined the phrase and named Honda as the "inventor" of this new class of bikes.

If I can ask, how old are you? You're making me feel ancient.

During this time, except for a few brands like HD, the 700-800cc bikes were considered to be what was acceptable for the average rider. The V65 was just considered to be too big.

Also as for "Power Cruisers", the media was just trying to describe what Honda was inferring. This is just a case of semantics.
HYPERR wrote:
Ryethil wrote:I remember still the first time I rode a V_Max and pulled the trigger. It was an adrenaline rush like few otherways that are legal. It's problem its that it didn't do very well at anything but going in a straight line at light speed.
The last sentence there is quite ironic coming from someone that is a fan of cruisers. Cruisers(Power Cruisers included)'s forte are not actually the twisties.

I have never heard anyone that is familiar with the VMax summarize it in a one liner like you managed. Anyone that is familiar with the bike will tell you it is a total blast to ride and one of the "funnest" bikes you will ever ride.

As for a cruiser and the twisties, you never put a thumping powerful comfortably big bike into the right series of sweepers and long radius turns and bend this very male beast to your will and go around them like you were on rails. I'm not exactly male and I realize the significance.

Secondly I'm not a fan of cruisers exculsively, I love all bikes. I'm a fan of freedom and finding "my" pecular way of doing things and feeling good because I thought of it. Other people's opinions I will listen to but it's my life, my choices. I actually had a CBR1000RR for a while and I like it. I just thought it could be better and where I thought it could of been better, it seemed that some bean counter had been there before me and put in a close to good enough piece but d*mn it, it wasn't the "right" piece and the bike just became a group of compromises in my eyes and I sold it to some kid that didn't know better and had the money to give me my asking price.

I used to race both MX and Road Racing and loved both. But in the end, I realized I wasn't good enough to be a winner and I wasn't going to waste my time being an also ran.

As for the V-Max, if it wasn't a niche bike then why did Yamaha never update it. It was like a pony car. It was fast on the open American roads but in the twisties it didn't do so well. All the reviews said the same thing about it. Yes, a bike that can give you a rush just accelerating and doing roosters can be very amusing but it doesn't make it a good motorcycle. And if other's feel that the V-Max is different than the way I see it then good for them. It's "my" opinon and I've never had a reason to change my mind.

For that matter Hona made a nearly equally potent V4 and it has similar problems. I don't remember what it was called bu it came in a cruiser and road bike versions.
HYPERR wrote:
Ryethil wrote: Now Honda has built the Fury and a lot of people will buy it because it looks cool. However, will they get the "chopper" experience?
What exactly is a chopper experience? And what makes your definition the only correct one?

The chopper experince was the most absolute personally intensive form of motorcycling expression. Bikers who were just common people with an abilitity to wrench and express some inner feeling created motorcycles from common everyday pieces that expressed their feelings about motorcycles. And it wasn't just choppers but the original cafe racers fall into this category too. Except that choppers were mostly an American experience and the big 4 companies tried to build their concept of what American's were doing and failed. They created "cruisers" instead.

This also happened to Cafe Racers. The beautifully balanced "naked" performance bike was never promoted in America and most riders in the US feel why build a bike that makes compromises to fit a riding styles that a normal person goes through during their riding lifetime or even day to day experiences. Advertising specifically stated that the "special" built motorcycle was much better than a bike that could do everything I'm specifically bringing up the concept of a lot of Italian bikes like Ducati. Which in the hands of the right rider can run rings around the usual sport bike rider.

I personally ride a ST1300A. I love and ride it a lot but I'm also in the process of building a stretched Rocker C which has other appeals than simply performance or eating up large amounts miles.

Which leads me to the Fury. First of all the ones that I've seen had sloppy welds, plastic parts that didn't fit well together and cheap covers for anything that stood out as original. Not to mention the exaust tone of a Prius. I like the VTX1300 better in all ways and can't figured why they raped it to create such a poor motorcycle, irrespective of what it was supposed to do. It seems to have taken all the bad parts of choppers and thrown out all the good things. But I have expectations that it will sell like hot cakes for it has all these cool colors and it looks AWESOME, DOOD! That and it has the Honda Motorcycle Company behind it and Honda is saying you "NEED" this bike. And other companies will sell similar bikes because Honda did so well with it and we'll have a new culture of "Chopper" riders who'll never feel the power and style of the real thing. And it will be a loss. :frusty:

It's good spelling but it Wobbles, and the letters get in the wrong places. WtPooh

My First Custom, Late 90's Sportster, Heavily Breathed On, Big Block, S&S HP Heads, Custom High Performance Pipes. Wickedly fast, Uncomfortable, Front end is a jackhammer. Age 18yrs, Still have the bike!


User avatar
Tennif Shoe
Legendary 300
Legendary 300
Posts: 372
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 12:32 am
Sex: Male
Years Riding: 5
My Motorcycle: VTX 1800c
Location: Houston, Texas

Unread post by Tennif Shoe » Sat Sep 19, 2009 12:26 pm

:offtopic: i like reading every post here but some of these post are just too long........ got halfway thru the 3rd page though :?
03 Honda VTX 1800c
87 Yamaha TT350
86 Kawasaki Vulcan 750 (sold) Have fun in Mexico Mr. Vulcan!

YES my spellin sucks, get over it, or you can be my personal spell check

User avatar
Legendary 500
Legendary 500
Posts: 521
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 5:21 pm
Sex: Male
Years Riding: 42
My Motorcycle: 1976 CB360t, 1991 Honda Nighthawk 750
Location: Northern NJ

Unread post by mydlyfkryzis » Sun Sep 27, 2009 9:20 pm

I guess I am too old. None of the choppers today are really choppers.

Choppers were just that, a stock motorcycle with everything not needed to roll forward chopped off. Originally, the forks weren't extended either. You too a bike, chopped off the fenders, chopped off any decorative covers, chopped off the seat, put a small one on. They were more like rat bikes than what is called a chopper today. A lot of choppers were english bikes. Harley didn't have the corner on the market either. The Vertical twin Triumph was faster and better handling than anything H-D put out at the time. By the 1970's, even the Japanese bikes were being chopped. a CB750 SOHC could be stripped of a lot of pieces, making it faster and better handling than most everything.

The Japanese bikes ARE aplliances, in every positive attribute to that word. In the 60's and 70's, H-D was a leaky, balky, hard to start bike. Triumph, BSA and other weren't a whlle lot better except in performance and handling. The Appliances from Japan started easy, broke down infrequently, didn't leak oil like the Valdez, and were faster and better handling than the H-D, though the English bikes (except Norton) were still better handling. My buddy had a BSA 500 that handled great. when it ran. It handled better than my CB350, but my 350 was faster. So he could handle the turns better, but I always outran him. The single Carb twin was no match for my 350, And my bike always started, and as bad as the headlight was on the Honda (37 Watt), it also worked.

So nobody really makes a chopper in my book.
Richard - Fully Dressed

Naked 1991 Honda NightHawk 750
Naked 1976 Honda CB360T

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 421 guests