How would a '89 NT650 stack up against a '90 CB-1?

[Daveontheedge]

As the title states I am curious how the two bike would compare performance wise. Both bikes would be Japanese spec.  Let me know your thoughts.

Dave

[a_morti]

As the title states I am curious how the two bike would compare performance wise. Let me know your thoughts.

Dave

This site isn't "just" a forum

http://www.hondacb1.org/reviews-ride0896.shtml
http://www.hondacb1.org/reviews-kzone0704.shtml

[Daveontheedge]

Those reviews are fine, but I already own a CB-1 and am looking for anyone who has experience on the NT650 and CB-1 who can compare the two. I have read the spec numbers, Hp is roughly the same with the Hawk having more torque.

What about personality? Neither review speaks about the 650.

[ptlcb1]

I think like the CB-1, the Hawk is also special in its own way.  It was also one of the great bikes that Honda made.  Like the CB-1, the Hawk also has a following after all these years.  Our CB-1 is a standard motorcycle that looks more like a naked sportbike than a standard.  The Hawk is a standard motorcycle, that doesnt look like anything else.  Exposed is the BIG aluminum sides of its perimeter frame, but with a single sided swingarm???  WTF!  That combination only came on serious sportbikes!   But it didnt look out of place on the Hawk.

Although much different in looks, these two bikes had quite a few things in common. 
1.  Physically small in size.  Hey Honda, many people over 5ft 2in in the US and UK!
2.  Single disk up front.   No complaints from me!   
3.  Too small gas tank.  Just when it gets good... her parents come home!   
4.  Both great commuters.  Like the 2 minute man, short trips can be lots of fun!
5.  Both are light weight.   Less than 400 lbs.
6.  Both were only priced a few hundred less than the fully faired CBR600 Hurricane. Ouch!

Performance-wise, they arrived at close to the same time, but they way they get there is much different.  The Hawk has LOTS of torque, so it has plenty of grunt down low.   Our CB-1 doesnt have much down low unless you rev the piss out of it!  Here are the stats from a 10 bike comparison that Cycle World did in July of 1990. 

CB-1  $4298  394 lbs.  1/4 mile-13.16sec@102.15mph   top speed-119mph
Hawk  $4198  394lbs.  1/4 mile-12.88sec@101.35mph    top speed-115mph

In my opinion, you couldnt go wrong with either one.  They are both great bikes!  If the Hawk came in the smurf blue color, I may have bought one of them as well!   

[clarkdw]

1.  Physically small in size.  Hey Honda, many people over 5ft 2in in the US and UK!

Are you saying there's something not normal about small people?  

2.  Single disk up front.   No complaints from me!  

Yeah, true but it is on the wrong side of the front wheel.

3.  Too small gas tank.  Just when it gets good... her parents come home!  

LOL Just sprayed the keyboard

In my opinion, you couldnt go wrong with either one.  They are both great bikes!  If the Hawk came in the smurf blue color, I may have bought one of them as well!  

I think ptl said it all. It is like getting a pickup truck with a gas powered V-8 or a diesel. Either one does the job, just in a different way. There is a fanatic following for both bikes and justifiably so. Many who have the Hawk also like the CB-1.

This is the one I would love to have

[Daveontheedge]

I can see what you are talking about with the gas tank. I went to go look at one today and the tank looked REALLY narrow and small. Sitting on the bike did not quite feel as comfortable a position as the -1 either. Probably a personal preference as it just did not feel "sporty".  The instruments looked really 80's ish(big shocker as it was an '89)

It was a nice looking bike in it's own way. The big aluminum frame was just screaming to be polished to a bright shine! However, I found the SSSA to be somewhat of a disappointment. This really surprised me as I am a big fan of them and was my primary reason for going to have a look at the bike. I guess I just expected it to be a little more refined? rather than blocky and practical.

 Unfortunately I did not get a chance to fire it up and hear that V-twin rumble away. Spent more time talking with the sales guy about my -1 !

[Daveontheedge]

Clark,

Is that a NT700 you have pictured there? The 2011 CB1000r looks interesting, too bad they didn't make it an 800.

[a_morti]

It's (apparently) pretty easy to fit the Revere 650 fuel tank on to the Hawk, and it doesn't even look bad. That holds a massive 19 litres. In that case, I might quite like one. You can (apparently) also fit the heads (or was it the whole engine) from an Africa Twin 750. At that point, with a fork/brake upgrade, you would definitely have my attention.
http://www.hiperform.com/customer_bikes.htm

[clarkdw]

It is the predecesser of the NT700. It was originally built as the NT650V Deauville. There is a good history of it here:  
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/phil_cooper/DeauvilleModelHistory.html
and some pics:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/phil_cooper/MyDeauvilleNT650V1_pics1.html

The cb1000r is just not my cuppa meat. I am not a big fan of the "streetfighter" look.

[ptlcb1]

a_morti,
    New for 2011 here in North America is the NT700.  Same as the Deauville you guys have had over there for quite some time.  Back in the day, there were tons of Hawks that were raced.  Two Bros. use to make some seriously fast Hawks!  I really thought that Honda would bring back a newer and more bad-ass version of the Hawk, once Suzuki came out with the SV650.  I think Honda missed a big opportunity by not doing so!  The SVs had around 70 bhp stock.  The Hawks had much less.   

Man, that first red Hawk is NICE!!!  I think the chrome would really pop off it the bike was CB-1 smurf blue!!

Sorry 'bout yo keyboard Clark!   

Daveontheedge,
     The SSSA isnt a pretty piece, when compared to just about every other bike that has one.  They could have made it look better.  The exhaust sound of the stock Hawk is okay, but nothing great.  These bikes sounded MUCH better with aftermarket exhausts on them.

[Drewski]

However, I found the SSSA to be somewhat of a disappointment. This really surprised me as I am a big fan of them and was my primary reason for going to have a look at the bike. I guess I just expected it to be a little more refined? rather than blocky and practical.

 

Apart from the obvious easier wheel removal, I think the idea of the single-sided arm was to get the drive chain and brake disc as near to the centre of the wheel as possibe. I'm not sure if you can feel the benefits or not.

[Daveontheedge]

Man, that first red Hawk is NICE!!!  I think the chrome would really pop off it the bike was CB-1 smurf blue!!

Sorry 'bout yo keyboard Clark!   

Daveontheedge,
     The SSSA isnt a pretty piece, when compared to just about every other bike that has one.  They could have made it look better.  The exhaust sound of the stock Hawk is okay, but nothing great.  These bikes sounded MUCH better with aftermarket exhausts on them.

I agree, that first Hawk looks amazing. Corbin seat, the rear foot pegs have been removed and the exhaust modified to show off the wheel.  Is that a CBR front end with a RVF rear wheel?

[a_morti]

Man, that first red Hawk is NICE!!!  I think the chrome would really pop off it the bike was CB-1 smurf blue!!

Sorry 'bout yo keyboard Clark!   

Daveontheedge,
     The SSSA isnt a pretty piece, when compared to just about every other bike that has one.  They could have made it look better.  The exhaust sound of the stock Hawk is okay, but nothing great.  These bikes sounded MUCH better with aftermarket exhausts on them.

I agree, that first Hawk looks amazing. Corbin seat, the rear foot pegs have been removed and the exhaust modified to show off the wheel.  Is that a CBR front end with a RVF rear wheel?

I'd ay the rear wheel is nc24, a it's "that" pattern and has four bolt holes. The usual swap is VFR750 as it allows a 160/17 tyre.

[JX]

GO FOR THE BROS(OR HAWK GT as you call them in thr US)

I WOULDN'T think twice,myself.
the BROS has that BRILLIANT inline V Twin(3 valve) engine from the NTV,so you CAN'T go wrong!
sounds great!ultra reliable&long lived!they have been known to do hundreds of thousands of miles,
without  problems!also has same cooling system as NTV as far as i know,so no probs getting spares there.
engine is lovely and torquey,fuel economy is about the same as the 1.
handling is apparently about equal to the 1 (also quite soft).
and of course(as everyone mentioned) the lovely single side swingarm.(only prob with those is that the brake discs can warp,apparently).

[halfast]

I owned both at the same time back in the 90's (actually, I own both now, but the hawk has been on the lift for 3 years ), they are really quite similar in stock form, pretty comfy ergos, nimble yet neutral handling, anemic suspension, but, and I think someone said it before,  the power delivery is where they differ:  The hawk has a lot of down low grunt and pulls nicely until you start hitting the upper revs, whereas the cb-1 you can wind the snot out of them and then you get that little punch at around 7-8k rpm, but seems a little sluggish in the lower rpms.  Personally, I love them both for the same reason and that is they are so damn easy to ride.  I'm building the hawk to be something somewhat unique, compared to stock , but with the -1 I'm be pretty happy to leave it as is, except for the suspension