Also Check Out
ATVFlorida.com
PinballShark.com

© 2014
HondaCB1.org Message Forums
July 27, 2017, 12:40:08 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to HondaCB1.org! Please register in the Forum to post messages or view attached photos.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: Mk1 CB-1 & elusive Mk2 differences  (Read 387 times)
ModerateFkr
Full Member
***
Online Online

Posts: 186


View Profile
« on: June 26, 2017, 10:03:04 PM »

As suggested by VintageHunter, I'm starting a new thread on here to discuss the differences between the Mk1 CB-1 we all know and love in all its forms, and the elusive and almost mythical Mk2 version.

So far all I have is this low res photo of a Mk2 I discovered via Google images. It looks like an official shot.

I'm not even close to an authority on the Mk1, indeed in on a very steep learning curve, having only discovered the little beauties a few months ago, and found mine at the beginning of May. So I'm counting on everyone to add their knowledge please, in the hope of amassing all the available data on the differences between the two models.

What I've noticed from the photo below is that the seat pad is thicker; the rider part appears to be longer and is level as opposed to sloping as on the Mk1. I propose to grab some basic data on the amount of slope soon. It also appears from the photo that the tail cowl is shorter. But the pad certainly is deeper at the rear (protruding above the cowl), as well as just behind the tank.  

The tank itself appears to be repositioned slightly further back and down the frame tube. We do know that the tank had a bigger capacity, looks a little different, and that the airbox was redesigned. The capacity increase could have been achieved by lowering the base panel and squishing the airbox. But what DID Honda do. Until we get one in captivity, we can't be sure.

Anyway, this is the place to throw in anything you may have. Photos of live Mk2s will be rewarded with pints of beer. VH is paying ;-))

Here's the link to the reference shot. I have no idea of its origin. Sorry I can't upload the one I have on my phone because its too big to the site limit of 128k!

http://a2bikes.co.uk/bike/honda-cb-1
« Last Edit: June 26, 2017, 10:04:46 PM by ModerateFkr » Logged
spacetiger
Full Member
***
Online Online

Posts: 126


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 27, 2017, 07:17:55 PM »

I noted the passenger footpeg bracket is different.  MKI = fixed tubing welded to the rear tail frame.  the MKII bolt to the frame (and can be easily removed.
Logged
a_morti
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Location: Gibraltar

Posts: 1920



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: June 27, 2017, 08:22:54 PM »

That's a difference from usa models and Japanese models. Japanese mk1 had the same bolt on rear footpegs.

Let's say i was at honda design hq after the cb-1 hadn't sold as well as it should've. I got feedback like it's not a sportbike so why the low bars (I'll fit higher bars), why the tiny tank range (I'll redesign the bottom half of the fuel tank and airbox lid but not the other halves as that's more unnecessary expense), why the basic shock absorber when the bike isn't cheap (add gas bottle), and why the poor thin seat (I'll pad it thicker). All that and a colour change doesn't cost much if it shifts frames and engines which are overstocked. New plastics are more expensive.
Logged

Cam Drive Gear Train Smiley
ModerateFkr
Full Member
***
Online Online

Posts: 186


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 27, 2017, 11:21:42 PM »

That's a difference from usa models and Japanese models. Japanese mk1 had the same bolt on rear footpegs.

Let's say i was at honda design hq after the cb-1 hadn't sold as well as it should've. I got feedback like it's not a sportbike so why the low bars (I'll fit higher bars), why the tiny tank range (I'll redesign the bottom half of the fuel tank and airbox lid but not the other halves as that's more unnecessary expense), why the basic shock absorber when the bike isn't cheap (add gas bottle), and why the poor thin seat (I'll pad it thicker). All that and a colour change doesn't cost much if it shifts frames and engines which are overstocked. New plastics are more expensive.

All true a_morti, makes perfect sense. I agree 100%.

When I started to investigate my Smurf tank, trying to figure out how to derust it, I noticed just how close the bottom bulge is to the filler, and how wide it is. I suspect there's close to a gallon in that hump.

Once you've figured out how to make perimeter frames, thus avoiding the need for a tunnel in the tank, why stick a giant plastic airbox on top of the head in the hottest spot on the bike? Does hot air in the inlet help reduce emissions I wonder? Al Gore has a lot to answer for.

Those front alloy side panels could easily have been turned into air ducts. They still can of course.

When I figure out how to play with carbon fibre, I'm hoping to make new panels (with integrated fly screens and water traps) that link directly up to a new flat topped airbox lid. The weight saving won't balance the extra fuel load, but the four side panels together do weigh 1.25kg - that's an extra litre for no weight gain.  

Since I've already got a Japanese model who's engine has pretty bad corrosion on all panels, and the frame is in need of a respray, I'd already considered that it seems sensible to go black. One stage further is to make a Mk3 concept CB-1, incorporating all the best innovations we can reasonably devise that are period appropriate.

Yeah, I know, I need to start another thread!!;-)
« Last Edit: June 27, 2017, 11:28:13 PM by ModerateFkr » Logged
VintageHunter
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Southern California-LA-Valencia

Posts: 1213


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: June 27, 2017, 11:32:43 PM »

microing the popcorn as I type......do it!....i'll be yer first fan.
[/quote].......One stage further is to make a Mk3 concept CB-1, incorporating all the best innovations we can reasonably devise that are period appropriate.

Yeah, I know, I need to start another thread!!;-)


[/quote]
Logged

a_morti
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Location: Gibraltar

Posts: 1920



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: June 28, 2017, 03:19:17 AM »

That's a difference from usa models and Japanese models. Japanese mk1 had the same bolt on rear footpegs.

Let's say i was at honda design hq after the cb-1 hadn't sold as well as it should've. I got feedback like it's not a sportbike so why the low bars (I'll fit higher bars), why the tiny tank range (I'll redesign the bottom half of the fuel tank and airbox lid but not the other halves as that's more unnecessary expense), why the basic shock absorber when the bike isn't cheap (add gas bottle), and why the poor thin seat (I'll pad it thicker). All that and a colour change doesn't cost much if it shifts frames and engines which are overstocked. New plastics are more expensive.

All true a_morti, makes perfect sense. I agree 100%.

When I started to investigate my Smurf tank, trying to figure out how to derust it, I noticed just how close the bottom bulge is to the filler, and how wide it is. I suspect there's close to a gallon in that hump.

Once you've figured out how to make perimeter frames, thus avoiding the need for a tunnel in the tank, why stick a giant plastic airbox on top of the head in the hottest spot on the bike? Does hot air in the inlet help reduce emissions I wonder? Al Gore has a lot to answer for.

Those front alloy side panels could easily have been turned into air ducts. They still can of course.

When I figure out how to play with carbon fibre, I'm hoping to make new panels (with integrated fly screens and water traps) that link directly up to a new flat topped airbox lid. The weight saving won't balance the extra fuel load, but the four side panels together do weigh 1.25kg - that's an extra litre for no weight gain.  

Since I've already got a Japanese model who's engine has pretty bad corrosion on all panels, and the frame is in need of a respray, I'd already considered that it seems sensible to go black. One stage further is to make a Mk3 concept CB-1, incorporating all the best innovations we can reasonably devise that are period appropriate.

Yeah, I know, I need to start another thread!!;-)

Better check what "down draft carbs" are for, before you blame al gore for another thing.

Air boxes were used to reduce noise long before al gore.
Logged

Cam Drive Gear Train Smiley
VintageHunter
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Southern California-LA-Valencia

Posts: 1213


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: June 28, 2017, 09:56:00 AM »

Moderate:
from what I've read on these forums...it appears those front engine panels should NOT be opened up. Seems they cause more air turbulence than just being for "looks". Trust me I too wanted to do the same thing...put a mesh behind those panels because it "looks" better but not at the risk of it adversely screwing with the air flow.
So...keep those front engine panels solid. Someone here in me town suggested that if you want a different "look" there. then simple paint that triangular shaped portion black and then add a "mesh" in front but that's a lot of work just for cosmetics which really doesn't need it.
 
That's a difference from usa models and Japanese models. Japanese mk1 had the same bolt on rear footpegs.

Let's say i was at honda design hq after the cb-1 hadn't sold as well as it should've. I got feedback like it's not a sportbike so why the low bars (I'll fit higher bars), why the tiny tank range (I'll redesign the bottom half of the fuel tank and airbox lid but not the other halves as that's more unnecessary expense), why the basic shock absorber when the bike isn't cheap (add gas bottle), and why the poor thin seat (I'll pad it thicker). All that and a colour change doesn't cost much if it shifts frames and engines which are overstocked. New plastics are more expensive.

All true a_morti, makes perfect sense. I agree 100%.

When I started to investigate my Smurf tank, trying to figure out how to derust it, I noticed just how close the bottom bulge is to the filler, and how wide it is. I suspect there's close to a gallon in that hump.

Once you've figured out how to make perimeter frames, thus avoiding the need for a tunnel in the tank, why stick a giant plastic airbox on top of the head in the hottest spot on the bike? Does hot air in the inlet help reduce emissions I wonder? Al Gore has a lot to answer for.

Those front alloy side panels could easily have been turned into air ducts. They still can of course.

When I figure out how to play with carbon fibre, I'm hoping to make new panels (with integrated fly screens and water traps) that link directly up to a new flat topped airbox lid. The weight saving won't balance the extra fuel load, but the four side panels together do weigh 1.25kg - that's an extra litre for no weight gain.  

Since I've already got a Japanese model who's engine has pretty bad corrosion on all panels, and the frame is in need of a respray, I'd already considered that it seems sensible to go black. One stage further is to make a Mk3 concept CB-1, incorporating all the best innovations we can reasonably devise that are period appropriate.

Yeah, I know, I need to start another thread!!;-)

Logged

Sugs
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Location: San Diego, CA

Posts: 138



View Profile
« Reply #7 on: June 28, 2017, 10:53:22 AM »

Moderate:
from what I've read on these forums...it appears those front engine panels should NOT be opened up. Seems they cause more air turbulence than just being for "looks". Trust me I too wanted to do the same thing...put a mesh behind those panels because it "looks" better but not at the risk of it adversely screwing with the air flow.
So...keep those front engine panels solid. Someone here in me town suggested that if you want a different "look" there. then simple paint that triangular shaped portion black and then add a "mesh" in front but that's a lot of work just for cosmetics which really doesn't need it.
 

I'm curious to know what exactly someone thinks happens if you do that.  I've been running my bike with those panels off for over 2 years.  Haven't noticed any drivability issues at all.  My airbox is stock and still has the snorkels.
Logged

1979 Honda GL1000 Goldwing - 1990 Honda CB1
VintageHunter
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Southern California-LA-Valencia

Posts: 1213


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: June 28, 2017, 10:56:18 AM »

Calling all experts.....calling on all CB1 experts who have had issues with these panels removed. Please opine. I'm interested as well.
Moderate:
from what I've read on these forums...it appears those front engine panels should NOT be opened up. Seems they cause more air turbulence than just being for "looks". Trust me I too wanted to do the same thing...put a mesh behind those panels because it "looks" better but not at the risk of it adversely screwing with the air flow.
So...keep those front engine panels solid. Someone here in me town suggested that if you want a different "look" there. then simple paint that triangular shaped portion black and then add a "mesh" in front but that's a lot of work just for cosmetics which really doesn't need it.
 

I'm curious to know what exactly someone thinks happens if you do that.  I've been running my bike with those panels off for over 2 years.  Haven't noticed any drivability issues at all.  My airbox is stock and still has the snorkels.
Logged

Pod70
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Location: Gravesend, England

Posts: 462


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: June 28, 2017, 12:01:55 PM »

VH, your mission if you're prepared to accept it is to ride your bike for a week without the panels and then with the panels and report back. This message will self destruct in 5 seconds....  Grin

I suspect that there will be little difference as the snorkels and airbox baffles will smooth any turbulance. If you have cut the snorkels however, then there may be issues.

Bizarrely the CBR400 has twin cold air feeds from the front of the fairing to the airbox. Not to be confused with a ram air setup as it is not a closed system
« Last Edit: June 28, 2017, 12:05:33 PM by Pod70 » Logged
VintageHunter
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Southern California-LA-Valencia

Posts: 1213


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: June 28, 2017, 12:06:32 PM »

hummm....my "mission" if chose to accept it huh.....OK "Q"......I'll try it out.
ride the CB1 for 1 week "without" those front engine panels and report back.....ok, lemme see how that goes.
Logged

ModerateFkr
Full Member
***
Online Online

Posts: 186


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: June 28, 2017, 03:14:48 PM »

This is why we need to do the work ourselves, as several of you have with your individual choices of rear shock, and as Jerry has with multiple options. We need to separate conjecture based upon folk lore from empirical experience.

Whilst we all have some experience of 'clean breathing' bikes of various makes, as Sugs points out, Honda's own CBR400 which shares the same or very similar engine, has cold air inlets. This very stronly suggests there's no special reason that WE should need to concern ourselves with, for keeping the system on the CB-1 PRECISELY as it was designed and built.

My attack on Al Gore earlier is based upon a long and detailed study of how legislation (and climate legislation in particular) has been formulated over decades, as well as what commercial interests are ultimately behind them, as well as who actually benefits.

This is obviously not the place for that discussion, but the trail most definitely does lead from those interested parties, to both foreign and domestic automobile and motorcycle manufacturers and their gov whores.

Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING is about creating revenue for gov via taxation, in order to enrich the psychopathic elite and pay gov debts. If that involves empowering local cops to fine you for having a non standard muffler, then it's only the same mentality as sending you to jail for possessing a plant that kills cancer cells.

The only way Honda could sell the CB-1 in the USA was to conform to federal and state legislation regarding emissions - based upon the claim that emissions contribute to global warming. When it was proven that there had in fact been NO global warming for 16 straight years, the climate lobby changed the terminology to 'climate change' - something that has been in constant flux for literally billions of years.

And at what point did these lying bastards ever propose legislating for the emissions given off by cattle, or point out the FACT that no model even based upon the wildest predictions, has been shown to cause more carbon production than the natural vegitation can cope with via photosynthesis.

But photosynthesis requires adequate sunlight. And the US gov is on record admitting it is operating programmes to limit the amount of sunlight reaching the ground.

For these, and many more reasons, we are wholly justified in being extreme my skeptical about the alleged NEED for air boxes of specific design and location - with hot air breathing snorkels strangling one model, whilst another has a cold air system. And if the anomaly is still confusing, Honda is subject to a quota system, whereby X number of their models have to comply with Z regulations over a given period. These are the complicated trade deals Trump pretended he knew all about. He didn't.

My suspicion, at this juncture, given the parallel anomaly of the CBR400 setup, is that they were allowed to manufacture and export the 'free breathing' CBR400 - ONLY if they also manufactured and exported the CB-1 in relatively 'strangled' form. That's how messed up these regulation deals actually are.

So yeah, Gore gets it in the nuts every time.


Logged
VintageHunter
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Southern California-LA-Valencia

Posts: 1213


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: June 28, 2017, 03:23:16 PM »

Whew there cowboy!...that was a mouthful...
I agree with you on "MOST of what your wrote...but not on our President. I support our current administration. This country has had too too many years of A$$HATS in charge...it's time for a REAL change. Not the one promised 8 years ago.....I digress.
Sorry....but as someone from the internet once said........."Oh whelp, someone on the net doesn't agree me with".

But as they always tell me....let's stick to motorcycles and CB1s or I'm sure some pinhead will chime and state "this is not the place for the subject of this discussion'....(sorry Moderate to burst yer bubble but they will say write that) at some point very soon...trust me I know from person experience.)...but I digress as usual.

I'd still like to know and understand what the specifiics diffs are on the MK1 and MK2 flavours of the CB1.
(getting back on track).

(p.s. - Al Gore is an A$$HAT who deserves to be kicked in the nuts, morning, noon and before his bedtime).

This is why we need to do the work ourselves, as several of you have with your individual choices of rear shock, and as Jerry has with multiple options. We need to separate conjecture based upon folk lore from empirical experience.

Whilst we all have some experience of 'clean breathing' bikes of various makes, as Sugs points out, Honda's own CBR400 which shares the same or very similar engine, has cold air inlets. This very stronly suggests there's no special reason that WE should need to concern ourselves with, for keeping the system on the CB-1 PRECISELY as it was designed and built.

My attack on Al Gore earlier is based upon a long and detailed study of how legislation (and climate legislation in particular) has been formulated over decades, as well as what commercial interests are ultimately behind them, as well as who actually benefits.

This is obviously not the place for that discussion, but the trail most definitely does lead from those interested parties, to both foreign and domestic automobile and motorcycle manufacturers and their gov whores.

Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING is about creating revenue for gov via taxation, in order to enrich the psychopathic elite and pay gov debts. If that involves empowering local cops to fine you for having a non standard muffler, then it's only the same mentality as sending you to jail for possessing a plant that kills cancer cells.

The only way Honda could sell the CB-1 in the USA was to conform to federal and state legislation regarding emissions - based upon the claim that emissions contribute to global warming. When it was proven that there had in fact been NO global warming for 16 straight years, the climate lobby changed the terminology to 'climate change' - something that has been in constant flux for literally billions of years.

And at what point did these lying bastards ever propose legislating for the emissions given off by cattle, or point out the FACT that no model even based upon the wildest predictions, has been shown to cause more carbon production than the natural vegitation can cope with via photosynthesis.

But photosynthesis requires adequate sunlight. And the US gov is on record admitting it is operating programmes to limit the amount of sunlight reaching the ground.

For these, and many more reasons, we are wholly justified in being extreme my skeptical about the alleged NEED for air boxes of specific design and location - with hot air breathing snorkels strangling one model, whilst another has a cold air system. And if the anomaly is still confusing, Honda is subject to a quota system, whereby X number of their models have to comply with Z regulations over a given period. These are the complicated trade deals Trump pretended he knew all about. He didn't.

My suspicion, at this juncture, given the parallel anomaly of the CBR400 setup, is that they were allowed to manufacture and export the 'free breathing' CBR400 - ONLY if they also manufactured and exported the CB-1 in relatively 'strangled' form. That's how messed up these regulation deals actually are.

So yeah, Gore gets it in the nuts every time.



« Last Edit: June 28, 2017, 03:25:15 PM by VintageHunter » Logged

ModerateFkr
Full Member
***
Online Online

Posts: 186


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: June 28, 2017, 04:58:12 PM »

They're all just bankers' puppets playing the fake two party paradigm VH. Some just happen to be famous for their TV reality careers and infamous for their blatant corruption in business. Have you read the cases brought by the workers he failed to pay scale when he built Trump Tower? Plus his four bankruptcies that mostly harmed small businesses and society in general who ended up picking up the bill.

The point about addressing the true role of the mythical 'climate' requirements influencing gov legislation in trade negotiations etc., which demonstrably determine how our bikes end up being configured, is to explode the PR mythology they feed us.

Ignorance is something we all suffer from, but it's both optional and curable through enquiry. Have you read Orwell? Did you ever think we would be actually living 1984?

The other factors governing these things are insurance companies and the issues surrounding liability. Built into all legislation are rafts of penalties designed to induce compliance and financially reward administrations for transgression (at all levels).

These are the REAL reasons the CB-1 has a hot airbox and it's brother does not. Just study engine design. Look how REAL efficiency governs air flow, and how what we are looking at is not compatible with those principles.

Finally, the people who determine what is and is not on topic need to be capable of making an argument to support their claims. They often can't. Everything is connected. But I contend that the design of the respiratory systems of the serially demonised internal combustion engine are more closely and directly connected to legislation than most other subjects. One simply cannot do justice to one without acknowledging the other.

Logged
VintageHunter
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Location: Southern California-LA-Valencia

Posts: 1213


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: June 28, 2017, 05:20:48 PM »

Moderate:
check yer PM to my responses to your last commentary.
I hope it made it to you....before this thread gets shut down for "non-compliance and Russian intervention" Wink
Logged

Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!