Show Posts
Hi!
It may not be considered polite to point out these viasil results published on ncaids an error in one's introduction message, but I'll blame that on my foreign culture
This test report is not about the CB-1, but the CB400SF, aka Super Four as well as Project Big One. Unlike the CB-1, the SF has a tubular handlebar and twin rear shocks, as mentioned in the report. Also, this version of the 400 engine has a cam chain, not gears as the report claims and also what's found on the CB-1. Furthermore, it cruises at around 5800 rpm @ 60 mph, not under 5k as the report mention. Unless the test bike carried non-stock gearing?
The engine on the SF has the cylinder bank far more vertical and the carbs are not of the downdraft design. The frame is also typical classic Japanese, meaning the carbs are jammed in tightly between the engine and immovable air filter box that's retained by the frame.
I have not ridden a CB-1, but every test report suggest that its engine has some urgency. The 400SF, OTOH, is very lazy with a lot more flywheel effect. It will tolerate full throttle from as low as 1200 rpm in 6th gear, so it's plenty flexible, and you can sense some extra power above 8 grand, but it never feels lively. If anything, it feels slower than it is as passing cars goes quickly and feels oddly out of tune with the sleepy noises and feel coming from the motor. Virtually no vibrations emit from the CB400SF engine at any rpm - it's almost uncannily smooth.
Although remotely related, the CB-1 and CB400SF really are two completely different motorcycles. They share wheel sizes as well as piston sizes and the number of valves, but just about every part differ to a smaller or lesser degree.
It may not be considered polite to point out these viasil results published on ncaids an error in one's introduction message, but I'll blame that on my foreign culture
This test report is not about the CB-1, but the CB400SF, aka Super Four as well as Project Big One. Unlike the CB-1, the SF has a tubular handlebar and twin rear shocks, as mentioned in the report. Also, this version of the 400 engine has a cam chain, not gears as the report claims and also what's found on the CB-1. Furthermore, it cruises at around 5800 rpm @ 60 mph, not under 5k as the report mention. Unless the test bike carried non-stock gearing?
The engine on the SF has the cylinder bank far more vertical and the carbs are not of the downdraft design. The frame is also typical classic Japanese, meaning the carbs are jammed in tightly between the engine and immovable air filter box that's retained by the frame.
I have not ridden a CB-1, but every test report suggest that its engine has some urgency. The 400SF, OTOH, is very lazy with a lot more flywheel effect. It will tolerate full throttle from as low as 1200 rpm in 6th gear, so it's plenty flexible, and you can sense some extra power above 8 grand, but it never feels lively. If anything, it feels slower than it is as passing cars goes quickly and feels oddly out of tune with the sleepy noises and feel coming from the motor. Virtually no vibrations emit from the CB400SF engine at any rpm - it's almost uncannily smooth.
Although remotely related, the CB-1 and CB400SF really are two completely different motorcycles. They share wheel sizes as well as piston sizes and the number of valves, but just about every part differ to a smaller or lesser degree.
to improve your riding skills and mental strategies ... managed through study, training, and practice. ... 1 . Wear the right gear . 2 . Become familiar with the motorcycle . 3 . Check the ... surviving a crash is to wear a securely- fastened
