• A few people have been scammed on the site, Only use paypal to pay for items for sale by other members. If they will not use paypal, its likely a scam NEVER SEND E-TRANSFERS OF ANY KIND.

Slow bike fast

Suspension is a tradeoff but they need ample travel in any case. I am wondering if they don't have the needed travel and Honda is trying to get around it by being innovative, especially after they shortened it to lower the bike in '21.
 
A footnote to this thread is that I just purchased a fully farkled and beautiful top of the line 2016 BMW S1000XR from a great local guy. The HP is 160+ with a full titanium Akraprovic exhaust and custom mapping. Rode it home from Bend, Oregon for 300 miles through some of the most beautiful country in the nation. What a machine. What a machine. Talk about acceleration. It's so light and nimble and fast. You think about it, and you are over 100. It scratches all my itches for performance. Super comfortable, cruise control, just a joy to play on and go for distance. And yet, I will ride the wife's NC to work tomorrow because it gets 60+MPG and is so fun around town!
A few months back I could have gotten a 2018 s1000xr from a friend for the price of my new nc750. I decided not to buy it. Not being familiar with BMWs and not liking the potential maintenance costs, I decided to stick with something more familiar to me, another Japanese motorcycle, which wouldn’t tempt me to ride like I’m still 25, and daily break licence losing speeds. I can see from your post you know what I’m talking about.
 
Suspension is a tradeoff but they need ample travel in any case. I am wondering if they don't have the needed travel and Honda is trying to get around it by being innovative, especially after they shortened it to lower the bike in '21.
I believe half the front fork problem is the springs were made for a much lighter rider. I’m 195. The static sag, and I find this hard to believe. is 40mm. With me on the bike it’s 60 mm. Half the available fork travel is taken up without the bike even hitting a bump. I’m probably going to have to put in stronger fork springs, but first I’m going to try replacling the non adjustable forks caps with preload adjustable cb1100 fork caps, to see what difference that makes.

Upto about 50 mph the rides not too bad. Above that, on a slightly rough road, if feels as if the spring is bouncing very slightly, under damped.

Other than that I have no complaints. The brakes that felt wooden have bedded in and are adequate for the bikes performance. The screen which I was expecting I’d have to replace due to all the complaints of noise etc, I find more than bearable. It’s certainly quieter than the small screen that came on my gsx-s1000f, and air doesn’t cause me to be jarred behind it.

I have to say I like the cockpit area, how it looks. I can’t stand sitting behind a minuscule instrument cluster such as the Fz9 Yamaha. On the other hand I also don’t care for large cockpit areas like the Fjr1300. Honda have done a good job here.
 
I believe half the front fork problem is the springs were made for a much lighter rider. I’m 195. The static sag, and I find this hard to believe. is 40mm. With me on the bike it’s 60 mm. Half the available fork travel is taken up without the bike even hitting a bump. I’m probably going to have to put in stronger fork springs, but first I’m going to try replacling the non adjustable forks caps with preload adjustable cb1100 fork caps, to see what difference that makes.

Upto about 50 mph the rides not too bad. Above that, on a slightly rough road, if feels as if the spring is bouncing very slightly, under damped.

Other than that I have no complaints. The brakes that felt wooden have bedded in and are adequate for the bikes performance. The screen which I was expecting I’d have to replace due to all the complaints of noise etc, I find more than bearable. It’s certainly quieter than the small screen that came on my gsx-s1000f, and air doesn’t cause me to be jarred behind it.

I have to say I like the cockpit area, how it looks. I can’t stand sitting behind a minuscule instrument cluster such as the Fz9 Yamaha. On the other hand I also don’t care for large cockpit areas like the Fjr1300. Honda have done a good job here.
The preload adjustment is about 18 mm if I recall correctly. I installed the CB1100 caps in my 2015. I think you will still have to replace the stock springs.

 
That "slow bike/car fast" mantra is mostly BS.

It all depends on a lot of things. I had a Kawasaki Mule SX that only went 22mph. It was slow and it was NOT fun to drive it fast due to the suspension. It wasn't meant to do that, therefore it wasn't fun.

The whole "slow car fast" idea came from the Miata. But people forget that car was designed to be fun at those power levels.

Having said that, I think the NC pulls hard enough to be fun. It has no top end at all, but that's fine with me. I don't really like 100+ mph runs.
 
That "slow bike/car fast" mantra is mostly BS.

It all depends on a lot of things. I had a Kawasaki Mule SX that only went 22mph. It was slow and it was NOT fun to drive it fast due to the suspension. It wasn't meant to do that, therefore it wasn't fun.

The whole "slow car fast" idea came from the Miata. But people forget that car was designed to be fun at those power levels.

Having said that, I think the NC pulls hard enough to be fun. It has no top end at all, but that's fine with me. I don't really like 100+ mph runs.
Nobody thinks it's fun to ride a slow Kawasaki Mule fast. Not an applicable comparison to the saying.

The NC and other slow sport-oriented bikes like 300-400cc naked and sport bikes, are all perfect examples of where the saying comes from. Riding a slow bike on track or through the twisties allows you to focus more on your lines through turns, braking later and setting up for turns, getting back on the throttle sooner at, or after, the apex, instead of also worrying about more extreme acceleration and then slowing down from 160mph to 80mph going into a turn.

I began riding track on a 2007 Kawasaki ZX10R back in 2008. Had a freak accident in 2010 on the same bike on the highway and lost left leg below the knee. Due to complications with residual limb, mainly the knee, I now ride an NC with DCT on track. Around the track environment, I always heard people say that riding a slower bike will make you a better rider, and it wasn't until I did my first track day in 10 years, back in 2019, on this NC that I fully understood that statement. I hate being passed on the straights by all the faster bikes, but I can catch them in the turns and pass them. The last track day I did a few weeks ago at Barber, I passed a single rider 3 different times in turns and he passed me right back in the straights, all in one lap. I firmly believe I am a better rider now on the NC that I was on the ZX10R back in the day, as a result of being able to focus more on the fundamentals of cornering and less on extreme acceleration and braking.
 
It's all about perspective.

Personally, I enjoy riding a faster bike more than I enjoy riding a slower bike. But there is a balance... For me a bike that is too slow is no fun, and a bike that is too fast is no fun. So there is a fun spectrum or a bell grade if you will, of fun bikes with a smaller power to weight ration at one end and a larger power to weight ratio at the other end. I tend to enjoy riding bikes that are at the upper medium end of fun in that spectrum...

I have a buddy that absolutely loves his CBR250. All 23 HP of it. I have ridden a Ninja 300 and a Yamaha R3 and those power bikes were a NOPE for me. Same with a CB 500X I owned for a little while, while attempting to downsize. Nope, no fun for me either. I have also ridden a 198 HP R-1 Yamaha and my son's 160 hp MT 10 Yamaha and those were at the other end of the Nope for me. Too much power for ME.

I tend to prefer bikes in the 100 HP range and about 75# torque. To me those bikes are fun to ride. Enough power to excite, but not ungodly power enough to scare.

Funny...The CBR250/Ninja 300/R3 camp would say 100 hp bikes are fast bikes... The Ducati Panigale, KTM 1290 and BMW S1000RR crowd would say 100 hp bikes are slow bikes.

For ME, the NC 750X is about as low as I am willing to go hp wise. Fun, but not really "exciting".

It's all about perspective
 
Last edited:
The preload adjustment is about 18 mm if I recall correctly. I installed the CB1100 caps in my 2015. I think you will still have to replace the stock springs.

Thanks. I feel you are right and the springs will need replacing. I’ll still get the fork caps to fine tune the new springs when I get them..
 
Nobody thinks it's fun to ride a slow Kawasaki Mule fast. Not an applicable comparison to the saying.

The NC and other slow sport-oriented bikes like 300-400cc naked and sport bikes, are all perfect examples of where the saying comes from. Riding a slow bike on track or through the twisties allows you to focus more on your lines through turns, braking later and setting up for turns, getting back on the throttle sooner at, or after, the apex, instead of also worrying about more extreme acceleration and then slowing down from 160mph to 80mph going into a turn.

I began riding track on a 2007 Kawasaki ZX10R back in 2008. Had a freak accident in 2010 on the same bike on the highway and lost left leg below the knee. Due to complications with residual limb, mainly the knee, I now ride an NC with DCT on track. Around the track environment, I always heard people say that riding a slower bike will make you a better rider, and it wasn't until I did my first track day in 10 years, back in 2019, on this NC that I fully understood that statement. I hate being passed on the straights by all the faster bikes, but I can catch them in the turns and pass them. The last track day I did a few weeks ago at Barber, I passed a single rider 3 different times in turns and he passed me right back in the straights, all in one lap. I firmly believe I am a better rider now on the NC that I was on the ZX10R back in the day, as a result of being able to focus more on the fundamentals of cornering and less on extreme acceleration and braking.
I agree with you. I’ve owned enough sport bikes, and raced a few in my time to know power is not everything. And just because you ride a powerful bike, it doesn’t make you a fast rider.

I remember years ago being at a track day spectating on the back straight. There were bikes of all makes and sizes, including vintage race bikes. It was interesting to watch the sport bikes come hurtling upto the right hander at the end of the straight, brake hard and change down the gears slowing considerably to make the corner. Then along came a 350 Honda twin racer, flat out, dropping down one gear, with no apparent loss of speed and turning into the corner at a speed that looked similar to the sport bikes, maybe even faster. Hard acceleration invariably leads to hard braking.

I found the same when I had my Cb900f in the mid 90s and I rode on the street with guys with new sport bikes. I had no problem keeping up in the corners, and on occasion overtaking. When I got a Yzf750 , a great bike, I marvelled at its power and handling, and wondered how I’d ever been able to keep up on my old 900f.

The major difference in my opinion between bikes prior to the 90s sport bikes and what came after is handling. Old bikes had flexy frames and so so tires. You could feel when the rear started to break away when you were being aggressive. Modern sport bikes handle amazingly, but when you’re aggressive and lose the rear end there’s less chance of saving it.

The nc is a bike that will make it obvious when it reaches the end of its tire grip.
 
It's all about perspective.

Personally, I enjoy riding a faster bike more than I enjoy riding a slower bike. But there is a balance... For me a bike that is too slow is no fun, and a bike that is too fast is no fun. So there is a fun spectrum or a bell grade if you will, of fun bikes with a smaller power to weight ration at one end and a larger power to weight ratio at the other end. I tend to enjoy riding bikes that are at the upper medium end of fun in that spectrum...

I have a buddy that absolutely loves his CBR250. All 23 HP of it. I have ridden a Ninja 300 and a Yamaha R3 and those power bikes were a NOPE for me. Same with a CB 500X I owned for a little while, while attempting to downsize. Nope, no fun for me either. I have also ridden a 198 HP R-1 Yamaha and my son's 160 hp MT 10 Yamaha and those were at the other end of the Nope for me. Too much power for ME.

I tend to prefer bikes in the 100 HP range and about 75# torque. To me those bikes are fun to ride. Enough power to excite, but not ungodly power enough to scare.

Funny...The CBR250/Ninja 300/R3 camp would say 100 hp bikes are fast bikes... The Ducati Panigale, KTM 1290 and BMW S1000RR crowd would say 100 hp bikes are slow bikes.

For ME, the NC 750X is about as low as I am willing to go hp wise. Fun, but not really "exciting".

It's all about perspective
I’m with you. 100 hp is all you need in the real world. I’ve been at both ends of owning fast and slow bikes. I didn’t consider my Vfr750 as a fast bike with its sub 100hp, but after jumping straight onto it after riding the nc my vfr went from a comfortable, moderately fast bike to a leaned over superbike with high foot pegs. It doesn’t take riding the nc long to make anything more powerful and sporty feel fast and uncomfortable.

I really like the contrast between the two bikes.
 
I drag raced my Suzuki GS1100 every week back in the eighties and got a Kawi with the same HP last year but now it scares me to open it up all the way on a public road. I'm looking forward to my 750 DCT if the dealer ever gets it in.
 
It's all about perspective.

Personally, I enjoy riding a faster bike more than I enjoy riding a slower bike. But there is a balance... For me a bike that is too slow is no fun, and a bike that is too fast is no fun. So there is a fun spectrum or a bell grade if you will, of fun bikes with a smaller power to weight ration at one end and a larger power to weight ratio at the other end. I tend to enjoy riding bikes that are at the upper medium end of fun in that spectrum...

I have a buddy that absolutely loves his CBR250. All 23 HP of it. I have ridden a Ninja 300 and a Yamaha R3 and those power bikes were a NOPE for me. Same with a CB 500X I owned for a little while, while attempting to downsize. Nope, no fun for me either. I have also ridden a 198 HP R-1 Yamaha and my son's 160 hp MT 10 Yamaha and those were at the other end of the Nope for me. Too much power for ME.

I tend to prefer bikes in the 100 HP range and about 75# torque. To me those bikes are fun to ride. Enough power to excite, but not ungodly power enough to scare.

Funny...The CBR250/Ninja 300/R3 camp would say 100 hp bikes are fast bikes... The Ducati Panigale, KTM 1290 and BMW S1000RR crowd would say 100 hp bikes are slow bikes.

For ME, the NC 750X is about as low as I am willing to go hp wise. Fun, but not really "exciting".

It's all about perspective
I've never ridden an R3, but I know at the track an R3 will be near dead even with me on the straights, sometimes even pulling away from me a little bit. The ones that pull away are probably re-geared and have other basic performance mods. I assume around town and normal highway driving, the feel of the R3's power is probably much different than that of the NC, whereas running wide open throttle on track, the R3 seems to have a very slight power advantage over the NC. Well, an NC700 anyways. Can't speak for how it compares to either generation of the NC750.
 
Last edited:
I've never ridden an R3, but I know at the track an R3 will be near dead even with me on the straights, sometimes even pulling away from me a little bit. I assume around town and normal highway driving, the feel of the R3's power is probably much different than that of the NC, whereas running wide open throttle on track, the R3 seems to have a very slight power advantage over the NC. Well, an NC700 anyways. Can't speak for how it compares to either generation of the NC750.
To me the advantage of a higher horsepower bike is that you don't have to run the beejeezus out of them to run the same speed you would on a smaller hp bike. 75 mph is 75 mph no matter which bike you are riding, but on a 23 hp bike you have to be running (example) 8000 rpms to do it, on a 100 hp bike you can be doing that same speed while turning at 4000 rpms.

There are of course certain roads, very curvy technical canyon roads, in very select areas of the country, where a small bike can keep up or even surpass an equal rider on a larger bike, but personally I don't live in areas like that. Around here it's not as technical, more country curvy sweepers and there is no way in a day of riding, a small bike rider is not going to be frustrated and worn out trying to keep up with a larger bike rider of equal talent if they are riding half way sportingly. If both bikes keep to the speed limit, there is no problem, just one will have to be run and rowed a lot more than the other, but any half way long straightaway will have the more powerful bike jetting out a gap on the smaller bike while not giving up anything in the curves, because the curves aren't tight enough that todays bikes/tires can't handle them. I've seen guys on BMW GS's, ST 1300s and FJR just railing these curves. Not me lol.
 
I drag raced my Suzuki GS1100 every week back in the eighties and got a Kawi with the same HP last year but now it scares me to open it up all the way on a public road. I'm looking forward to my 750 DCT if the dealer ever gets it in.
I've never ridden an R3, but I know at the track an R3 will be near dead even with me on the straights, sometimes even pulling away from me a little bit. The ones that pull away are probably re-geared and have other basic performance mods. I assume around town and normal highway driving, the feel of the R3's power is probably much different than that of the NC, whereas running wide open throttle on track, the R3 seems to have a very slight power advantage over the NC. Well, an NC700 anyways. Can't speak for how it compares to either generation of the NC750.
I wouldn’t be handle the buzziness of an R3 on the road. I sold a gsxr1000 because I wanted to slow down and got a cbr600f4i. Kept a year and sold it. Couldn’t stand revving it hard compared to the gixxer. I like big, or understressed engines like the nc that never feel like they’re working. For me you cant beat a v4 for feeling like it’s never working hard at any speed.
 
I wouldn’t be handle the buzziness of an R3 on the road. I sold a gsxr1000 because I wanted to slow down and got a cbr600f4i. Kept a year and sold it. Couldn’t stand revving it hard compared to the gixxer. I like big, or understressed engines like the nc that never feel like they’re working. For me you cant beat a v4 for feeling like it’s never working hard at any speed.
I agree with all that. If you have to tach something out just to squeeze the power out of it it makes no sense to me.
 
I wouldn’t be handle the buzziness of an R3 on the road. I sold a gsxr1000 because I wanted to slow down and got a cbr600f4i. Kept a year and sold it. Couldn’t stand revving it hard compared to the gixxer. I like big, or understressed engines like the nc that never feel like they’re working. For me you cant beat a v4 for feeling like it’s never working hard at any speed.
Well, pulling a long grade at 70+ mph into the wind the NC lets you know it's working hard especially when hand guards, panniers, and a larger windshield have been added.

For a long time I thought I'd be on a Honda ST V4 forever, 180,000 miles. I agree it's close to the perfect road engine with easy going power from off idle to rev limiter. Fun & competent on Saturday morning sport rides or a 5,000 mile trip. More than a few times I thought I swallowed or bent a valve when it bounced off the rev limiter in 4th around a buck thirty five when I thought I was in 5th.. I've had singles, twins, a triple, inline4, V4, flat six but at this point twins are my favorite configuration. I like the soft pulsing throb of both the NC and opposed twin RT. Soft power delivery, torquey and easy going personality.
 
Well, pulling a long grade at 70+ mph into the wind the NC lets you know it's working hard especially when hand guards, panniers, and a larger windshield have been added.

For a long time I thought I'd be on a Honda ST V4 forever, 180,000 miles. I agree it's close to the perfect road engine with easy going power from off idle to rev limiter. Fun & competent on Saturday morning sport rides or a 5,000 mile trip. More than a few times I thought I swallowed or bent a valve when it bounced off the rev limiter in 4th around a buck thirty five when I thought I was in 5th.. I've had singles, twins, a triple, inline4, V4, flat six but at this point twins are my favorite configuration. I like the soft pulsing throb of both the NC and opposed twin RT. Soft power delivery, torquey and easy going personality.
Yea, I think Honda knocked it out of the park with the NC750.
 
I agree with all that. If you have to tach something out just to squeeze the power out of it it makes no sense to me.
Bikes that you have to "tach out" to build power are designed that way for a reason. When riding aggressively on curvy roads on the street or on track, it is advantageous to the rider to have a wide rpm range in a single gear so as to minimize the need to shift as many times between turns or mid-turn. It also makes the bike more controllable through turns when you are in the higher rpm range, as getting off and on the throttle is more predictable and less jerky. Whether you buy a sportbike of the 300cc flavor or the 1000cc+ flavor, and no matter how you use it, whether it be to commute to work every day, get out and ride wheelies every weekend, only drive it to bike nights, etc., the manufacturer designed it for track use, or aggressive street riding. These bikes rev to 10k-16k+ rpms for a purpose, not because that's the only way the engine designer could get any power out of it. They are purpose built machines, no matter what other purpose you may buy them for. Kinda like the NC is not an offroad bike, never was intended to be, although several use the NC in that manner. Adventure does not mean offroad, I go on adventures all the time and never leave the pavement.

Anyways, I'll stop....maybe the point there is clear enough.
 
I agree with all that. If you have to tach something out just to squeeze the power out of it it makes no sense to me.
Sometimes you might want a lighter weight, nimble motorcycle. You can build the bike around a larger, heavier low rpm engine, or you can build a lighter, more nimble bike around a smaller high rpm engine and still get a comparable power to weight ratio.

Fuzzy, a member here, went along with me to both Alaska and to Newfoundland on a 300cc Kawasaki, having no problem riding along with my NC700X or GL1800. He had to rev higher but he enjoyed traveling on a lighter weight motorcycle.
 
Back
Top