2014 Honda CTX1300
- Thread starter Bones
- Start date
veefore
See you at my intervention!
Re: ctx 1300
Thought the DN-01 was the strangest looking bike I'd ever seen, but this one has endured an even longer beating about the head and shoulder with a much larger ugly stick. Put a pork chop around it's neck. Just saying.... Love that motor!
Thought the DN-01 was the strangest looking bike I'd ever seen, but this one has endured an even longer beating about the head and shoulder with a much larger ugly stick. Put a pork chop around it's neck. Just saying.... Love that motor!
ST13Fred
Fred
Re: ctx 1300
Let's be clear, the CTX is a cruiser; feet forward, more weight on your butt and minimal side clearance.
The ST13 is actually more sport (very light steering compared to CTX) than tourer and certainly a long way from a cruiser.
Both do have the Honda pedigree and (re-tuned for CTX) 1261cc V-4 motor; beyond that, are completely different bikes.
The biggest reason I will never own a cruiser is the question of side clearance. The essence of cycling is carving corners and it becomes
a safety issue at that point for me. Winding roads is at the heart of what motorcycling is......super slabs are the boring side of the sport.
Let's be clear, the CTX is a cruiser; feet forward, more weight on your butt and minimal side clearance.
The ST13 is actually more sport (very light steering compared to CTX) than tourer and certainly a long way from a cruiser.
Both do have the Honda pedigree and (re-tuned for CTX) 1261cc V-4 motor; beyond that, are completely different bikes.
The biggest reason I will never own a cruiser is the question of side clearance. The essence of cycling is carving corners and it becomes
a safety issue at that point for me. Winding roads is at the heart of what motorcycling is......super slabs are the boring side of the sport.
Re: ctx 1300
I totally disagree!
The CTX is one of Honda's entry into the "Bagger" category. A Bagger is a cross between a Cruiser and a "Dresser" (what bikes with windshields and saddlebags were called at one time)
And since it seems that everything that has been a mixture of two styles (autos or bikes) are called "Cross"-whatever, I want to know why the Baggers aren't called Cross Dressers?
I totally disagree!
The CTX is one of Honda's entry into the "Bagger" category. A Bagger is a cross between a Cruiser and a "Dresser" (what bikes with windshields and saddlebags were called at one time)
And since it seems that everything that has been a mixture of two styles (autos or bikes) are called "Cross"-whatever, I want to know why the Baggers aren't called Cross Dressers?
Blrfl
Natural Rider Enhancement
Re: ctx 1300
Either way, though, when you strip off the farkles, the architecture is still fundamentally cruiser.
--Mark
Either way, though, when you strip off the farkles, the architecture is still fundamentally cruiser.
--Mark
Re: CTX1300
Still no price for the CTX1300 on Honda's website. All I've heard is it'll probably run at least $17K which is wayyy too much in my opinion. If I were in the marking for something "like" the CTX1300 I would just pony up the extra $$ and buy either the Gold Wing F6B or the new Valkyrie.
Still no price for the CTX1300 on Honda's website. All I've heard is it'll probably run at least $17K which is wayyy too much in my opinion. If I were in the marking for something "like" the CTX1300 I would just pony up the extra $$ and buy either the Gold Wing F6B or the new Valkyrie.
Re: ctx 1300
Nice, your a brave soul!!! (grinnin green guy)
I totally disagree! And since it seems that everything that has been a mixture of two styles (autos or bikes) are called "Cross"-whatever, I want to know why the Baggers aren't called Cross Dressers?
Nice, your a brave soul!!! (grinnin green guy)
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2009
- Messages
- 2,542
- Age
- 69
- Location
- West Des Moines, IA
- Bike
- 2022 Kymco AK 550
- 2024 Miles
- 006503
Re: CTX1300
over on the CTX1300 forums (yeah, there's already a forum for it opened just before Honda announced the model at EICMA) one of the posters mentions the dealer in their area has pricing released by Honda now and is taking pre-orders. Said he was quoted $15,185 for the Deluxe model.
over on the CTX1300 forums (yeah, there's already a forum for it opened just before Honda announced the model at EICMA) one of the posters mentions the dealer in their area has pricing released by Honda now and is taking pre-orders. Said he was quoted $15,185 for the Deluxe model.
ST13Fred
Fred
Re: ctx 1300
Now I'm getting confused!
Your Bagger and Dresser are nothing but opted up Crusiers.......... feet forward, more weight on your butt and minimal side clearance... Cruisers. Now don't make me say this again!
Now I'm getting confused!
Your Bagger and Dresser are nothing but opted up Crusiers.......... feet forward, more weight on your butt and minimal side clearance... Cruisers. Now don't make me say this again!
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2009
- Messages
- 2,542
- Age
- 69
- Location
- West Des Moines, IA
- Bike
- 2022 Kymco AK 550
- 2024 Miles
- 006503
Re: CTX1300
I agree with Fred that a Bagger is just a Cruiser with the travel/touring options added. BUT... this CTX is in my opinion unlike real Cruisers, even typical dressed out baggers which are designed to be cruisers first with baggage and fairings added on almost as an afterthought. The CTX is designed from the start with the half fairing and baggage integral from stock. The seating position is much more like a GW than a typical cruiser with forward controls. Granted the feet are not *under* you, but they are also definitely not hanging out there way in front like a cruiser or like sitting in a LazyBoy recliner with the foot rest up . I owned a V-twin cruiser for a short time and know feet forward controls. That's why it was only a short time I had it. I then owned a GW with upright seating that was much better. The CTX is upright seating. The ST (both) is not sport bike seating with the feet definitely behind you but it is between upright and sport seating. I will take either ST or GW type of seating. With the GW seating I would prefer a good rider backrest that hits the small of my back and I'm good for a lot of miles. This is what I had on my GW. I can ride my ST1100 for about the same miles without a backrest as my GW. I would say the CTX is closer to a light tourer than a cruiser. And the ST1300 is more sport than touring. I am not a canyon carver. That's not my riding style, at least not my preferred style. I like touring and the CTX looks to promise that kind of riding. I intend to give it a test ride if possible this spring when it's available. I've tested a ST1300 and preferred my ST1100 as it seems more settled for touring with the longer wheel base. CTX1300 is a few inches longer yet. Not as long as a GW but only by 2 inches. My Burgman 650 was longer than my ST1100 and was very stable and settled on the superslab. It could keep up with anything on the road but was just a bit small for me (engine size, not so much bike size). That's just my opinion. Everyone will have a different one.
I agree with Fred that a Bagger is just a Cruiser with the travel/touring options added. BUT... this CTX is in my opinion unlike real Cruisers, even typical dressed out baggers which are designed to be cruisers first with baggage and fairings added on almost as an afterthought. The CTX is designed from the start with the half fairing and baggage integral from stock. The seating position is much more like a GW than a typical cruiser with forward controls. Granted the feet are not *under* you, but they are also definitely not hanging out there way in front like a cruiser or like sitting in a LazyBoy recliner with the foot rest up
. I owned a V-twin cruiser for a short time and know feet forward controls. That's why it was only a short time I had it. I then owned a GW with upright seating that was much better. The CTX is upright seating. The ST (both) is not sport bike seating with the feet definitely behind you but it is between upright and sport seating. I will take either ST or GW type of seating. With the GW seating I would prefer a good rider backrest that hits the small of my back and I'm good for a lot of miles. This is what I had on my GW. I can ride my ST1100 for about the same miles without a backrest as my GW. I would say the CTX is closer to a light tourer than a cruiser. And the ST1300 is more sport than touring. I am not a canyon carver. That's not my riding style, at least not my preferred style. I like touring and the CTX looks to promise that kind of riding. I intend to give it a test ride if possible this spring when it's available. I've tested a ST1300 and preferred my ST1100 as it seems more settled for touring with the longer wheel base. CTX1300 is a few inches longer yet. Not as long as a GW but only by 2 inches. My Burgman 650 was longer than my ST1100 and was very stable and settled on the superslab. It could keep up with anything on the road but was just a bit small for me (engine size, not so much bike size). That's just my opinion. Everyone will have a different one.
Re: ctx 1300
What came first, the chicken or the egg?
If you really want to get "Technical"... The term "Cruiser" really didn't come along until the "Other" makers started mimicking the Harleys...say back in the early 80's. And someone came up with the term "Cruiser" to describe their bikes that mimicked the Harleys. Before that, everything was a "standard" or a Harley or a "Chopper", which was a modified Harley or other maker...(the demise of many 60's Brit bikes in the US). The term Dresser, was used long before that, to describe any motorcycle with Saddlebags and a windshield.
When Honda came up with the Goldwing back in the mid 70's, and people started putting saddlebags and windshields on them, they too were called Dressers or Full Dressers!
Yes, under todays terminology, it is a cruiser with saddlebags, but under the terminology I'm using, the term "Dresser" came first, so I still say that it is a CrossDresser!
Now I'm getting confused!
Your Bagger and Dresser are nothing but opted up Crusiers.......... feet forward, more weight on your butt and minimal side clearance... Cruisers. Now don't make me say this again!
What came first, the chicken or the egg?
If you really want to get "Technical"... The term "Cruiser" really didn't come along until the "Other" makers started mimicking the Harleys...say back in the early 80's. And someone came up with the term "Cruiser" to describe their bikes that mimicked the Harleys. Before that, everything was a "standard" or a Harley or a "Chopper", which was a modified Harley or other maker...(the demise of many 60's Brit bikes in the US). The term Dresser, was used long before that, to describe any motorcycle with Saddlebags and a windshield.
When Honda came up with the Goldwing back in the mid 70's, and people started putting saddlebags and windshields on them, they too were called Dressers or Full Dressers!
Yes, under todays terminology, it is a cruiser with saddlebags, but under the terminology I'm using, the term "Dresser" came first, so I still say that it is a CrossDresser!
Re: CTX1300
I personally think it's a mutt...which is not a bad thing. I kind of like it and it may be an option for me. I like my ST and the girlfriend prefers my VTX. This may be a good compromise.
Even thought it isn't always the case, I've always associated a cruiser with the V-twin engine and at least some growl from the pipes. The CTX appears to not have either of the latter. 2 cents.
I personally think it's a mutt...which is not a bad thing. I kind of like it and it may be an option for me. I like my ST and the girlfriend prefers my VTX. This may be a good compromise.
Even thought it isn't always the case, I've always associated a cruiser with the V-twin engine and at least some growl from the pipes. The CTX appears to not have either of the latter. 2 cents.
Throttlejockey
Padden is my hero
Re: CTX1300
It weighs more than our ST1300!
It weighs more than our ST1300!
veefore
See you at my intervention!
Throttlejockey
Padden is my hero
Re: CTX1300
I take that back...it's 6lbs less with 2 less gallons of fuel. (both with full tanks) Why is it so heavy? No fairing or adjustable windshield.
I take that back...it's 6lbs less with 2 less gallons of fuel. (both with full tanks) Why is it so heavy? No fairing or adjustable windshield.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2009
- Messages
- 2,542
- Age
- 69
- Location
- West Des Moines, IA
- Bike
- 2022 Kymco AK 550
- 2024 Miles
- 006503
Re: CTX1300
I think it is a gap filler kind of mc. Not really a cruiser (I also generally associate the term "cruiser" with the v-twins for the most part, though I accept some other bikes in that term that do not come stock with baggage), the styling and seating is definitely not cruiser (feet are more forward than the ST but not what I consider "forward controls", I've had that before, more like standard/touring seating). But also not really a tourer. Obviously not a sport/tourer. Besides Honda is not replacing any ST with this series, they have it going too good in both tourer (GW) and sport/tourer (ST1300). It's also obviously not a standard bike, though the seating IS more like a standard or even touring configuration. How about calling it a Cruising Tourer? :grin:
I think it is a gap filler kind of mc. Not really a cruiser (I also generally associate the term "cruiser" with the v-twins for the most part, though I accept some other bikes in that term that do not come stock with baggage), the styling and seating is definitely not cruiser (feet are more forward than the ST but not what I consider "forward controls", I've had that before, more like standard/touring seating). But also not really a tourer. Obviously not a sport/tourer. Besides Honda is not replacing any ST with this series, they have it going too good in both tourer (GW) and sport/tourer (ST1300). It's also obviously not a standard bike, though the seating IS more like a standard or even touring configuration. How about calling it a Cruising Tourer? :grin:
Last edited: