2014 Honda CTX1300

Re: CTX1300

rjs987 said:
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:
Click to expand...

Oops, the local shop here referred to the CXT1300 as a cruiser version of the ST1300. That sums it up.
 
Re: CTX1300

Reginald said:
Oops, the local shop here referred to the CXT1300 as a cruiser version of the ST1300. That sums it up.
Click to expand...

That doesn't mean anything. What dealer/sales person do you know who really knows anything? They only know 3 classes of bikes anyway: cruisers, sport, and BMX. The most that should be said is that it is as close to a cruiser that Honda should get without actually being one so as not to cut into the Honda cruiser lines. It's also not a full tourer so as not to cut into the Gold Wing sales.
That's part of a sales pitch line by Honda promo department trying to attract an element of riders who reject the ST1300 because it's NOT a cruiser and yet don't really want a HD but like the idea of riding a different kind of cruiser. Kind of like calling a Gold Wing a cruiser. :eek: And I've heard sale staff do that before.
Or like calling a ST1300 a Sport bike.

OK, I suppose I could almost call my ST1100 a cruiser too. :) But I won't. The seat's too tall and my feet are too far under me.
 
Last edited:
Re: CTX1300

ST13Fred said:
We're drifting here a little bit, but I loved the VF750 Sabre when they came out in the 80's. V-4, shaft drive.
Click to expand...

# one to that. The V45 Sabre dressed out in the Honda Sport touring outfit. Had my 82 model for about 14 years. It was high tec for its day.
 
Re: CTX1300

Nice bike. I vaguely recall seeing those. Kind of looks like a relative of the new CTX. :grin: :duck:
 
Re: CTX1300

rjs987 said:
Nice bike. I vaguely recall seeing those. Kind of looks like a relative of the new CTX. :grin: :duck:
Click to expand...

:badabing:

Not even close!

bobsfirstsabre.jpg83honv45sabre_mine.jpgbobs_sabre.jpg84v65sabre_mine_bluestripe.jpg


And you wondered where the Sabre in my nick name came from?...:D
 
Re: CTX1300

I had a chance to sit on the CTX at the IMS show here in Minneapolis. I opted to go tonight (Friday) to avoid some of the crowds the tend to show up on the weekends. So, as I said, I had to chance to sit on the CTX in both sizes, and was impressed by the concept. The saddle and bar placement worked pretty well for me (5' 6"), but the forward foot position of the pegs was still a no-go for me personally. Interestingly, my feet were farther in front of me when I was sitting on the CTX-700 than on the 1300.

On and unrelated note, I sat on the Wing and found it very comfortable. I also really liked the CB500F - a neat standard that fit me really well. Also, there was no ST1300 at the Honda booth...
 
Re: CTX1300

veefore said:
Ya might wanna try this.......image.jpg
Click to expand...

No thanks, that's a very different bike IMO and I didn't like the nose on it. Reminds me of a shark AND has somewhat foot forward controls... UNLIKE the CTX1300 (standard seating) IMO. Besides those are out of production. :)

antimatter said:
I had a chance to sit on the CTX at the IMS show here in Minneapolis. I opted to go tonight (Friday) to avoid some of the crowds the tend to show up on the weekends. So, as I said, I had to chance to sit on the CTX in both sizes, and was impressed by the concept. The saddle and bar placement worked pretty well for me (5' 6"), but the forward foot position of the pegs was still a no-go for me personally. Interestingly, my feet were farther in front of me when I was sitting on the CTX-700 than on the 1300.

On and unrelated note, I sat on the Wing and found it very comfortable. I also really liked the CB500F - a neat standard that fit me really well. Also, there was no ST1300 at the Honda booth...
Click to expand...

That's because the CTX700 DOES have foot forward controls and the CTX1300 has standard controls/seating. Don't know why the Wing was more comfortable, same seat height as the CTX1300 but bigger bike overall. I used to own a GL1500 and test rode a GL1800 and the seating was very much the same to me, and the same as it looks to be on the CTX1300. Took me a while to get used to the farther back and under foot position on my ST1100 but it is one of two seating geometries I now like: ST and Standard (GW, F6B, CTX1300, and others like the Honda CB series). Rode the cruiser foot forward controls position for a year and couldn't take any more of that. Also tested a sport bike feet-way-back position and just knew that was definitely out. Not surprised you didn't see a ST1300 there since they aren't finished with the new model :wink: (rumour mill at work) :wink:
 
Last edited:
Re: CTX1300

ST Gui said:
I had a V-65 in blue and have to agree that they and the CTX1300 look nothing a like. If Honda brought back the V-65 (or the 650 Nighthawk) I'd own one in a heartbeat. GREAT UJMs.
Click to expand...

You should really sit on the CB500F then. It's a straight-up standard just like the old Nighthawk.

I should clarify my comment on the Wing. I have a love/hate relationship with the Goldwing based on the fact that the older bike was wide enough that my hips would hurt after I'd sat on one for about 10 minutes. For me to find the newest one comfortable was a bit of a revelation, but I still don't want to own one. I just don't feel like I'm in control of a motorcycle unless I have my feet under me, something I verified by sitting on a number of cruisers from different manufacturers. I was really disappointed that there wasn't an ST1300 at the show because I wanted to do some comparison sitting between the ST, the Concours, and the FJR.
 
Re: CTX1300

antimatter said:
there was no ST1300 at the Honda booth...
Click to expand...

Was any Honda model displayed more prominently, on a pedestal or elevated off the floor?
If not, I'm kind of glad the ST13 was not shown, meaning a new ST may be announced this spring.

But on the down side Europe will get it first and the US would see one in 2015. :(
 
Re: CTX1300

ST Gui said:
I had a V-65 in blue and have to agree that they and the CTX1300 look nothing a like. If Honda brought back the V-65 (or the 650 Nighthawk) I'd own one in a heartbeat. GREAT UJMs.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was disappointed when they dropped them, 1985 being the last year!

83honda650nthk.jpg
 
Re: CTX1300

ST13Fred said:
Was any Honda model displayed more prominently, on a pedestal or elevated off the floor?
If not, I'm kind of glad the ST13 was not shown, meaning a new ST may be announced this spring.

But on the down side Europe will get it first and the US would see one in 2015. :(
Click to expand...

Nope, the Honda area was the smallest of the four Japanese manufacturers. Suzuki was making a big deal out of the new V-strom 1000, and the new Bergman 200 was also up on a pedestal. Kawi was pimping the new Ninja 1000, and Yami had the FJR and the new FZ9 triple displayed.
 
Re: CTX1300

Went to the Minneapolis bike show today......saw and sat on the CTX........don't know what you'd call it but it's one of the most uncomfortable bikes I've sat on...........tiller style bars, footpegs too far forward (more so than a GoldWing) don't even know why they put a 1 inch windshield on it....seating position puts all of your weight on your tailbone.....and feels like you're already leaning back.....wonder what wind pushing on you does? Definitely not desirable.....really liked the FJR.....gonna have to test ride one of these.....and the Husquavarna 650 dirt bike was way sweet....hadn't seen one of those before.....wasn't impressed with the Honda lineup at all......new Valk is ungainly looking....just another GoldWing with weird parts.....and the a** on the F6b is huge.....the 500s weren't nearly as nice as the Yamaha FZ6, or the FZ9.........my 2 cents.......................ff
 
Re: CTX1300

That's funny I found the new FJR to be uncomfortable and the CTX not too bad (you're right about the windshield). Unfortunatley, we were looking at the CTX for my wife and it was still too tall. I didn't like to HOnda layout, but liked the 500 dressed for tourling. I was impressed with the KTM 1190, Ninja 1000, the ergos of the BMW 800GT and of course the K1600 GT. Maintenance costs scare me away from BMW.
 
Re: CTX1300

All a matter of personal taste or perspective. Everyone is different. For some ST or Sport (feet down or back) position is better. for others ST or Standard (feet under or just down) is better. Heck, I even know some dudes who think a bandanna is as good a helmet as any and wear only leather vests who actually like the feet forward position and they usually think the CTX1300 or GW have the feet way too far *back*! For me as long as the foot peg is not behind where my butt sets or out in front of the grips I'm good. Of course that's not counting having highway pegs out front like I've seen on many bikes, even STs (highway blades), for an alternate foot position for comfort. Nor latching my heal on the passenger pegs to stretch my leg as I have done on occasion, one foot at a time, on a long ride.
(just haven't been able to talk myself into a set of those for my ST yet)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom