2014 Honda CTX1300

bmcdonau said:
I thought it was the worst--I always had the perfect view of my knuckles and wife's knees. Not that her knees aren't attractive. The picture in the mirror was large, but too obstructed.
Click to expand...

+1 on the wife's knees, but the main reason I chose the ST1300 was for two up riding, so she stays :). It must be the bar risers my second-hand STeed arrived with that keeps my knuckles out of the way. I suppose something similar could be done with the CTX, just not for me.
 
Both my 1100 and the 1300 were a night and day difference to the buzzy & fuzzy images that my first generation Concours had. Lost count of how many times I had to head check for Crown Vics.........;)
 
Just wondering if anyone put on the higher windshield? Visually that would pull the whole bike together.
 
Pete in PA said:
Visually that would pull the whole bike together.
Click to expand...

That does it for me. I think the shorty windshield puts some people off on a couple of levels. The big wide bars may be a factor too. But it looks like they can be adjusted or replaced if required.

I've only seen one pic of the CTX with a taller windshield and only showed part of the bike from a 3/4 angle. I think the only way we'll see better/more pics will be from owners or maybe when the aftermarket ramps up. In H-D Land the shorty look is popular but there are plenty of baggers with regular screens.
 
Pete in PA said:
Just wondering if anyone put on the higher windshield? Visually that would pull the whole bike together.
Click to expand...

"windscreen" ? I sat on one recently. I would not call that a "windscreen", but a "placeholder" :) It's literally, what, right at one inch up at the most?
 
Pete in PA said:
Just wondering if anyone put on the higher windshield? Visually that would pull the whole bike together.
Click to expand...

A couple of guys on the CTX board have added it, and they love it. They say it totally transforms the ride. Interestingly, the tall shield makes it look slightly more ST-esque. I must be getting old, because I'm seriously considering one myself.
 
ST Gui said:
That does it for me. I think the shorty windshield puts some people off on a couple of levels. The big wide bars may be a factor too. But it looks like they can be adjusted or replaced if required.

I've only seen one pic of the CTX with a taller windshield and only showed part of the bike from a 3/4 angle. I think the only way we'll see better/more pics will be from owners or maybe when the aftermarket ramps up. In H-D Land the shorty look is popular but there are plenty of baggers with regular screens.
Click to expand...

Actually I think the bars are going to be difficult replace because they're a real oddball size. They're mostly 1 1/8" from the risers out past the last bend, then step down to 1" where the brake and clutch levers mount, and then step down again to 7/8" at the grips. I don't know who in their right mind would make bars with those dimensions. Heck, I don't even know why Honda made them with those dimensions. What might be a more likely replacement is 1 1/8" down to 1", and swap in more 'normal' size 1" grips and throttle.

Now, compared to the ST, the factory bars are definitely wider. But compared to most cruisers, they really aren't that wide. With the more upright riding position of the CTX, the bar width is very comfortable. And this is coming from a guy who prefers narrower bars.
 
That's the way the bars are on my Tiger--I think the aftermarket already has that covered or will shortly.
 
Pete in PA said:
Just wondering if anyone put on the higher windshield? Visually that would pull the whole bike together.
Click to expand...

Found this on a CTX1300 owner's photo album. He added extra mirrors also that I think detract from the appearance of the bike but you can get an idea how the Honda tall shield changes the look of it. Does this look better to you?

Honda2014CTX1300deluxewithTallShield_IMG_3635-X2.jpg
 
lectricmojo said:
I like the looks with the tall WS... the extra mirrors , I don't really get, but hey, each his own..
Click to expand...

That particular owner wasn't happy with what he can/can't see out of the stock mirrors and wasn't able to adjust around that. He found those matte black jobs (I think from Triumph) that don't look too awful bad. The taller windshield actually makes them look less obvious than the short one, I think. The more I see of that tall windshield the more I like it.
 
rjs987 said:
Does this look better to you?
Click to expand...

It sure does for me. That windshield adds more than I thought it would. To me it's like a different bike though I liked it well enough as is. Thanks for the pic and link.


sleepngbear said:
He found those matte black jobs (I think from Triumph) that don't look too awful bad. The taller windshield actually makes them look less obvious than the short one, I think.
Click to expand...

+1 on all that. I probably wouldn't have noticed the mirrors right away because of the shield and the finish. While adjusting the bars might have worked for him those mirrors work to eliminate any blind spots.

On my 750-K4 and V65S I had two different length mirrors so they shook at different rpm. LOL
 
For those who don't get the mag... here's the online version of the Rider Magazine review on this bike. They do show results of a dyno test but I think they missed by not starting the test reading at below 2500 rpm. Or maybe they can't and had to do the entire test in 5th gear only (not familiar how a dyno test has to be done) but there. There seems to be considerable torque available there (even in 5th gear when I rode the bike). I also don't think the dyno results are as good as a well broken in engine, over 1000-2000 miles, would show.

This article New Wave Cruiser was published in the June 2014 issue of Rider magazine.
 
rjs987 said:
They do show results of a dyno test but I think they missed by not starting the test reading at below 2500 rpm. Or maybe they can't and had to do the entire test in 5th gear only (not familiar how a dyno test has to be done) but there.
Click to expand...

You can do a dyno test in any gear where you can reach the engine's red line without spinning the rollers on the dyno faster than they were designed to handle.

That chart's actually pretty telling as-is, because it's very different than the ST's. Much more so than I expected, actually, shaped like what you'd see in a lot of V-twin cruisers. The review says it ticks over at 3,250 in 5th at 60 MPH, which is perfect for the way they have the engine tuned, leaving a little bit of the top of the torque curve available for roll-ons.

The parts fiche shows that a lot of the drivetrain is shared from the ST, including the crank, crankcase, rings, pistons transmission and final drive (same gear, different housing). I'd read that the pistons had been changed, but they're the same; the connecting rods are different, I'm guessing shorter for less compression. The top end is entirely different, with different camshafts (probably stubbier lobes), different valves and probably a different cylinder head (can't tell because it's a model-specific assembly). The throttle bodies are different, as is the ECM. (Look for MCS, the model code for the ST, vs. MJN, the model code for the CTX, in the part numbers to spot the differences.)


I also don't think the dyno results are as good as a well broken in engine, over 1000-2000 miles, would show.
Click to expand...

Advances in manufacturing make break-in is a lot less of a factor than it used to be. Either way, I doubt you'd see a huge difference. Review bikes are rarely lent out with a goose egg on the odometer.

--Mark
 
Then Honda succeeded at their goal. To make this ride similar to a cruiser yet retain as much of the touring ride as possible.
I just compared the dyno chart from this review with the one provided by dduelin HERE some time ago. Between about 3000 rpm and 5000 rpm torque is higher on the CTX1300 and HP is about the same. But over 5000 rpm is where the ST1300 pull away quickly. This is as I was expecting from all I've read on the CTX and the ST.

I don't know what rpm ST riders normally run at highway speeds. I almost never see 5000 rpm, and rarely see even 4500 rpm on my ST1100 (and that's only when I forget to shift when I normally do). Seems to me the best power/performance range for the ST would be over 4500 rpm on the ST. Looks like the best power/performance range on the CTX would be 3500+ (which is consistent with what I noticed when I took it out on the highway on my first test ride).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom