2014 Honda CTX1300

GlenT said:
There is an interesting example of this thinking in the Jeep world. The 2014 Jeep Cherokee is based on an Alfa-Romeo platform. I personally think it is about time that we have 'world bikes' and 'world automobiles'. Europeans have been getting all the good stuff for far too long.
Click to expand...

That is fine as long as the platforms are up to the intended duty. Using the same platform for Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury cars worked well. Using a compact car platform for a larger, heavier vehicle (Neon platform for the PT Cruiser and Jeep Compass) didn't work as well and they eat up suspension components. Using the Dart platform for the Jeep Cherokee will probably have the same results.

Using a scooter platform for a small commuter bike makes some sense. Using a scooter platform for a cruiser or big touring bike doesn't.

Sent from my XT881 using Tapatalk 2
 
fnmag said:
Now, this should sway many of the nay sayers. I'd like to take a test ride on one.
Click to expand...

I'd be happy if it just reduced the Hate Factor. It seemed like there was more to that video as it ended a little abruptly. I didn't realize that it's 100lbs lighter than the ST. I thought it had inverted forks, but wasn't sure. And traction control. AND a radio, and probably intercom.

I'd like to test ride that. Since I have no room for another bike bringing one home won't be a worry. Just add a taller windshield and I'll live with the handlebars. NICE bike!
 
Mellow said:
It's not... he said 'lighter' than the F6B I believe.
Click to expand...

Oh. My Rice Crispies were making too much snap, crackle, and pop. He did say something about the weight being "down low" didn't he? I wonder how they did that. Off to review. Thanks for the clarification.

Back from reviewing

Yes, "like the F6B and over 100lbs less". I guess it's the frame and seating position that lowers the CG.

And taller gearing! I like.
 
Last edited:
Twin shocks and new frame. They changed it quite a bit from the ST.
 
ST Gui said:
He did say something about the weight being "down low" didn't he? I wonder how they did that.
Click to expand...
They stretched the chasis by 6 inches, reduced the fuel tank by 2.6 gallons and put entire fuel tank underneath the seat. Then they threw away the motor and track for the adustable windscreen. And voila! Same weight, but moved down lower.

P.S. forgot to mention that they lowered the seat by two inches, so they put YOU down lower also.
 
Last edited:
One concern I have with the windshield is that it is not going to be adjustable for angle (or height). You are going to be stuck with the designed angle, no matter how tall the windscreen you put on it.

I've rented two current GL1800's in the past two years. I cannot find a height on the adjuster that eliminates helmet buffeting on a GW. I hope the CTX13 isn't like that too. Maybe they couldn't get it right, so that's why the cropped it.
 
Bigmak96 said:
Twin shocks and new frame. They changed it quite a bit from the ST.
Click to expand...

The frame is a typical kind you'd find on a cruiser (and also the way the ST1100 is built). It's going to be a lot more flexible than the arrangement on the 1300, where the engine is a frame member, so I wouldn't expect the CTX to approach anything resembling sporty in its handling.

--Mark
 
GlenT said:
Maybe they couldn't get it right, so that's why the cropped it.
Click to expand...

My money is on making it part of the styling statement to attract a specific demographic. The taller windshield is one of Honda's economical options. Ok, I was kidding about the economical part.

I'm guessing it won't have the adjustability of a GoldWings windshield. You'll either be stuck with the Honda option or some third party offering which may or may not have vents.

After riding my GL1000 with a National Cycle windshield and then a Vetter fairing, I'll take a fixed windshield over none and live with the buffeting.

If Honda were to say they're getting out of the S-T market some people might be happy with this from Honda's site:

Make It Your Own
We'll have plenty of Honda Genuine Accessories available to give your CTX1300 its own look. There'll be a tall windscreen, heated grips, backrest with pad, 12V accessory socket, rear trunk (45L), LED foglight kit, plenty of chrome accents, and more!
Click to expand...

Did they ever offer a trunk for the ST here in the States? There's a Deluxe version of the CTX but unlike the high-end of the F6B there's no center stand option.

Even with the smaller gas tank I could accept the CTX as a replacement if I had to. Come November 20 we may know if that's the case.
 
ST Gui said:
That all makes sense. The lower seat was obvious but I didn't give it much weight. lol




I think one of the biggest reasons for similar reactions is the smallest styling cue and one of the most conspicuous in its absence-- the shorty windshield. Put a taller one on and you almost completely change the character of the bike.

Not saying that is a cure but at least it could/would make for some more objective critique of the subjective. Even if the styling isn't... everyone's cup of tea the bike still has a lot going for it.
Click to expand...

My objection is to where one places their feet. Feet forward does not work for me, nor does the seating style of the Gold Wing. I always feel like I am pulling my self foward on the handle bars. The sport touring seating postion give me the body balance that I feel comfortable with.
 
It's now on Honda's website.

Pricing is "TBD" but here are some specs:


"Rake 28.5?
Trail 114.3mm (4.5 inches)
Wheelbase 64.5 inches
Seat Height 29.1 inches
Curb Weight 724.2 pounds. Includes all standard equipment, required fluids and full tank of fuel-ready to ride
Fuel Capacity 5.1 gallons"


As already mentioned, compared to the ST1300, wheelbase is longer, gas tank is smaller and weight is about the same. I'm interested in the taller gearing but did anyone else notice that the redline is now 6500rpm? I wonder if there are any changes to the engine or just an artificially lower redline.

Not for me but might be a good choice for those with shorter inseams. :)
 
ChucksKLRST said:
My objection is to where one places their feet. Feet forward does not work for me, nor does the seating style of the Gold Wing. I always feel like I am pulling my self foward on the handle bars. The sport touring seating postion give me the body balance that I feel comfortable with.
Click to expand...


+++++++1
 
I agree with Chuck on the ergonomics. Betting the ground clearance will be bad, foot pegs won't last long around this crowd. :D

I'm also gonna bet the torque curve is moved down the chart and milder cams compared to the ST. Could result in better gas mileage. Fur sur the lower red line would dictate milder performance.

Fingers crossed the new VFR on this side of the pond.
 
Too bad that all they saw worth keeping was the engine. The more stuff gets poi Ted out the less I like it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom