MotorcycleDaily.com – Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Old Honda Concepts Heading for Production?

070115top-i

Honda CB1100R concept

Back in 2007, Honda put great effort into three concept motorcycles in advance of the Tokyo Motor Show. In 2008, the motorcycle market essentially collapsed, not just in the United States but also in other markets important to Honda. Only one of the three concepts shown at the 2007 Tokyo Motor Show made it into production, the CB1100F.

The two bikes pictured here never moved beyond the concept stage as far as we know, but now there is a rumor that Honda may be about to produce the retro CB1100R. The naked Honda Evo 6, also pictured, was positively received by both consumers and the press, but its design was likely superseded by the production Valkyrie introduced for the 2014 model year.

If Honda puts the CB1100R into production, let’s hope it upgrades the rather sedate engine performance found in the CB1100F.

070115middle

Honda CB1100R concept

070115bottom

Honda Evo 6 concept

125 Comments

  1. Zukib says:

    Honda’s in red white and blue always gets my attention. 🙂

  2. fast2win says:

    I usually find Hondas boring. I would buy the CB1100R if the bike was priced right. Most of the sport bikes today are over the top. Give it 100+ rwhp and have fun.

  3. Mike says:

    I like it…..like it alot.

    Point of reference is way back in the early 80s the 1100F was a bike that was a threat on the street and there were quite a few customs around then that looked more/less like the new 1100R.

    In saying all this, the next question of course is the market segment and who are potential buyers for todays 1100R beyond real ole timers like me that would have bought it in a heart beat …..in say 1980.

    Maybe the market is “toe to toe” against the Kawasaki ZRX 1100-1200 that came and went 10 years ago to the states. So does this make the 1100R just another late to the USA market Honda again

    Maybe… Honda is becoming a new member “boutique” manufacturers list…..or both!

    No maybe about it…..I not understand Honda related to motorcycles now….and…. maybe Mr. Honda would not either!

    My guess this 1100R it just another recent Honda model that some of us can not understand from a business or market standpoint, but there is one thing most of us do know ….ten or so years from now this 1100R will be there on the long list of discontinued “unique” Hondas that did not sell in quantity ….and demanding high prices for that reason alone.

    All aboard………….. yet again.

  4. Hot Dog says:

    Evo6 musings—Where’s the air cleaner (I had a Wing and it took hours to change), where’s the fuel storage and what’s it’s capacity?

  5. Jim bottomley says:

    I know the Honda engineers know better than me how to build a frame, but the 1100 frame looks very flexy to me, like an old Ducati single with a poorly triangulated rear frame.

    Jim B

    • My2cents says:

      It looks like a stressed member to me and requires less strength in the rear section.

  6. John says:

    Also, a CB900F, just slightly modernized would be awesome. But with a water cooled engine and single rear shock. The body panels and tank are what make the design. Actually, they should get rid of the CB500F and redo it with CB900F styling and then I would be forced to buy one.

  7. John says:

    I like the idea of the Evo, but would much prefer it to be based on the ST1300.

  8. Grover says:

    Wait ! Someone forgot to install the battery, rear turn signals, catalytic converter, charcoal canisters, kick stand, center stand and 50 feet of emissions hoses to the bike to make it legal for sale. The CB1100R is nice to look at in its present form, though.

  9. PN says:

    I like the Evo but the CBR shows Honda’s usual stremlined but bland and a little dorky aesthetics. The last really nice Honda design was the XX Dos Equis Blackbird.

  10. carl says:

    Who are these bikes suppose to appeal to?? Us old farts who remember them back in the day. With average age of motorcyclist being around 50, I think cruisers and tourers do well is because we are looking for comfort in our travels. Most young people due to insurance, economics etc are out of the motorcycle game. I do love the R1 and all these crazy sport bikes out there but there 20 years to late for me. That’s the reality we are old and although these bikes appeal to us from our younger days the bones are say forgit about!!

  11. Trpldog says:

    CB1100R – yawn.

    • Trpldog says:

      Honda seems to be blindly grabbing at straws, whereas Yamaha took the bull by the horns and threw it down and skinned it! – new R3, new R1…

  12. Norm G. says:

    overnight Honda goes from in control to OUT OF CONTROL.

    • Gary says:

      I’d rather have them go too far than what they’ve done recently … which is to be WAY too conservative. It seems as though the company has lost its way. Over the years they’ve rolled out some true groundbreaking bikes:

      – Honda mini trail 70
      – Honda Elsinore (the most significant bike in history, IMHO)
      – GL1000
      – CB750
      – VFR750

      • Breva750 says:

        Big call on the Elsinore. In that line of function, I was thinking the CZ Strokers of the 60s were the true groundbreakers. And for trailbikes, the Yamaha DT1.

        • Gary says:

          Breva … yeah, I know it’s a big call. But I still remember that first Elsinore. It really redefined motocross bikes of that era … and what level of performance you could expect from a showroom bike. It changed everything, and forced all the manufacturers to up their games.

      • Gary says:

        Dang … I actually deleted someone’s post when what I wanted was to respond to it. Sorry … whoever you are. Did not mean to do it.

      • TF says:

        The Elsinore was significant for about one year after it’s introduction. It then became an also-ran until ’78 when a totally new model was offered. I still remember Honda trying to blow out the left over ’75 CR125’s for $450.00. They could not give them away. They were already uncompetitive.

        Honda hasn’t changed. They have always been a conservative company.

        • Gary says:

          TF … I disagree. It was a great leap forward for that one year, and it forced everyone else to rethink what was possible. It was also the first time that any manufacturer built a motorcycle that was comparable to a factory one-off.

          • TF says:

            It was a leap for a Japanese company (in 1973) in that they became competitive with the euro bikes and at a lower price point. However, they then chose to do almost nothing with the design again until 1978. Meanwhile, Yamaha and Suzuki left them in the dust with their YZ’s and RM’s. Typical fickle Honda.

  13. yellowhammer says:

    None of those concepts, while visually stimulating, have real-world utility. It seems like the whole Japanese motorcycle industry is on ludes.

    • Norm G. says:

      re: “None of those concepts, while visually stimulating, have real-world utility.”

      utility schmoo-tility, this is the niche business of motorcycles…!!! 🙂

    • Blackcayman says:

      you are obviously not 50 years old…

      That CB1100R is delicious…It looks able to accept a little higher bars pulled back a bit for the demographic that wants it and can afford it.

      Its a perfect excuse to buy Gasolina Midnight Edition Classic Boots, vintage helmet & leathers and go play dress-up with the Café Racers and Hipster Douchebags

    • rg500g says:

      Ludes… It takes a person of a certain age to recognize Methyl Quaalone, every disco dolly’s lil’ helper. Ah, Rorer 714s, timeless.

    • Jeremy in TX says:

      What constitutes “real-world utility”? That seems like it would be a pretty subjective metric defined by the buyer.

  14. Craig says:

    If they could make them look like the concepts, then great, but that CB1100R will have so much crap on it that is won’t be close until it’s customized.

    And yes, it needs to be a PERF bike / R model for real. Heck at this point they may consider replacing their CBR with it as that bike is not 8 years old. 🙂

    As it looks, I’d ride that bike if it has performance and not over 450 lbs.

  15. ConnieUsa says:

    Love those concepts from Honda.

    Ideally, I would like to have both in my garage. I would ride the EVO6 all the time (providing they get a better seat) and will stare at the CB for hours, maybe a bike night here and there (providing they get a better seat). lol

  16. Provologna says:

    Thinking and looking more at the 1100: for older guys like me who like the looks and retro theme, the riding position looks way too extreme. I’m not getting the track day thing, because guys on well tuned Suzuki SV650s will give you fits unless they wake up the CB1100 motor.

    The closer I study the Evo 6 the better it looks. I don’t care what kind of four it is, compared to the sound of a proper six, the four pales.

    What do you guys think is wet weight with a full tank? It definitely needs some kind of windshield ’cause the bike itself won’t even wake up at 80mph. Again, the smoothness of the six is uncanny. My next door neighbor had a late model Wing. Even that 900 lb luxury touring bike made me almost cry just hearing it idle and the occasional rev in his driveway.

    • Norm G. says:

      re: “I don’t care what kind of four it is”

      strokes or cylinders…?

    • Jeremy in TX says:

      “What do you guys think is wet weight with a full tank?”

      The Evo 6? I’d wager every bit of 650+ lbs if it goes to production.

  17. Denny says:

    I had a new CB-1100 2013 – great bike! But, I was offered a deal on a new Valkyrie I couldn’t pass up. With some mods (Corbin Gunfighter seat), set of hard bags (Pelican – that I hand fabricated with Honda mounts), and a Gusseffson windshield it is the best motorcycle I’ve ever owned! And, I’ve owned over 40 in my 43 years of riding. The Evo should be built – absolutely! A stripped down Goldwing with some style – yeah baby! IMO the Honda flat six is the finest drive train ever put in a motorcycle frame.

  18. Gary says:

    The CB1100R- your kidding me right? Dated and with such an ugly front fairing design, no thanks. The Evo6 is much better, maybe needing a more comfortable looking seat. Many seem to want retro, but most of those never seem to go over like those saying they want one, actually do. There may be very few exceptions.

    • Randy in Atlanta says:

      There’s nothing wrong with the sentiment “What’s old is new!” Harley sold an unbelievable 57% of the new bikes in the U.S. in 2014. On the other hand, I’m sick of cruisers. I’m sick of enclosed bikes. The engines are part of the artwork. Simplicity and minimalism has great benefits. It lessens the price going in, attracting new blood. It brings back variety and alternatives. Look at how much PRIVATE creativity is lost when you don’t give someone a basic palette to work with. ($6000 of chrome options on a Harley is not CREATIVITY). I’m all for the CB’s and the Bumble Bee Yamaha’s and the Royal Enfields and the Urals and exposed singles and twins. Fords greatest success is from remaking the 69
      Mustang using current technology. I think I need to restart BSA.

  19. azi says:

    CB1100R reissue? Suzuki’s been there and done that with their 2002 GS1200SS 🙂

  20. Provologna says:

    Screw it, Honda. Just come out with an overhauled CBX, would you please? Air cooled, as close as possible to the original cosmetics and riding position, maybe narrower cylinder bank, injected of course, lighter versions of the Comstar wheels, offer it in either red or black, naked but w/optional sport-touring fairing similar to the 81-82 touring model (also sold for the 81-85 700/750 Sabre), adjustable pegs and bars, gotta have 6-1 exhaust because revving such motor at a stop is enough to make the owner of a half-million dollar car run out and buy one that same afternoon. (Everyone who’s ridden a finely tuned CBX w/a Denco header, jetted carbs, and OEM Sport kit knows exactly what I’m talking about.)

    Is this asking too much? Soichiro and original designer Irimajiri would be so proud. Every single one would be pre-sold before delivery.

    • KenHoward says:

      “Is this asking too much?” Of course it is – not to mention, what do you think it would cost? The CBX was a sales flop, instantly outgunned and outsold by Kawasaki’s ‘Z’. It certainly looked cool, though (in fact, I’ve got a beautiful poster of one on my wall).

  21. Patrick Connelly says:

    Didn’t they design a heads up display helmet that went with the evo 6?

  22. Mark L says:

    A smaller version of the 1100r would be nice say a 500r or cafe racer style!

  23. North of Missoula says:

    Looks about 500 lbs and 98hp. Retro should mean simplicity in form, function and style. We don’t want 1982 HP ratings to go with it.

    Give it the CBR1000 power plant tuned for low end grunt. That is what people want.

    What the hell is wrong with Honda?

    • MGNorge says:

      It’s only hinted that Honda may do this and you’re already complaining about details? So glad I’m not a motorcycle product planner!

    • mickey says:

      That is what people want? What people?

      People that want a retro ride aren’t interested in a finless, liquid cooled motor. If they did they’d just buy the CBR1000 in the first place ( or many of the other finless, water cooled bikes available).

      Retro riders want that finned air cooled lump with a steel frame and dual rear shocks and round gauges. It’s a package.

  24. Mark Pearson says:

    I’m a late 70’s/early 80’s Superbike guy so the CB1100R is right up my alley. I pray it happens with the adjustable suspension and radial brakes in the photos and weighs less than 500 lbs. I’d love to take a bike like that to a track day.

  25. Grover says:

    Headed for production? I’ll believe that when I see it!

  26. John A. Kuzmenko says:

    Lots of air and empty space under the seat and fuel tank of the CB1100R, making it seem very light-weight.
    I wonder if that would be crammed full of EPA and DOT doo-dads in reality.

  27. Randy in Atlanta says:

    EVO? What the Valkyrie should have been. The CB? The world is growing tired of cruisers and crotch rockets. Every day I hear guys yell for simplicity, high end brakes and suspension, and exposed engines. The essence has been lost. It’s nice to see it making a comeback. Next thing you know, there will be small displacement machines drawing in new blood. Well, I’ll be damned…..

  28. Flylow says:

    I don’t like Honda’s but I have to say that the uncluttered and basic design of especially the CB 1100R is something ALL current motorcycle manufacturers could learn from. Awesome! Well done!

  29. 2007? really? How many Valkyries have you seen on the street? F6B? CB1100? The b’ness was cut in half by the events in 2008 and it does not appear to be coming back.

    • Neil says:

      I don’t see ANY bikes on the street. 100 miles of commuting today and I saw one Busa. People are not riding in New England. Here it is nice weather and no one is riding. It baffles the mind. Harleys all over the place on weekends, but even few of them commute.

      • Jeremy in TX says:

        I see a lot of commuters here. I am not one of them because I value my life, but they are out there. Even a guy on a Zero SR. Lots of people out on the weekend, too. New Valkeries? I’ve seen three over the past month. Maybe four, but it might have been the same guy. Just one FB6 six during that time, and one CB1100. Maybe it is the year-round riding season here, but there is no shortage of new bikes (2 years old or less) on the road out this way.

      • Norm G. says:

        re: “People are not riding in New England.”

        that is weird.

        wait, which New England…? north of Boston or south of Boston…?

      • todd says:

        I see (and hear) many, many bikes out riding every day. Very few of them are Harleys.

  30. Hot Dog says:

    A couple of years ago at the IMS in Mpls, Honda had a retro scrambler that looked like a 305 scrambler. It had a 750 water cooled V-twin and it was beautiful.

    I think either one of these machines would be a sales success.

  31. mickey says:

    I don’t care what they do to it cam wise, exhaust wise compression bump wise the mill is not going to produce anything comparable to a new liquid cooled designed motor, Bumping the std CB 1100’s HP to 105-110 would put it in line with bikes like the Griso and BMW R9T, and more than the Bonnie (even the rumored new liquid cooled one) and V7 Guzzi and 800cc Kwacker that it will be competing with, although I don’t see Honda doing that. I’d be surprised if in production it made significantly more hp than the std CB1100 mill.

    The EVO 6 is pure sexy (except for the headlight imo). Would love to test ride that!

    • Jeremy in TX says:

      ” the mill is not going to produce anything comparable to a new liquid cooled designed motor”

      I don’t think anyone would expect that level of power from an air-cooled engine. Well, except maybe the guys that probably also think it should weigh less than 400lbs and cost $7500.

      The 100-ish rwhp territory is a sweet spot for me and makes for an exciting street bike assuming the bike makes good power through the midrange as well, and it would put the on par with some of its peers.

      • mickey says:

        Jeremy I think that 100 ish hp is doable. We have guys on the CB1100 forum that have dyno’d 92 rwhp with an ECU reflash, and a pipe.

        • Jeremy in TX says:

          I have no doubt they could achieve 100+ from the engine without taking much punch out of the bottom. Maybe it isn’t the case inside, but everything about the exterior of that engine says “overbuilt” – it just looks like it is meant for so much more! Not that it matters as I imagine Honda would just drop the current engine in as is should they produce the bike.

        • VLJ says:

          The last air-cooled (and properly finned, too!) R1200R made a legitimate 100rwhp and 77 ft. lbs of torque at the rear wheel, and that’s just a Boxer twin. A 1200cc I4 designed and built by the motorcycling world’s preeminent motor manufacturer should have zero problem reaching and eclipsing such moderate figures.

          The CB1100F only makes the power it does because that’s what Honda wants it to make. If they wanted more, it would make more. Now, as to why Honda never seems to want “more” anymore, I haven’t a clue. I sure wish they would, though, and I suspect many others do, as well. I’m reasonably certain there isn’t a CB1100F owner out there who would have opted not to purchase his bike if it made twenty more rwhp and fifteen more lbs of torque. They might not have needed it or asked for it, but they wouldn’t have turned their noses up at it, either.

          It’s the same story, regarding the VFR. Make it 1000ccs, with the equivalent power and weight of a Ninja 1000 (and a similar upright seating position), and Honda dealers would be unable to keep the bike in stock.

          Long story short, yes, Honda could easily design this new CB1100R to produce 100-120 rwhp, with mid-’70s lbs of rw torque. And they almost certainly won’t. That’s today’s Honda.

          • mickey says:

            VLJ…I remember this discussion lol. I wrote a nice response to this last night that somehow disappeared in space after hitting submit, so I will try again.. anyhow I AGREE with you that most CB1100 owners wouldn’t mind another 20 HP as long as it didn’t mess with the sweet and forgiving nature of the CB1100F. If the power comes on in a rush from 8000-13000 rpms like the FZ-1 Yamaha at the expense of the sweet usable street riding spot of 2000-5000 rpms it would ruin the nature of the bike. Many of us, myself included, have owned higher horsepower bikes and sold them to get the CB1100F. An interesting thread going on right now on the CB1100forum is “What bike did you have prior to the CB1100” and I think you would find the answers interesting…FZ-1s, Speed Triples, Harley Screaming Eagle Evos, BMW R1150R’s, CBR1000’s all the bikes non CB1100F owners think the CB1100F should aspire to be. Of the couple thousand members we have on the forum from 21 countries, very few are dissatisfied with the performance of their CB1100F and its meager 87 HP, because in the real world, for a lot of us, HP doesn’t mean squat when it comes to a pleasurable riding experience. Another 20 hp in the right range would be nice, but another 20 hp won’t make the bike any nicer to ride, just a little faster if you rev it far enough.

          • VLJ says:

            mickey, that mill is large enough to accept another twenty hp without sacrificing anything down low. For one thing, the CB1100F motor doesn’t make that much power down low. It really should make at least as much torque as the aforementioned 1200cc Boxer twin, yet it doesn’t come anywhere close. And no one who has ever ridden that Boxer motor would ever describe it as “peaky.” Not at all. It’s a tree stump puller that redlines at a mere 8500 rpm.

            Give your bike another twenty hp and fifteen lbs of torque and you needn’t sacrifice a thing, regarding its easygoing nature. You would simply have a nice extra shot of grunt down low, along with a more exciting rush on top. With 1200ccs and four pistons on tap, those would still be very sedate power numbers.

            Win-win. And Honda could do this in their sleep. They would pick up extra buyers, too, while alienating no current ones. People on the CB1100F board aren’t posting threads asking how to reduce the power of their bikes, but plenty of them clearly crave more power.

        • mickey says:

          I can tell you the R1200R I rented in Europe for two weeks did not like being lugged around under 4000 rpms. I rode my CB around this morning and most of the time found myself running between 2500 and 3000 rpms. Country back roads 45-60 mph. That’s what I mean by an easy going nature of the bike. Any gear any speed. It never bucks in any gear as long as you are moving.

          Another 20 hp done right, no problem. Not necessary, but no problem.

          • VLJ says:

            http://www.motorcycle.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/2014-Retro-Roadsters-hp-torque-dyno-633×450.jpg

            I’ve never ridden a Euro-spec R1200R but I can tell you that mine ran perfectly fine at those crazy-low rpm you mentioned. And, as you can see from the dyno chart, the air-cooled 1200 Boxer makes more power and torque than the CB1100F everywhere, not just on top.

          • mickey says:

            I think maybe it depends on gearing? Any liter bike should be able to pull those “crazy low numbers” as you put it, but I have a friend with a Griso and he says it doesn’t like to run under 4000 rpms. Same story with a friend with a Ducati Multistrada. A common fix on many of the Euro forums is to change the gearing by going 1 tooth down on the front and up a couple teeth on the rear from what I understand. That is how my son fixed his Ducati Monster, which wouldn’t cleanly pull high gear until after 65 or 70 mph.
            I live in sw Ohio. All the state highways have a maximum speed limit of 55 mph. Even on the freeway here it is 65 mph. So the vast majority of our riding is from 45 to 60 mph. Having just returned from a 120 mile ride on state highways I observed the following rpms in high gear on my CB…. 55 mph 2500 rpms, 60 mph 2750 rpms (notice at this point I am already speeding), 65 mph 3000 rpms, 70 mph 3250 rpms (now I am speeding on the freeway), 75 mph 3500 rpms and 80 mph 3750 rpms (get caught going this fast and it’s considered reckless op in Ohio and there is a possibility you will go to jail) and I am at still not at 4000 rpms. Those crazy low numbers will still get me in serious trouble if caught doing some of them. Now you could down shift a couple gears, but to what end? More rpms, more wear on the motor, less fuel mileage, and you can still legally only go so fast. The CB will rev to 8500 if you want it to, but there simply is no need, and no place you could do it where I live, without risking tickets or jail.

          • VLJ says:

            Unless we’re talking stop-and-go city traffic or a long run of fifteen mph switchbacks, I simply won’t ride a motorcycle at those speeds. Not on purpose, anyway.

            🙂

            Seriously, though, of course we have speed limits here in California too. Most of the decently fun roads have 45 mph (or thereabouts) posted limits, but there is just no way to ride that slowly. Besides the occasional Harley slug, nobody rides that slowly. Even the Goldwing guys are nearly always at least ten mph over the posted limits.

          • mickey says:

            I’d wave you around my friend. I enjoy riding and am not in that big of a hurry anymore. I am usually speed limit to speed limit plus 5. I had my 30 or so years of riding like my tail was on fire. Surprised me that I survived those years. Now I ride like the old man I am, and the nature of the CB matches my riding style perfectly.

          • mickey says:

            BTW when you are riding around on your 45 mph roads at, lets say 15 over the limit (do you ride that slow?) what gear are you usually in at 60 mph..1st? second? 2nd or 3rd or 4th? What are the rpms in say 4th at 60 mph on your ride? I’m thinking on the CB it would still be under 4000 rpms … I will find out on this afternoons ride. Crazy-low rpms man!

          • VLJ says:

            If I’m on a 60mph twisty road, I’m usually in third gear. Maybe fourth, if I know the road is going to open up on the exit. Keep in mind, though, I now ride a Street Triple R. Back when I was on the R1200R I would have been more likely to be in fourth, unless I was trying to go fast, at which point I would have remained in third. When I was on the GSX-R1000 or GSX-R750, it would have been second gear. I tend to like higher rpm when I’m on a reasonably fun road.

            On your bike I’m guessing I’d usually leave it in fourth for those lazy 60 mph twisties.

          • mickey says:

            I cant imagine running 60 mph in second gear lol

            I checked today, 60 mph in 4 th is 3500 rpms, drop down to third though and it soars to 4500 rpms.

          • todd says:

            even 4500 RPM seems so low to me. If an engine is designed to spin to 10k, there’s no damage done running it at 6k or more. That’s where my engine really pulls even though it’s smooth down to 2500 or less. In my experience, fuel mileage is more related to how much throttle (or “torque”) I’m using, not RPM.

            Redwood Road is posted at 25 – 35 but I find that I am averaging 55 over the 10.5 miles between Castro Valley and Oakland (11.5 minutes). It’s VERY difficult sticking to the posted limit…

          • mickey says:

            Todd you are saying it’s alright to ride a 10 thou rpm bike at 6000 (60%.. and btw I don’t disagree with that)well my CB redlines at 8500 so running at 4500 is more than 50%..60% would be 5100 rpms, the equivalent to your example.

            and I find it hard to believe you run the entire 10 1/2 miles of that road in 3rd gear or less. You may… but I wouldn’t lol

            ever worry about cops when you are running twice the speed limit?

          • VLJ says:

            mickey, believe it. Any decent road like Redwood Rd, yes, we’re doing at least 60-ish mph. Those 25-35 mph limits were engineered for 50’s-era slow, cumbersome, ill-handling land barges. Trying to ride those roads at those speeds on a modern sport(y) motorcycle borders on the ludicrous. It can be done, but it’s like riding through a mall, looking for a parking spot.

            As for 60 mph in second gear seeming crazy to you, well, my bone-stock GSX-R1000 did 123 mph in second. Even my little Street Triple R is doing a lot more than sixty when I’m riding relatively hard.

          • mickey says:

            Those gotta be Crazy-high rpms lol

      • azi says:

        GSX1400 produced over 100bhp with an air/oil cooled lump, but it was really heavy. Euro emissions regulations killed it too.

        So yes it’s technically possible as it’s been done before – but whether it’s technically possible within current regulations is another matter.

        • azi says:

          XJR1300 also makes over 100bhp (forgot about that one), and they are still making them

          • mickey says:

            Tests I’ve read put the RWHP of the XJ1300 at 98. About the same as the Bandit 1200

          • azi says:

            More enthusiastic poking in the dusty corners of my brain during sensible working hours has also unearthed the specs of the standard GSX1100 motor from the early 1980s – which made over 100bhp at the crank.

            The Honda Cork is a real thing 🙂

          • mickey says:

            I think it would be a mistake on Hondas part not to produce at least 110 rwhp for the R model. Even if it is retro, unlike its CB1100F cousin, it will be judged as a retro “cafe’ racer.. Emphasis on racer. It had better run to 135 mph too unlike our neutered CB1100f’s which are limited to 112 mph.

            Almost all of these big inline 4 air/oil cooled motors today are putting out in the neighborhood of 100 rwhp, and the retro water cooled bikes are putting out 10 to 15 horses more than that.

  32. Ricardo says:

    Where do I put my deposit on the EVO 6?

  33. Routemeister says:

    Air-cooled cafe style with a 50 mile mono-post seat? Dream on! Honda’s marketers will never push that concept to production.

  34. Tommy D says:

    Just talking this weekend about the Honda CB1100R. A bunch of former Honda guys chatting about how they used to have really cool bikes and I brought up this bike as an example of something I wished they would sell. It generates all the right feelings looking at it.

  35. Rich DuBarton says:

    I like both of them ,but I’d like to take a demo ride on Evo6 . The CB1100R looks like a fun bike to ride in the north Georiga mountains where I live . Please add adjustible foot pegs.

  36. Kev C says:

    The EVO 6 is gorgeous. I was waiting for naked BMW 6 cyclinder, but the Honda looks better by far!

  37. Paul Harris says:

    I am a die hard Honda guy (all I have ever owned) and have been waiting on them to make the EVO 6 since it was shown. The current CB1000rr just doesn’t peek my interests. I am about to stray to a KTM Super Duke 1290R because of Hondas reluctance to provide a similar animal. If they make it, I hope they use a 1200-1300cc motor with at least a 10,000 rpm redline with 85-90 foot pounds of torque. They will sell as many as they can produce to the guys coming off liter bikes who seek more comfort but don’t want a neutered v-twin cruiser with a 6000 rpm ceiling and poor handling characteristics.

    • Dave says:

      That’s a heavily served market right now. Bikes like Ducati Diavel, Monster, and every “naked” sport bike (Tuono, Speed Triple, Duke). It’s really easy to get it wrong in that segment.

      I’d like to see a sport standard built on the 800cc V4. I think the flat-6 is always going to be too heavy for anything outside of the cruiser sphere, and probably too smooth running to have the personality that lots of these riders are looking for.

  38. Ed says:

    What a beautiful bike the CB1100R is. New-old heritage homage is great to see. There is a certain beauty in the simplicity of design of the old stuff. This bike has no clutter, which is what anything mechanical is about, and that is the heart of a beautiful motorcycle, and it’s emotions that sell a bike like this. What you said about the motor makes sense along those lines too. It doesn’t have to be blindingly fast, just make some cool sounds and maybe a good top-end rush. If there were some factory-aftermarket silencer options like Ducati does with their Termignoni line the bike would an even bigger hit.

    • Notarollingroadblock says:

      I agree about the looks. But could it ever make it into production (especially for California use) and stay so clean looking? Let’s hope so.

      • Grover says:

        That’s what I thought. By the time it makes it to production it will have changed significantly. Gotta satisfy the EPA, DOT and stringent Calififornia emissions. Probably be.
        a 49 state bike.

  39. KenHoward says:

    I’d love to see a lighter-weight, standard bike built around Honda’s super-smooth flat-6. This Evo 6 caught my attention when it appeared, and still looks absolutely amazing to me.

  40. Jeremy in TX says:

    I like them both. That EVO 6 kind of has the vibe of a Japanese Griso.

    • Norm G. says:

      it also has the vibe of the original GL1000 before it grew a pair and morphed itself into a house on wheels.

  41. Alex says:

    That CB1100R really does it for me—engine, frame, body, components—the perfect sporty retro without defaulting to the cafe style.

  42. Larry K says:

    Rarely have I been much of a Honda guy but I dig both of these. I think if Soichiro was around he’d get them going.

  43. MGNorge says:

    I too thought there was promise with the Evo 6. If fitted correctly with accessory panniers i’d be very interested. A more padded seat for longer trips would be aN appreciated add-on too. The CB1100R looks good too but not sure what to expect from air-cooled mills as to output?

  44. Frank says:

    Weight shouldn’t be a problem with the Evo 6…most of the weight should be down low. It’s a power standard made for the street, not a race bike. For the folks who will buy it, this bike will rock. Agreed, it’s great looking..so too the 1100R concept.

  45. xLaYN says:

    “let’s hope it upgrades the rather sedate engine performance”
    as per Cyclerworld review
    56 foot-pounds of torque is immediately available below 2000 rpm, and over 60 ft.-lb. from 3000 rpm to beyond the 82-hp peak at 7200 rpm

    Maybe just different cams and exhaust?, also the CB1100f seems to sport an small oil cooler, the one on display doesn’t appear to have oil lines (or radiators), not sure how much performance you can get without start sacrificing reliability.
    OTH it may be just a display model and the production one would be severely different.

    Honda Evo 6 concept, the Gold Wing sporty brother, weight will probably be the main issue but that thing looks beautiful.

    • Jeremy in TX says:

      Judging from the CB100 I rode, I’m guessing they could make some pretty exciting power with different cams, timing and probably a compression bump. Whether or not they do that is a whole different story. I also think they probably left the oil cooler off of the prototype for aesthetic reasons.

    • Hot Dog says:

      You’re right, that Evo 6 is beautiful. I had a 04′ Wing that I put 100K on and the motor was bulletproof. I’ve kept in contact with the next owner, he’s got over 185K on it and there’s never been a valve that needed adjustment.

      If Honda would build it, it’d sell like Hot Dogs at the county fair (BOOO!). I doubt that they will.

      • xLaYN says:

        “I had a 04′ Wing that I put 100K”
        nice you got that wing to the road, 100k sounds like a lot of fun

        “I doubt that they will.”
        they could build it for the sake of “we are Honda, look what we can do” like they did with the Rune Valkyrie

      • Provologna says:

        I believe it. I think the primary determinant of so-called “valve lash service interval” is emissions regulations. If not for those regulations, IMO the intervals would be longer.

        If the motor is hard to start or spits/backfires on deceleration, valve lash clearance is less than spec. If the top end is noisy, valve lash clearance is excessive (I forgot why, but these rules don’t apply to Ducati Desmo heads). The parts in modern production are reliable, and lacking abuse or racing, are generally stable. Especially on a motor as overbuilt as the Wing (AKA Lead Wing as we used to call it).