New Cycle World review of the Superhawk
10-01-2004, 09:16 AM
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
New Cycle World review of the Superhawk
I've only owned my Superhawk since spring, so I haven't followed the press it's gotten until this year. It's pretty funny and a little puzzling why motorcycle journalists simply don't like the bike. This latest review takes the cake.
They put the Superhawk up against a Ducati 1000. One of the new post-999 styled Ducatis that you either hate or love the styling. Whatever. It's a Ducati with all the good and bad things that come with the brand.
I don't have the article in front of me but the long and short of the review is this:
The Superhawk has more power, handles better, is more reliable and costs much less, but still loses the "match" to the Ducati. I have to smile and quietly thank magazines for this sort of press. It allowed me to buy a brand new Superhawk for six thousand dollars, put Ohlins suspension on it, save at least several thousand dollars over what a comparable sportbike would have cost me, AND have Honda reliability.
Thanks Cycle World. Now if they would just start slamming the new BMW R1200GS and get the price of that thing a little more affordable.....
They put the Superhawk up against a Ducati 1000. One of the new post-999 styled Ducatis that you either hate or love the styling. Whatever. It's a Ducati with all the good and bad things that come with the brand.
I don't have the article in front of me but the long and short of the review is this:
The Superhawk has more power, handles better, is more reliable and costs much less, but still loses the "match" to the Ducati. I have to smile and quietly thank magazines for this sort of press. It allowed me to buy a brand new Superhawk for six thousand dollars, put Ohlins suspension on it, save at least several thousand dollars over what a comparable sportbike would have cost me, AND have Honda reliability.
Thanks Cycle World. Now if they would just start slamming the new BMW R1200GS and get the price of that thing a little more affordable.....
10-01-2004, 04:04 PM
#2
Senior Member
Superstock
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 318
Re: New Cycle World review of the Superhawk
That seems like a pretty stupid comparo.... most magazines would not even jeopardize their reputation for doing comparisons of bikes that are not closely matched. Stupid.
But, you bought a NEW superhawk for $6k?? where?? That is an amazing price... almost too good to be true!
But, you bought a NEW superhawk for $6k?? where?? That is an amazing price... almost too good to be true!
10-02-2004, 03:39 PM
#3
Remember stock is BAD!
SuperSport
SuperSport
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Jacksonville FL
Posts: 760
Re: New Cycle World review of the Superhawk
Who is interested in reviewing a bike that was came out in 97and hasn't changed sense then (colour doesn't count).
I wish that the mags would review bikes that came out a couple of years ago and give a review of them now. I am not interested in a full review of the latest gixxer. I want to know what bikes are a good deal that I can live with on an everyday basis, and do a few trackdays here and there. Oh yeah that I can afford to buy and afford the maintance on.
:P
I wish that the mags would review bikes that came out a couple of years ago and give a review of them now. I am not interested in a full review of the latest gixxer. I want to know what bikes are a good deal that I can live with on an everyday basis, and do a few trackdays here and there. Oh yeah that I can afford to buy and afford the maintance on.
:P
10-02-2004, 08:31 PM
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: New Cycle World review of the Superhawk
I was just about to come here and post about this.
The thing is, I agree with CW. I almost bought a SS1000 before I bought the SH. The only reason I bought the SH is because I got it for a little over $7k new.
The SS1000 is nearly as quick (~.2 sec in the 1/4 mile), at least until you are going really fast, handles better (don't care what CW says, though I think they say it is more compliant, not better handling), has better brakes, and is considerably lighter.
The thing is, I agree with CW. I almost bought a SS1000 before I bought the SH. The only reason I bought the SH is because I got it for a little over $7k new.
The SS1000 is nearly as quick (~.2 sec in the 1/4 mile), at least until you are going really fast, handles better (don't care what CW says, though I think they say it is more compliant, not better handling), has better brakes, and is considerably lighter.
10-04-2004, 07:43 AM
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
A couple of follow up items here. Price and esthetics.
Faz asked where I got a new SH for six thousand. At Sun Honda here in Denver. It was a new, still in the crate 2001. Full warranty.
ChickenLover has an interesting point. What IS a "better" bike? What qualities define "better"?
Because all motorcycles are SO good these days performance is often hair splitting. When we start talking about one hundreth of a second in a quarter mile, or for that matter a second or two,...I don't care. There are no points, trophies or dollars available for racing on the street. My ego is fine with the horsepower I've got.
"Compliant" and "better handling" are relative too. Now that I've upgraded the suspension I find very little difference between how my friend"s Ducati 998 and my Superhawk ride. Up to a point. My SH is more comfortable for longer periods of time. The Ducati is a much better bike if I'm on the track.
For me, the real issue is esthetics and money. The sound and the look of a Ducati is art. I love walking out to my friend's garage and just sitting and looking at his bike. The SH is good. I pass it every morning with a smile. It's not high art.
I won't even get into reliablilty, parts availablility and valve adjustments. I wish I could afford a Mike Hailwood replica Ducati but I can't.
Form or function. It's one of those never ending questions that keeps this sport fun for me.
Faz asked where I got a new SH for six thousand. At Sun Honda here in Denver. It was a new, still in the crate 2001. Full warranty.
ChickenLover has an interesting point. What IS a "better" bike? What qualities define "better"?
Because all motorcycles are SO good these days performance is often hair splitting. When we start talking about one hundreth of a second in a quarter mile, or for that matter a second or two,...I don't care. There are no points, trophies or dollars available for racing on the street. My ego is fine with the horsepower I've got.
"Compliant" and "better handling" are relative too. Now that I've upgraded the suspension I find very little difference between how my friend"s Ducati 998 and my Superhawk ride. Up to a point. My SH is more comfortable for longer periods of time. The Ducati is a much better bike if I'm on the track.
For me, the real issue is esthetics and money. The sound and the look of a Ducati is art. I love walking out to my friend's garage and just sitting and looking at his bike. The SH is good. I pass it every morning with a smile. It's not high art.
I won't even get into reliablilty, parts availablility and valve adjustments. I wish I could afford a Mike Hailwood replica Ducati but I can't.
Form or function. It's one of those never ending questions that keeps this sport fun for me.
10-11-2004, 12:03 PM
#6
Senior Member
Superstock
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 318
thanks for the clarification, rray. even though they are the same bikes, I don't think any dealer would sell a 2004 model for $6k new. The 2001 model, if it were still sitting on the showroom floor at the spring of 04, is a different story. In any case, you got an awsome deal on a great bike, and that is all that counts! 
I read the article, and well, even though I would have preferred to have the superhawk be the winner, I sort of agreed with the article in whole. It had a ton of good stuff to say about the superhawk, and the only thing that pissed me off was the part about not being able to get more than a 100 miles from a gas tank. I normally put about 2.8 gal. every 110-115 miles or so, and I still have 1.4 gal. left in the tank, which is good for another 40 miles easy. (stock everything, incl. pipes)
In any case, superhawk remains one of the best all around bikes, in my opinion, and the article points out some of the positives of this bike.
I read the article, and well, even though I would have preferred to have the superhawk be the winner, I sort of agreed with the article in whole. It had a ton of good stuff to say about the superhawk, and the only thing that pissed me off was the part about not being able to get more than a 100 miles from a gas tank. I normally put about 2.8 gal. every 110-115 miles or so, and I still have 1.4 gal. left in the tank, which is good for another 40 miles easy. (stock everything, incl. pipes)
In any case, superhawk remains one of the best all around bikes, in my opinion, and the article points out some of the positives of this bike.
10-12-2004, 01:21 PM
#7
Member
Squid
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 64
Re: New Cycle World review of the Superhawk
You know the whole tank range is kinda puzzling to me too. I mean, it doesn't get the best mpg, but I do average around 38mpg, and that's with a slip-on and jetting. I usually go 118-125 before the light comes on.
Just last week I went 114 or so when the light came on, and that was after a bit of "spirited" riding. I went 147 miles before I made it to the gas station, and I was starting to get worried. Then I filled up and only put in 3.8 gallons. Doesn't a 98 SH have a 4.8 gallon tank? I could've gone another 35 miles if that's the case, which would take me 182 miles on a tank! Am I wrong here?
Jeff
redsuperhawk
Just last week I went 114 or so when the light came on, and that was after a bit of "spirited" riding. I went 147 miles before I made it to the gas station, and I was starting to get worried. Then I filled up and only put in 3.8 gallons. Doesn't a 98 SH have a 4.8 gallon tank? I could've gone another 35 miles if that's the case, which would take me 182 miles on a tank! Am I wrong here?
Jeff
redsuperhawk
10-13-2004, 05:15 PM
#8
Senior Member
Superstock
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 318
well, from honda's website, the specs for the superhawk says 4.2 gallons, including 0.7-gallon reserve. I think I read somewhere that the gas tank was increased from 2001 (with the new digital dash), but I am not sure.
In any case, I have always got at least 35 mpg, mostly 37 or so mpg though, and with 4.2 g it should take me at least to about 140 miles or so.
In any case, I have always got at least 35 mpg, mostly 37 or so mpg though, and with 4.2 g it should take me at least to about 140 miles or so.
01-02-2005, 02:44 AM
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: New Cycle World review of the Superhawk
The US model never got the larger tank. Only Europe & Aus. got the upgrade from 16l to 19litre tank. One of the problems with gas milage is that the VTR is unable to empty tank. The fuel is only gravity fed to carbs. The fix for this is to add a fuel pump so that you can use the full capacity of tank. I have perfomed this mod to my 2001 Aus. model with 19l tank. If I ride it for economy I can manage over 300klms to empty.
01-02-2005, 02:59 AM
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: New Cycle World review of the Superhawk
rray I think you made the right decision. I to thought of a Ducati ST4s but the bang for you buck & the total cost of ownership made the VTR the smart buy. I have no regrets my mate who but the ST4s sold it due to the high service costs. The VTR with a seat mod can tour they can hold their own on track days.
The fuel pump mod really helps with gas tank range. I'll try to post a photo of mod in this reply??
The fuel pump mod really helps with gas tank range. I'll try to post a photo of mod in this reply??
01-02-2005, 07:37 AM
#12
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 127
They missed the mark on this test. They sure like their Ducks over there. Also everthing else unobtainium. Alot of the bikes they write about can't even be had in the USA and alot of the others are not even being built. When they do write an article like this they can't even do their own math. If I had a stable of bikes to choose from I would probably be riding something else. But for my $$$$$ I'll stick with the Hawk. It is a fun bike to ride.
01-18-2005, 09:37 AM
#13
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 103
Re: New Cycle World review of the Superhawk
Regarding biased reviews and motorcycle reviews in general, the editors of most of these magazines are caught in a strange paradox: they must at least pretend to be objective in their reviews, while, at the same time, avoid pissing-off too severely their main contributors (the "Big Four" who buy so much advertising space in the magazines).
More importantly, V-twin cruiser magazines excepted, the reviews offered in the most of the major motorcycle rags are biased in favor of bikes that perform well on a race track. Specfically, the editors often presume that riding a motorcycle very quickly on a race track, a highly controlled and constant environment in comparison to what most riders will ever experience, somehow translates to something meaningful for a person who might be interested in buying one of the bikes under review. Further, the editors rarely take into consideration that different riders have different needs and preferences when it comes to what they think comprises an excellent motorcycle. For example, "iron-butt" riders often prefer BMWs because of the nifty accoutrements that enhance long-distance riding (comfortable rider position, heated grips, a rider-accomodating motorcycle that is not the size of a cruise-liner, etc.). Similarly, everyday commuters often prefer Hondas because of the reputed no-headaches reliability of their motorcycles, as in all of those CB-750s out there that will out-live us all.
That said, it seems to me that most of the editors of the motorcycle rags that I have read have raced at some time and are almost naturally going to prefer edgy bikes over something a little more practical, something a little more attuned to the everyday rider's needs and point-of-view. It is at this point that the VTR often loses-out, as--to paraphrase the Honda press release for the VTR in 1997--"the VTR1000F was _not_ designed to be a street-legal race bike; it was designed to be an excellent all-around motorcycle."
On that note, I would have to say to the engineers at Honda, "Mission accomplished."
cheers,
--HotStreetVTR
More importantly, V-twin cruiser magazines excepted, the reviews offered in the most of the major motorcycle rags are biased in favor of bikes that perform well on a race track. Specfically, the editors often presume that riding a motorcycle very quickly on a race track, a highly controlled and constant environment in comparison to what most riders will ever experience, somehow translates to something meaningful for a person who might be interested in buying one of the bikes under review. Further, the editors rarely take into consideration that different riders have different needs and preferences when it comes to what they think comprises an excellent motorcycle. For example, "iron-butt" riders often prefer BMWs because of the nifty accoutrements that enhance long-distance riding (comfortable rider position, heated grips, a rider-accomodating motorcycle that is not the size of a cruise-liner, etc.). Similarly, everyday commuters often prefer Hondas because of the reputed no-headaches reliability of their motorcycles, as in all of those CB-750s out there that will out-live us all.
That said, it seems to me that most of the editors of the motorcycle rags that I have read have raced at some time and are almost naturally going to prefer edgy bikes over something a little more practical, something a little more attuned to the everyday rider's needs and point-of-view. It is at this point that the VTR often loses-out, as--to paraphrase the Honda press release for the VTR in 1997--"the VTR1000F was _not_ designed to be a street-legal race bike; it was designed to be an excellent all-around motorcycle."
On that note, I would have to say to the engineers at Honda, "Mission accomplished."
cheers,
--HotStreetVTR
01-18-2005, 09:56 AM
#14
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 103
Re: New Cycle World review of the Superhawk
Regarding Ducatis, before the engineers at Ducati turned them into ugly-looking spacehips, they were very pretty motorcycles and, as they still do, came ready to rock-and-roll, right out of the crate. (the '97 Ducati 916 is a work of art and likely had a big place in motivating the creation of the VTR1000F.)
That said, Ducatis are also a right-royal pain in the ****. To accompany the ridiculously high cost of routine maintenance, Ducati dealerships have placed a strangle-hold on the Ducati maintenance market--will not readily sell valve shims or proprietary valve-adjustment kits to the mechanic down the street. Thus, if you ride more than 6000-8000 miles per year, you'd better have deep pockets and be willing to sit at the dealership all day, once a year.
In short, in the view of many mechanics, Desmodromic valves are an antiquated technology--nothing new or flashy, just a pain in the **** and a hole in the wallet.
cheers,
HotStreetVTR
That said, Ducatis are also a right-royal pain in the ****. To accompany the ridiculously high cost of routine maintenance, Ducati dealerships have placed a strangle-hold on the Ducati maintenance market--will not readily sell valve shims or proprietary valve-adjustment kits to the mechanic down the street. Thus, if you ride more than 6000-8000 miles per year, you'd better have deep pockets and be willing to sit at the dealership all day, once a year.
In short, in the view of many mechanics, Desmodromic valves are an antiquated technology--nothing new or flashy, just a pain in the **** and a hole in the wallet.
cheers,
HotStreetVTR
01-19-2005, 10:34 AM
#15
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nananimo, B.C.
Posts: 764
Re: New Cycle World review of the Superhawk
Lots of wisdom here. A friend of mine who lives for motorcycles blew 20k on a 916 that he couldn't afford. A year later it now sits at the dealership he bought it from, on consignment. He could barely afford the payments, didn't have a car and the maintenance costs buried him. When I look at the bike now I notice rust on some of the parts. So I pointed this out to my SV bud and he said that "Duc's are only really for mechanically inclined racers as they require nearly continuious maintenance....or posers. On the street MANY bikes will mop up a Duc."
Everything I've seen and read about them, which isn't that much admittedly, makes me wonder why people buy them. Then again, rattly, clunky unrealiable and ludicrously underpowered Harley's still sell well...
Everything I've seen and read about them, which isn't that much admittedly, makes me wonder why people buy them. Then again, rattly, clunky unrealiable and ludicrously underpowered Harley's still sell well...
01-23-2005, 02:41 PM
#16
Remember stock is BAD!
SuperSport
SuperSport
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Jacksonville FL
Posts: 760
Re: New Cycle World review of the Superhawk
Hotstreet -
I agree with you about the biased reviews, most reviewers dont even think of the fact that most motorcycles are also used as commuters, and for weekend duty.
I have to disagree with you about the "Desmodromic valves are an antiquated technology--nothing new or flashy, just a pain in the **** and a hole in the wallet"
When the desmo system came out it was revolutionary, In some respects it still is. The biggest problem they had back then was dropping valves. Metalurgy has come a long way from then.
Ducatis have no "red line" Honda uses a similar type of set up on its valves called cam drive (VFR), 2 different ways to skin a cat.
The reason why ducati still uses this is TRADITION. That is why they still have a frame that is made out of steel.
That is why they use dry clutches.
Itallians have a history that is rooted in racing. Ducatis are focused - to be used as a track tool. Think of another itallian company ferrari. Big racing history, beautiful vehicles, good performance... sound familiar. Ferraris have the same service issues and costs associated with them.
Why do you pay so much for a Duc. In italy there are people that make the bikes. There are itallians that put the blocks together and torque down bolts. Real live humans in a factory, unlike other manufacturers (honda, yamaha, kaw, suzuki etc...)
In essence its a handmade bike.
NOrrth-
"On the street MANY bikes will mop up a Duc." That isn't the point. The point isn't who can get there faster in a straight line.
Ducatis are about carving corners with style and grace and looking good when it -and you- are going fast or standing still.
Hopefully you can appreciate these roling pieces of art for what they are.
I agree with you about the biased reviews, most reviewers dont even think of the fact that most motorcycles are also used as commuters, and for weekend duty.
I have to disagree with you about the "Desmodromic valves are an antiquated technology--nothing new or flashy, just a pain in the **** and a hole in the wallet"
When the desmo system came out it was revolutionary, In some respects it still is. The biggest problem they had back then was dropping valves. Metalurgy has come a long way from then.
Ducatis have no "red line" Honda uses a similar type of set up on its valves called cam drive (VFR), 2 different ways to skin a cat.
The reason why ducati still uses this is TRADITION. That is why they still have a frame that is made out of steel.
That is why they use dry clutches. Itallians have a history that is rooted in racing. Ducatis are focused - to be used as a track tool. Think of another itallian company ferrari. Big racing history, beautiful vehicles, good performance... sound familiar. Ferraris have the same service issues and costs associated with them.
Why do you pay so much for a Duc. In italy there are people that make the bikes. There are itallians that put the blocks together and torque down bolts. Real live humans in a factory, unlike other manufacturers (honda, yamaha, kaw, suzuki etc...)
In essence its a handmade bike.
NOrrth-
"On the street MANY bikes will mop up a Duc." That isn't the point. The point isn't who can get there faster in a straight line.
Ducatis are about carving corners with style and grace and looking good when it -and you- are going fast or standing still.
Hopefully you can appreciate these roling pieces of art for what they are.
01-26-2005, 04:29 PM
#17
Junior Member
Squid
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Signal Hill, California
Posts: 15
Re: New Cycle World review of the Superhawk
My first ride on a Duck was around 1980, I test rode a 900 Darmah, and a 500 Pantah. They we incredibly precise in their handling compared to my Yamaha at the time. After the rides I jumped on my bike took off down the road but had to stop after a mile or so because I swear it felt like some one had loosened every nut and bolt on the thing.
01-26-2005, 04:51 PM
#18
Senior Member
SuperSport
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nananimo, B.C.
Posts: 764
Re: New Cycle World review of the Superhawk
I'm sorry if I've rubbed anyone the wrong way, that wasn't my intention.
Like I said, I dont know much about Duc's. I've never owned or even ridden one so I'll take your word and many others that, when they are running right, they are finely crafted machines that handle superbly.
So...what about Aprillia Mille? Everything Ive read says its as good as a Ducati and its reliable. Not as long a pedigre?
Like I said, I dont know much about Duc's. I've never owned or even ridden one so I'll take your word and many others that, when they are running right, they are finely crafted machines that handle superbly.
So...what about Aprillia Mille? Everything Ive read says its as good as a Ducati and its reliable. Not as long a pedigre?
02-21-2005, 01:52 PM
#19
Senior Member
Back Marker
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: mass.
Posts: 140
Re: New Cycle World review of the Superhawk
the sticker on the back of my helmet sums this whole topic up.....I HUNT DUCS....and as far as you guys getting 100-130 miles to a tank full, man i wish i could get that, the guy who owned my bike before me put some serious gas guzzling mods on my bike-"spirited" wheely burnout riding gets me to the 60 mile lights on get gas now point....pics soon to come thursday...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
