NC700x vs CB500X

[HHMN]

just read an artical about the CB500x has 54 HP, and our belove NC700x is 51 HP...

I am happy with my NC700X, with average of 65mpg
how about the CB500X??
any one know?

 

[Rocker66]

They have not actually reached the shops here so nobody this side of the pond knows

 

[Beemerphile]

Less torque than the NC. I am not sure that it would be as satisfying to ride. If you are going to get horsepower-envy every time your NC gets beat you are in for a depressing ownership experience.

 

[Rocker66]

Less torque than the NC. I am not sure that it would be as satisfying to ride. If you are going to get horsepower-envy every time your NC gets beat you are in for a depressing ownership experience.

That sounds very true

 

[frozenpoet]

I like the NC as a package, some things aren't as good but some things are much better.

 

[Rocker66]

I like the NC as a package, some things aren't as good but some things are much better.

Compared with which bike? Have you been lucky enough to ride the new 500? If so which model?

 

[frozenpoet]

I was talking as a lightweight in general. I'm going to miss the power of my CBR, but most of that isn't used or used legally anyway. For me, the gas mileage and storage is the big thing for me... and the ergonomics.

 

[Rocker66]

Thats why I enjoy having 2 bikes (but no cars) as the NC is for practicality and the Crossrunner runner for fun. Only a lack of space and funds prevent me having more but the wife will not sell either of hers

 

[HHMN]

Less torque than the NC. I am not sure that it would be as satisfying to ride. If you are going to get horsepower-envy every time your NC gets beat you are in for a depressing ownership experience.

I have a NC700x, love it all the way, just wonder the cb500x has more HP, but whether it can get the mpg as NC700x. Being selfish here, i dont want another Honda bike just beat my "NC"......

 

[Naked_Duc]

If I were to guess, I would think the CB500 engine makes HP in a different way than the NCX. It will be high rev'ing and makes little torque. Being down on displacement, you will have to give up something to make that much HP.

 

[Beemerphile]

To me "lazy horsepower" is easier to live with than a machine that is having to scream its guts out to get it. That is why I have been a fan of BMW boxer motors for so long (since 1977) and I guess why the NC appeals to me.

 

[dduelin]

I read in one of the first looks that the Honda claims 61 mpg with the CB500X. The conventional DOHC 500 cc motor will have less torque than the 670 cc and it's torque and hp curves will likely be steeper so I am thinking it will be almost as efficient in mpg but will have a narrower sweet spot and not be as efficient above and below that band of rpms unlike the 670 cc which delivers high mileage across the wide range of it's power band.

 

[MZ5]

My bet is that the CB's power curve will be between that of the NC's and the CBR's. That'll make it more 'fun' to ride for those who like the sportbike style of power delivery, and it'll make it easier to get more mpgs out of with the simple addition of another tooth up front.

Or maybe not...

 

[Rocker66]

I have a NC700x, love it all the way, just wonder the cb500x has more HP, but whether it can get the mpg as NC700x. Being selfish here, i dont want another Honda bike just beat my "NC"......

Personally if I have a bike that does what I want and makes me happy then I don't care what any other bike does or doesn't do

 

[670cc]

The conventional DOHC 500 cc motor will have less torque than the 670 cc and it's torque and hp curves will likely be steeper so I am thinking it will be almost as efficient in mpg but will have a narrower sweet spot and not be as efficient above and below that band of rpms unlike the 670 cc which delivers high mileage across the wide range of it's power band.

Wow. 71 words in one sentence is hard to say in one breath!

 

[HHMN]

To me "lazy horsepower" is easier to live with than a machine that is having to scream its guts out to get it. That is why I have been a fan of BMW boxer motors for so long (since 1977) and I guess why the NC appeals to me.

Again, I agree with you on this.
I have the CB1000r, it is nice looking bike, fast.. But nothing compare to the low Rev cruising at 65mph...of the NC700x.

 

[johnakay]

the cb500x does not have 54 bhp and only the dct have 51 bhp.
the cb500 was developed for the european market, there is a new law coming out(2013) for riders progressing from a 125cc 12bhp to a bike which has a 47bhp limits hence the reason the ninja 300 and the cb500!! no doubt yam and suzy will follow.....

as for torque the NC is much better ..higher torque at low rev's.
the 500 will be higher up the rev range.in other words you'll probably have to wring it neck to get the max torque.
I think the NC was develope for a more decairning type of folks.
the 500 higher reving will appeal to a young wipper snapper

 

[dduelin]

Wow. 71 words in one sentence is hard to say in one breath!

Just reading it does make it look like I have an aversion to periods. Good thing I was not born female.

 

[Beemerphile]

the cb500x does not have 54 bhp and only the dct have 51 bhp.

This seems to vary by market. The info I have seen in the US says that the manual model has a few more ponies than the DCT. I imagine they can make small tweaks like this in the ECU/PCU.

 

[RubenAlonzo]

Don't half-ass it man. If your in for a penny you're in for a pound (my philosophy). The horsepower figures, if true are NOT what moves you. Torque does. Besides the obvious no "Frunk" space on the 500X, you will be giving up "Real World" tractable Hp on the road. In this case, bigger IS better in the long run.

HORSEPOWER: HOW FAST YOU HIT THE WALL

TORQUE: HOW FAR YOU TAKE THE WALL WITH YOU.