• A few people have been scammed on the site, Only use paypal to pay for items for sale by other members. If they will not use paypal, its likely a scam NEVER SEND E-TRANSFERS OF ANY KIND.

Eliminate the rev limiter?

Pegasus

New Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2014
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Big Island
Visit site
Is it possible to eliminate the rev limiter on an NC700? I have been riding for nearly 50 years and I am fully aware of the implications of doing that, However, I like this new little bike and hate the limiter, not to mention that it can be dangerous in a tight traffic situation. Thanks for any help.
 
Perhaps a little more seat time on the bike will give you a better feel for the power band and the shift, shift, shift technique it requires under max acceleration in the lower gears.

Not to be critical of your experience, I'm sure you have that, this bike does easily catch riders out until they retrain the brain.

You could probably handle no rev limiter but I would have been bending valves and breaking connecting rods before I learned to shift before 6500.
 
Last edited:
What everyone else said. I have only rode CBR's for the last 20 years and after about a month or so I finally found myself changing gears at around 4,000 rpms. I adjusted quickly and now I don't even think about it.
 
I have yet to hit it once. I really don't see what all the complaining is about. I came from a BMW 650GS and a KLR650 before that, and only shift when the bike feels like it wants to. Unless you come from a crotch-rocket it really shouldn't be a problem. I was really concerned before I bought mine from everything I read, but after I rode one I wasn't worried anymore.
 
No one seems to be complaining..... But I also did hit the rev limiter on more than one occasion when a burst of power was needed. I also wish it would not cut out that early....
As to whether one dislikes it or not - it's all about the riding style, load and the situations on the road. Really can't generalize!
Whatever bike one came from, I don't think any of them cut out THAT early :)
 
As we've discussed at the fellow co.uk forum, you'll gain nothing with this engine. It's designed 100% for fuel economy, not performance.

And most probably the engine will be stressed enough.

With this bike you've to shift too soon. I think it's a good idea to ride a DCT model to learn you how to do the sifting! ;-)
 
Is it possible to eliminate the rev limiter on an NC700? I have been riding for nearly 50 years and I am fully aware of the implications of doing that, However, I like this new little bike and hate the limiter, not to mention that it can be dangerous in a tight traffic situation. Thanks for any help.

5.jpg
The rev delimiter on most bikes is part of the CPU processor. It can be changed but gets real expensive. Companies like Dynatech sell these products, but I don't believe anyone makes one for the NC700, as it is not a high demand item.

Dynatech.jpg

Also, the manufactures do not honor your warranty for any part they considered damaged by the after market rev delimiter, in any shape or form.

SmileyTalkingHands.jpg

00.jpg
 
Last edited:
I with Pegasus on this, only I have only 43 years experience. Once in a while an extra 1000rpm would be nice. No, it probably won't be the peak power but it provides some flexibility for certain situations.

Not picking on you Dave on this rant - rev limiters are there to prevent engine damage. But to work that issue - why would this particular engine be unusually susceptible to that? Any 650 modern twin is redlined much higher. Did Honda use such a junk design that the redline must be kept really low? I think/hope that is a rhetorical question. Piston speed isn't the issue. Hydraulic valves aren't the issue. Is there a mechanical issue like a really chintzy crankshaft design? I hope no. Would the engine run out of breath at 7000+, probably. Single throttle body, crazy exhaust port and header, long stroke, all conspire against good highspeed breathing. But most bikes have a redline that provides significant overrun past where the engine is making peak power. Why not just provide the overrun?

It's designed 100% for fuel economy, not performance.

If you believe the marketing. I ride my NCX std like any other bike I've had (75-80mph cruise, brisk acceleration) and it's getting 55mpg on Kali winter gas. The Sprint 955i I had got 53 and I was *probably* going faster on it. So is Honda being an institutional "nanny"? Limit the power available and you shape behavior?

There are qualities to the NCX I like - comfortable, good offroad, light natural handling. The power is adequate for the most part, but for some situations it falls short. Those situations are safety related - with enough power you can do certain things safely, if you know what I mean. When I ride I don't sit behind motorhomes and cars on mountain roads - I pass them. With the NCX that's problematic. With a little overrun it would be less so.
 
Oh I just knew this would be a fun thread to follow when it was first posted.:D

200122842-001.jpeg
 
I with Pegasus on this, only I have only 43 years experience. Once in a while an extra 1000rpm would be nice. No, it probably won't be the peak power but it provides some flexibility for certain situations.

Not picking on you Dave on this rant - rev limiters are there to prevent engine damage. But to work that issue - why would this particular engine be unusually susceptible to that? Any 650 modern twin is redlined much higher. Did Honda use such a junk design that the redline must be kept really low? I think/hope that is a rhetorical question. Piston speed isn't the issue. Hydraulic valves aren't the issue. Is there a mechanical issue like a really chintzy crankshaft design? I hope no. Would the engine run out of breath at 7000+, probably. Single throttle body, crazy exhaust port and header, long stroke, all conspire against good highspeed breathing. But most bikes have a redline that provides significant overrun past where the engine is making peak power. Why not just provide the overrun?



If you believe the marketing. I ride my NCX std like any other bike I've had (75-80mph cruise, brisk acceleration) and it's getting 55mpg on Kali winter gas. The Sprint 955i I had got 53 and I was *probably* going faster on it. So is Honda being an institutional "nanny"? Limit the power available and you shape behavior?

There are qualities to the NCX I like - comfortable, good offroad, light natural handling. The power is adequate for the most part, but for some situations it falls short. Those situations are safety related - with enough power you can do certain things safely, if you know what I mean. When I ride I don't sit behind motorhomes and cars on mountain roads - I pass them. With the NCX that's problematic. With a little overrun it would be less so.
There are plenty of technical articles on the 700/750 engine that explain how the mission brief of maximum economy from given displacement was achieved ........ I don't need to repeat any of that. This modern 650 twin is very different from others in the 650 class and that is why it has such a low redline. Honda builds engines to last and last and it's my opinion the low redline is to preserve this heritage of long trouble free life not to preserve chintzy materials.
 
I with Pegasus on this, only I have only 43 years experience. Once in a while an extra 1000rpm would be nice. No, it probably won't be the peak power but it provides some flexibility for certain situations.

Not picking on you Dave on this rant - rev limiters are there to prevent engine damage. But to work that issue - why would this particular engine be unusually susceptible to that? Any 650 modern twin is redlined much higher. Did Honda use such a junk design that the redline must be kept really low?

Kind of like comparing a 5.9 liter Cummins to a 5.9 liter V8. Do you think a Cummins should turn 6,000 rpm?(Same displacement) Would it be a junk design because it is governed at 2,500? My Cummins won't outrun the gasser 5.9 stock, but has over 600,000 miles on it and will crush the gasser when I hook up a real load on it. Sure you can turn them up and have unreal power, but at what cost? I'm betting if mine was pushing a 1,000 horse power it wouldn't make it to 600k miles.
Honda built the NC for great fuel mileage and did their homework on the average riding style.
 
does it not have something to do with physics?

Since the length of the piston stroke is LONG (compared with other bikes), the piston behaves differently?

Big BORE with very short stroke seems to lend itself to high revs. Long Stroke with smalle bore probably delivers a better power curve at lower RPMs? I have only intuition on this and really wish I knew what I was talking about at this moment.
 
does it not have something to do with physics?

Since the length of the piston stroke is LONG (compared with other bikes), the piston behaves differently?

Big BORE with very short stroke seems to lend itself to high revs. Long Stroke with smalle bore probably delivers a better power curve at lower RPMs? I have only intuition on this and really wish I knew what I was talking about at this moment.

You are correct. With undersquare (long stroke, torquey) engines, the long stroke means high piston velocity.

For example, in a F1 engine, maximum piston acceleration occurs when leaving top dead center and is around 95,000 m/s squared. From TDC to 90 degrees, the piston is accelerating. From 90 to 180 degrees, is slows back down to zero at BDC. Repeat 18,000 times per minute, or 300 times per second. This causes massive forces to act on the piston, wrist pin, connecting rod, crankshaft, all associated bearings, oil, etc. In order to withstand the forces that this acceleration causes, the pistons, pins, rods, crank, and bearings have to be very strong and very light. This means the use of exotic and expensive alloys of aluminum, magnesium, titanium, etc.

F1 engines are oversquare (short stroke) the enable higher RPMs. A longer stroke engine spinning at the same RPM will experience greater piston acceleration, since a greater distance (stroke) has to be covered in the same time (90 degrees of crankshaft revolution).

This is part of why our engines are RPM limited lower than most motorcycles. Most similar sized motorcycle engines are oversquare. Most modern supersport engines also make more use of more expensive materials. In an effort to keep the entire bike cheaper, there is not much exotic metal content. Most Al alloys used in the NC are fairly common and cheap. The split pin crank is even twisted to 270 degrees after being machined at 360 degrees just to save machining cost for a 270 degree crank. Our rockers are cast aluminum (instead of machined billet or forged). They don't even have the cast flashing machined off. Our valve springs are small and low tension. At high RPMs, this will let the valves float and lead to misfiring, burnt valves and seats, and possibly contact between the valves and pistons.

Overall, every part of this bike is built for efficiency, low cost, and long term durability. Not sure in what order, but high RPM performance was not in the engineers design parameters. By removing the Rev Limiter, I think you would be asking for engine damage on this particular engine.
 
View attachment 12826
The rev delimiter on most bikes is part of the CPU processor. It can be changed but gets real expensive. Companies like Dynatech sell these products, but I don't believe anyone makes one for the NC700, as it is not a high demand item.

View attachment 12827

Also, the manufactures do not honor your warranty for any part they considered damaged by the after market rev delimiter, in any shape or form.

View attachment 12828


The V-star 650 I had didn't need to get rid of the rev limiter for more speed... It needed a turbo, supercharger, N2O, and a stick of dynamite.


I think the "Low redline" goes hand in hand with the bigger is better theory. I personally haven't found a situation where a slightly higher rev limit would have been needed for "safety" reasons. I also ride defensively and tend to keep myself out of bad situations.
 
Thanks for all the replies. I was hopeful, but not expecting a good answer to my rev limit question. Yes, I am capable of riding within the rev limits, but I just don't like it. I guess it's because I come from riding triples and fours and they are very comfortable with higher rev limits. This little 700 does get great gas mileage though, and I guess that's the trade off. On ethanol free I recently got 80mpg on a long ride. 10 mpg extra seems to be pretty standard using ethanol free in this 700. It costs more, but multiplied out by mileage, it's actually cheaper to run. My last 955si triple only got 45-50mpg. Still I might have to go back to something a little bigger and get less gas mileage for the safety and fun factor.
 
Back
Top