Guys; Go to just about any of the better bike sites and find the link to the Honda 2002 models and you will find the new VFR. I am not impressed! I don't understand the exhaust treatment. Two ugly cans with two outlets? This bike has to be heavier than the previous generation. Maybe the edgy style will grow on me, but right now ... Can you say aftermarket pipe?

 

VFR800,

Hey, I wasn't knocking your bike at all...in fact I think it's awesome and mentioned I wouldn't mind owning one at some point. It's just my opinion that it's not the S2K of motorcycles, which is not meant to be taken as a knock in any way.

Chipster, yes the new VFR is a little bit heavier, but I love the new styling. It looks like a comfortable, reliable exotic to me!

 

Wow! I saw the pictures of the new VFR - it looks great!

As for the great VFR debate, I LOVE mine. It's not the fastest, lightest, best handling, etc. bike out there, but it does everything so well, and it is the perfect bike for me. Mine is 11 years old, and I have ridden all of the newer bikes every year thinking that I will get something else. Every bike I have ridden - GSX-R's, R1, CBR's, etc, all do some things better than my VFR. But none of them did/do anything that much better that would make me plunk down $10K or more for another bike. My wife will ride up to 2-3 hours on my VFR with me before she complains - that would not be the case with an R1, or even a CBR. And, I have to say that I have never cracked open the throttle on my bike and thought "this thing really needs more power".

I used to have a 1976 CB750F SuperSport which was absolutley bulletproof - the only mechanical failure that I had in over 125K miles was an ignition coil at 90K miles (and I still rode the bike over 100 miles home on 2 cylinders!). When I sold that bike (a very sad day) in 1995, the bike still had the original clutch, fork seals, and everything except normal maintenance items such as chains, sprockets, brakes, battery, and tires. So far, my VFR has been just as reliable.

If I raced for a living, the VFR certainly would not be my first choice. But for an everyday motorcycle, it's awfully tough to beat the VFR.

 

I've got 84,000 miles on my '85 Nighthawk 650. As soon as the S2000 is in my garage I want to upgrade the Nighthawk to a '96 to '98 VFR.
Why do I NOT find it strange that S2000 people are drawn to the Interceptor?
I guess we all just have great taste in go fast toys!

 

VFR subgroup,

If you guys are ever in the North/South Carolina area, do yourselves a favor and visit the Blue Ridge Parkway. In your S2K or your VFR, it's the greatest. If you get a chance, let me know and I'll meet you. It's as good as it gets for scenery and twisties.

Don't you love this site?

 

Chris; Here is what I was thinking when I compared the VFR to the S2000. When you consider this bikes heritage it has been Honda's tech. flagship from day one. Examples I might point out include V4, single sided rear swingarm, LBS, FI, and other smaller features. The 2002 model seems to carry on the tradition! Your comparison of the R1 to the S2K IMHO is a bit overstated. No doubt about the fact that the R1 rocks, but it's more like a C5 or other V8/10 monster. I think you will agree that even though the S2K is quick, it's not in the same category as C5 or viper. As I see it,the S2K, (at least for the time being) is in a class of it's own. I believe heavy in the tech. dept. and little lighter in the monster HP category. Just my thoughts, no flame intended.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chipster
[B]Chris; Here is what I was thinking when I compared the VFR to the S2000. When you consider this bikes heritage it has been Honda's tech. flagship from day one. Examples I might point out include V4, single sided rear swingarm, LBS, FI, and other smaller features. The 2002 model seems to carry on the tradition! Your comparison of the R1 to the S2K IMHO is a bit overstated.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Triple-H
[B]I've got 84,000 miles on my '85 Nighthawk 650. As soon as the S2000 is in my garage I want to upgrade the Nighthawk to a '96 to '98 VFR.
Why do I NOT find it strange that S2000 people are drawn to the Interceptor?
I guess we all just have great taste in go fast toys!

 

Chris; I did misread your post ,but I also tend to paint bikes like GSXR 600,750, &1000, R1 & R6 ZX6's, ZX9's F3 & F4's and others with the same brush. Very quick, agile, and with a little work, race ready. My sense of what Honda had in mind for the VFR is to showcase technology, not performance. As you point out some features seem to exist to detriment of performance. It might just be that we will have to agree to disagree about the comparison to the S2K, but that's cool. I came off a ZX6 to my VFR. It took a while to get used to it. I don't like the LBS, but I don't ride it like the 6 so it's no big deal. As you and the other guys in this thread know, any of the bikes mentioned here are really good, solid capable bikes. One of my riding buddies has a Hawk as his second bike. His VTR is his real love, but he still digs getting out on his Hawk.

 

Hey Chipster,

No problem, I hear ya. I've ridden and owned LOTS of diff. sportbikes, plus raced, so I'm pretty sensitive to characteristics that might not be so important to you. Just "downgraded" from an R1 to an SV b/c the inline 4 sportbikes were influencing me to ride too fast on the street and I didn't want to get in trouble.

The SV isn't too great for wheelies, but otherwise has all the performance I need for the street. IMO literbike performance is getting excessive, esp. w/ the GSXR 1000 (but I'm still looking forward to taking one for a spin). Just the same, the VFR has all the performance that most people need for the street.