It's more money...but...
Written: Sep 14 '00 (Updated Sep 15 '00)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: Honda reputation, good power, predictable handling, great sound/feel
Cons: Heavy clutch, steering takes some muscle, fuzzy mirrors
|
|
|
| Don_Carnage's Full Review: 2000 Honda Interceptor |
After many zillions of miles and more years than I care to count, it's time to replace my Nighthawk. Briefly, I pretty much decided I wanted another Honda since my last one was of such high quality and the service has been excellent.
So I hit the dealership today at lunch. I've actually had my eye on the VTR1000 Super Hawk, since I've recently developed a soft-spot for the feel and sound of a twin. It doesn't have old-man accessories like a center-stand or clock, but it's a twin-cylinder, it's sporty, meets my horsepower and torque requirements, and it's a Honda.
Also, I like the Y2K yellow, so I know I have to work fast. Next year, they're red.
So I chatted up the sales guy about the Super Hawk, trotting out knowledge acquired through my extensive research, and I came straight to the single chink (IMHO) in the Hawk's armor: gas mileage. He came right out and admitted I'd most likely not see the high side of 35 mpg no matter how gently I ride it, and a more realistic number is along the lines of 26 mpg. Cracky....my hot-rodded 1967 Beetle does better than that. I'm not sure I buy those numbers under normal riding conditions (seems to me it only takes so much gas to make a motorcycle go 75 mph), but in any case I let him steer me over to my #2 choice...the VFR 800 Interceptor.
I'd also researched this one extensively, and the onliest reason it wasn't number one on my list was the price (though it's a lot of bike for the money). Sexy bits lacking on the Super Hawk include fuel injection which eliminates the need for a choke, clock, center stand, single-sided swingarm, dual headlights, gear-driven cams (no timing belt/chain to break or wear out), LCD display of gas gauge, coolant temp (and ambient air temp, btw...*grin*), and a very nice looking fairing in that smashing Y2K yellow I so adore.
So when he asked if I wanted to ride it (no demo rides on the Hawk...it's the only one they have left), I said heck yeah.
It fired right up when he thumbed the starter, which he said it would every time with the injection, and I've no reason to doubt it. I let it run for a few seconds and then hopped on and rode out of the lot.
With the engine cold, I found the throttle to be a trifle abrupt, but apart from that there's no noticeable difference between fully warm performance and cold performance...granted it was 75 degrees at the time of the ride. Open it up and it goes without hesitation. In terms of feel, the V-4 engine is unlike anything else. It lacks the distinctive thump of a twin, but it's not smooth like an inline four...it's got a growling character all its own. I loved the sound of the engine, though it's a bit muted. I added an aftermarket pipe to my mental shopping list.
Stoplight to stoplight, it's delightful. As it warmed, the power delivery smoothed out substantially. Power at mid-to-upper RPM's is abundant and smooth, and every time I wound open the throttle, I felt my eyes widen. Do that when the tach reads over 5,500 rpm or so, and things start to happen real fast. Ride it at engine speeds below that, and its lack of torque starts to tell. No worries though, as down-shifting the six-speed transmission is a snickety-snick labor of love, and before you can say "second gear," it's party time again.
The brakes are swell, too. This is the first bike I've ridden with linked braking, and not only did I not find it a nuisance, I actually liked it. Like a lot of riders, I'm famous for neglecting the rear brake, and while linked braking doesn't help my bad riding habits, it's an effective workaround from a safety standpoint for those of us who aren't Kent Kunitsugu doing stoppies for a magazine cover. But I digress.
As I got it up to the twisty section of Calaveras, I discovered it's a bit of work getting the bike through the corners. For reasons that aren't quite clear to me, it likes a firm shove to get it to lean over where you want it. Once into the corner, though, its balanced suspension and smooth engine give a lot of feedback and confidence. As I got used to the effort at the handlebar, I was able to appreciate the balance of the cycle much more and get a little deeper into the corners. It loves to lean, and forgives midcorner adjustments of your line with a shrug and a smile. Visions of local twisty roads started to dance through my noggin....a bike like this could keep me happy for years.
Complaints are few and fairly trivial, but for a $10k bike they're worth a mention. The fairing-mounted mirror stalks tend to dance when the engine is at low RPM's, making mirrors look a pair of palm-sized Van Goghs. And maybe I'm just a sissy, but the clutch seemed kind of heavy. By the end of the ride, my forearm felt like I'd been squeezing a tennis ball. Both of those, however, could be attributed to the abuse a demo bike takes, and this Interceptor had almost 4,000 miles on it. So take those with a grain of salt.
I wasn't ready to buy today (soon...oh very soon), but I did talk numbers with the salesman. Without getting into specifics, let's just say that Honda dealers are willing to be a lot more flexible on the price of the already less expensive Super Hawk than on an Interceptor.
So I'm still up in the air. The VFR is a fantastic bike, but it's priced just outside my price range, while the Super Hawk finds itself snugly in the middle of the affordable zone. This doesn't mean that I wouldn't buy the VFR if money wasn't a key issue (isn't it always when the savings account is half someone else's?).
So we'll see where I end up. God willing and wife be flexible, it will be in the saddle of that VFR.
Update:
I went with the VFR. After a lot of research in print and on the web, I was only able to find anecdotal evidence to support my theory that the mileage on the Super Hawk could climb to a reasonable level. In any case, I expect to do a fair about of the kind of riding that will drop it down into the twenties. At 100 miles per full tank of gas, that means four stops for gas between home and LA, at least one stop when I'm out cutting it up with buddies in the hills while they wait for me to fill up, and that's too many on both counts. It also means I wouldn't even get a week's worth of commuting out of a tank of gas, even at 30+ mpg. I can forgive a lot in terms of comfort, and I could deal with giving up all the bells and whistles of the VFR, but I couldn't accept that short a cruising range.
The VFR, on the other hand, holds 5.5 gallons and gets 42 mpg, and the more I read, the more I become convinced that the performance I lose by choosing the VFR is not terribly significant compared to what I gain.
It was a tough dilemma, and I wrestled over it, but I made the right choice. The VFR is an outstanding, fun, great-looking cycle, with everything I want and more. And besides, having to choose between Interceptor or Super Hawk is the right kind of problem to have.
Recommended:
Yes
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
Don_Carnage
|
|
Location: San Jose, CA
Reviews written: 20
Trusted by: 11 members
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.