Topic: Which stock bike accelerates fastest?

[PxTx]

I remember thinking the 750 was top dog among the sohc4 Hondas years ago, but a friend was adimate that the 650 was faster.  Is there a factual review on this subject or is it just a bunch of opinions?

[Gordon]

There's probably a fact-based comparison somewhere, but I don't have it.  All I can give is a "seat of the pants" comparison between my 750K1 and my friend's '81 650C, (both in good tune) and the 750 definitely feels like it accelerates faster. 

[tomkimberly]

Which one has the lower gear ratio?

Tom

[PxTx]

Yeah, I think the K1 had the more aggressive gearing so I can se how that might work out.  I've heard of people trying to mod the 550 with 650 stuff.  I often wondered why they didn't just dunk the 650 into a 550 frame to start, it's gotta be lighter.

Thanks for your impression.  Does anyone have a different experience?

[PxTx]

The lower gears would help to multiply torque, which can help a lower torque/ higher hp bike accelerate.  I'm not sure where the line gets drawn where a bike with more torque could make up for the potential gearing advantage.

Which one has the lower gear ratio?

Tom

[lrutt]

Believe it or not the Norton 850 Commando's were tested at 12.69 in the quarter back when they came out. Amazing for such an old beast. I know mine feels real strong, pulls better than my CB750 from the low and mid. Would be a good run and I think it would out do my CB.

[City Boy]

Speaking of Commandos,I chummed with a guy with an S model.In a rolling start drag,he left my K0 like I'd turned the key off!

[Bodi]

Well, a VW beetle could beat almost any other car of its era... for the first 20 feet or so. A huge flywheel is nice for the first jump but slows you down after that.
The Norton had a lot of low end torque and a low RPM redline. The Honda had less torque at low RPM but a higher redline and (both stock) more actual horsepower (67 to 60). What kills the Honda is the extra 90 pounds over the Norton.
However, in the day a Honda 750 was pretty much matched with the Norton 750 on a straight drag. The Norton would run away from it in a road race, the bike just handles much nicer.
The only bikes that could embarass a Norton in those days were the Kawasaki H1 and H2 triples. Both the 500 and 750, though, like to wheelie into a flip if one applies full throttle in first gear. This handicaps them against the wheelie resistant Norton in street drags with inexperienced riders.

[754]

1970 dyno tests
Nort..49.5 hp 44.2 torque       420 lbs

Hon..53.9 hp 36.4 torque        525 lbs


In 70 it was maybe easier to get Dunstal Norton goodies than Honda stuff..

[ekim98]

Compairing the 750 Honda or a Norton 750 4 cycle to the Kaw 550 or 750 two cycle isn't a very good comparison, considering that all the Kaw 550/750 was made for was street/drag racing. Handled like crap and had a bad habit of self destructing. The Kaw's were street legal but never street safe. But they were quick.

[Gordon]

So much for the original question...

[City Boy]

I am not comparing nothin to nothin!I'm just saying that stoplight to stoplight,that S model blew my doors off!

[ekim98]

So much for the original question...

Isn't that how most topics go tho, kind of sideways from the original topic.

City Boy,
 Ok,I guess getting your doors blown off isn't a comparison, but this topic is about comparing a bikes' quickness. 

[City Boy]

Off to detention I go.

[heffay]

doors?  what doors?

[City Boy]

Optional in Canada!