Hondaline Saddle Bags '86 CB700SC

[See-Three]

I made my saddle bags. Better Than the above? Probably not, Cheaper? hell yeah!

http://nighthawk-forums.com/index.php/topic,11124.msg167722.html#msg167722

[TimmyJ]

The 700 sc is vicious. 11,000 RPM red (compared to a regular NH's 8,500). Can someone explain why the made the 700 SC essensialy a "sportbike"?

[Option13]

Because the market for sporty standard style motorcycles wasn't dead in the 1980's like it is now.

The Nighthawk line in the 80's was supposed to be a combination of "custom" styling and sportbike performance with the riding position of a standard. Sportbikes got the worlds attention, but what really moved on the sales floor were the factory customs. Combining the hype of sportbike performance with the looks of a custom bike was seen as a way to give people two typically opposite things they wanted. The 700S styling was described by many magazines as a California custom hot rod - a different kind of custom, but a custom nonetheless.

[TimmyJ]

Well yeah, but a regular NH is already part sport bike. The SC seems to be just about full-on sports bike (not completley, but close). I mean, 11,000 RPM's? At the time honda already had the Interceptor.

EDIT: Wait, Ive been on YouTube looking at Interceptors from the 80's. Lots of video of the sporty V-4 bikes, but not one that shows it opened up full throttle. From the way the thing sounds, I think a Nighthawk would spank it. So I guess the SC was Honda's "sportbike".

Edit: Wrong, the interceptor VFR 750 F from 1986:
PerformanceFrom Cycle June 1986:

Curb Weight /W full tank Fuel: 505.5lb
Standing 1/4 mile: 10.95sec @ 113.95mph
Fuel Consumption: 45 mpg
Range (to Reserve) 189 miles
Acceleration:
0-60mph 2.4sec

That's quick.

[Option13]

The 550 and 650 Nighthawks from the 1980's both rev to 10,500 RPM. 0-60 is virtually meaningless on a motorcycle, limited more by the tendency to flip over rather than engine power. The 650 has been clocked at an 11.8 quarter mile. The 650 and 700S Nighthawks could both almost keep pace with the sportbikes of their time. That's what a Nighthawk was. The 90's ones are completely different, with different goals. They were also built later - something to keep in mind when wondering why the 700S doesn't seem to conform to what you expect of your 750. They set the first standards for what a Nighthawk was, not your 750.

[TimmyJ]

Man, you really hate the 90's ones.

Anyway im getting different numbers. I saw where interceptors are in the 11's not 10's on another site. I see the 700 sc getting mid twleves on one site...top speed 120. I cant find quarter mile times on the 1986 650 at all, but with 64 HP I'll guess it's in the mid 13's.

Ok, I found two numbers on the 650...mid 13's, and 12.9. See that's why I dont like about looking up "quarter times"...I keep getting different nuimbers. It depends on the rider who tested it, it depends if they tested it at sea level, all kinds of different factors. Just going by what someone wrote in a magizene is usually not 100% accurate, to say the least.

[fishball]

According to this classic commercial the 650sc does the quarter mile in 12.2 seconds.



While looking for it on youtube I found a 700s commercial I had never seen before...

[TimmyJ]

I see quater times on the NH 750 at 13.1 on one site, 12.5 on another, and 12.3 on another. You posted a commercial showing saying the 650 does 12.2, but I have seen different numbers on other sites. I beleive only what I actually see. I learned that long ago. If a 650 pulls up beside me, I'd run him.

Herei s something I found on the 1992 NH 750...

ACCELERATION
0 - 30 mph 1.3 sec
0 - 60 mph 3.7 sec
0 - 90 mph 8.0 sec
0 - 100 mph 10.6 sec
1/4 mile 12.29 sec @ 107.5 mph

Now should I believe that, or should I believe the 13.1 figure? All I am saying is you know as well as I that different testers get different results depending on the rider, sea level, bunch of other stuff. I will conceed to you that the 650 seems to run right with the 750 (close either way). I will say that the different quarter times posted does make for nice debates  

So hats off to the 650's and 700's. You think the shaft drives made a big difference?

 

[Option13]

Second paragraph, second page is where I get the 11.8 figure.

In a side by side drag race, they're all pretty much the same. I don't hate any Nighthawk, they were just built for different goals. Do I want a 750? No. I know they make great bikes for a lot of people, I just wouldn't personally want one.

Shaft drives are less efficient and heavier - theoretically they would slow down any bike equipped with one.

[NHPep]

Option13, do you have the magazine for the above scans?  I'd like to get a readable pdf version of them if you do.

Thanks, NHPep

[TimmyJ]

Right. It's wet weight at 473 pounds is about the same as a 750's dry weight, but the 750 has a bit more torque and horsepower which should about make them even. But mabye they got 11.8 on the 650 by running it at sea level @ 60 degrees temp with just 1/2 gallon of gas and a rider that weighed 97 pounds! lol. His name is "Pee Wee" Gleason after all.
   

Those conditions are worth a good half a second.

Anyway, either way they are close to even, but the 650 is a whole 100cc less in engine size, so hats off to the 650 as I have said. Plus I think the 650 has a 6th gear which the 750 yearns for (mine tops out at only 135 mph).

As far as styling goes, you have repeatedly asserted that the 90's NH's were targeting a different crowd. How so? Both the 90's and 80's NH's are standards...like a halfway between sport and cruising. The only big styling difference on the 90's NH's is the teardrop gas tank which adds to a more "cruiser" look, and I have gotten compliments on that tank by many. Some like it, some dont I guess.



Does the nighthawk owner get the girl? And at the end someone says "wait till Jake hears about this". Is it's Jake's girl? Mabye Jake should of went home in an earlier commercial when he left the bar instead of going the other way!
  

[Option13]

Styling is subjective. I'm talking about the performance features of the bikes. The 650 has that teardrop tank too. Rather than beat a dead horse, I'll just forget the cruiser/sportbike thing.

135 MPH? Maybe if you're talking gear ratios. I doubt any Nighthawk would make it much past 120.

NHpep, Right click on the image and save as. It's bigger and higher quality than shown, NHF just shrunk it down a bit.

[TimmyJ]

I'm not going to go out and try to do 135 to prove what a 750 does. I'm too scared to attempt such a thing  

Ive done much more than tht...in my (ex) Corvette Z06. But a bike is a whole different thing. The wind is crushing at 75 MPH, I couldnt imagine 130 or 135.

[Option13]

Just because the bike redlines in top gear at 135 MPH doesn't mean it has the power to make it to that speed. I doubt any Nighthawk does.

From a magazine article about the 650:

60 mph in sixth this 40-incher snoozes along at 3965 rpm...

Going by this number, At 10,000 RPM a 650 would be going 151 MPH in top gear. The 700S's top speed at redline in top gear is 147 MPH.

Neither of those two bikes will make it to their respective gear limited top speeds, and neither will a 750 make it to 135 - no Nighthawk will.

[Mad_Marv]

Well.... I'll probably visit the German Autobahn soon....
We'll see what the CB700SC will do :)

There is no speed limit there, and I'm not afraid to go fast in a straight line.... lol.

[Honda Dan]

I found this Honda Sabre brochure.

Just posting it for comparison.



Wow, look at this one!

Does anyone have a better version of this one?

I got those Blue Saddlebags in new condition with that brioche and the Hondaline instruction that came in the bags.  I picked up a one owner RWB 86 from a estate sale with 4000 miles on it.  No tank bag , but the saddle bags were never used.  I'd love to find that matching blue tank bag.

[Dogpark]

I just bought my first bike. It's a 1985 red Honda Nighthawk 700s. I want those hard bags! 10 years?! Are you sick of them yet? I'm in Oakland too!
Cheers, Cameron

[Mad_Marv]

I found this Honda Sabre brochure.

Just posting it for comparison.



Wow, look at this one!

Does anyone have a better version of this one?

I got those Blue Saddlebags in new condition with that brioche and the Hondaline instruction that came in the bags.  I picked up a one owner RWB 86 from a estate sale with 4000 miles on it.  No tank bag , but the saddle bags were never used.  I'd love to find that matching blue tank bag.

That's great!
Could you scan the instructions and post them in this thread?
That would be great! 

[Doby Pilgrim]

I sold the bags that enessett has on this thread. AT one point he stated that he thought there was a "ghost" bidder. I assure there was not. The other bidder was from Canada and begged me to end the auction early and sell to him. When the auction was over another bidder offered me a bit over $200 more to shaft the auction winner (enessett) and ship them to him. If you want the correct Hondaline bags be prepared to pay almost as much for them as a running bike. That last offer that I turned down was $950 for the set. I was blown away by how much they brought! I know I couldn't justify buying them back!