Boxerworks.com

250cc, ??hp(probably 28-30), 160kg


250cc, 28.5hp, 110kg.


How much progress has really been made in 45 years?

dougie wrote:250cc, ??hp(probably 28-30), 160kg


250cc, 28.5hp, 110kg.


How much progress has really been made in 45 years?

Tons. Compare reliability, braking, charging system, lighting, suspension, emissions, tires ect,and the Ducati ends up looking like an attractive pile of crap.

And frame flex, or lack thereof.
But perhaps that is not such an issue with such a lightweight bike.

I wonder how much weight the fairing adds to the Honda?

I agree with all that. I was thinking more about engine output, and why the extra 50kg?
My W650 as delivered was 70 lbs heavier than a 1960's Bonneville.

I'll bet the tires weigh more, tubes notwithstanding.

And NOBODY is giving up the engine output rating!

justoneoftheguys wrote:And NOBODY is giving up the engine output rating!

I couldn't find the engine hp listed anywhere.

I've been thinking of a diesel Enfield , little slower than an ST .So sometimes less power is OK.

Sibbo wrote:I've been thinking of a diesel Enfield , little slower than an ST .So sometimes less power is OK.

And you can fill the tank at McDonalds.

justoneoftheguys wrote:

Sibbo wrote:I've been thinking of a diesel Enfield , little slower than an ST .So sometimes less power is OK.

And you can fill the tank at McDonalds.

Yep ,that'is the idea ..I've got 6 drums 200 litre of used oil here waiting for me to get my act together .It's 95% done .Soon ,soon !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYEKbRPR ... re=related

Sibbo wrote:I've been thinking of a diesel Enfield , little slower than an ST .So sometimes less power is OK.

An Enfield is slow even without making it a diesel.