Interesting Observation Regarding 0 to 112 MPH on Speedo
21 - 40 of 48 Posts
Joined
·
13,090 Posts
Honda was asked that question. This is what they had to say.The high speed stability of this bike makes me wonder why the limiter was set so low. This bike would easily do much higher speeds and remain stable. I don't get it...
"What we wanted to do was not develop a motorcycle that’s achieving high top speeds like 200km/h plus – that’s not a something you’d usually use, so we didn’t want to sacrifice the practical areas for that. We made the design sleeker, which resulted in a slightly smaller radiator – with the current "heat management", the bike is capable of running at 200km/h, but if you really want to focus on that top speed you’d probably have to sacrifice other areas, which we thought were more important. We wanted to really maximise the areas in which the motorcycle was designed to be useful."
Thanks, Murf, although--not your fault--that doesn't really answer the question. As a sentient being, I already know that there's going to be a cost to running any machine beyond it's design limits.The question is not, "Why won't the Goldwing do higher speeds all day"; it's "Why has Honda arbitrarily limited the Goldwing to a lower speed than it's capable of?"
Joined
·
17,613 Posts
I have the now"nonobtainum" Guhl tune; but, I do not know how fast it will really go now since I am not in that much of a hurry.
prs
prs
I see absolutely no benefits whatsoever to the areas in which the bike was designed for by setting the speed limiter so low. They could've set it at 120, or even 130 without compromising a thing...this answer sounds like tap dancing to me...Honda was asked that question. This is what they had to say.
"What we wanted to do was not develop a motorcycle that’s achieving high top speeds like 200km/h plus – that’s not a something you’d usually use, so we didn’t want to sacrifice the practical areas for that. We made the design sleeker, which resulted in a slightly smaller radiator – with the current "heat management", the bike is capable of running at 200km/h, but if you really want to focus on that top speed you’d probably have to sacrifice other areas, which we thought were more important. We wanted to really maximise the areas in which the motorcycle was designed to be useful."
That's a good article from Bennett's UK. Thanks Murf.Honda was asked that question. This is what they had to say.
"What we wanted to do was not develop a motorcycle that’s achieving high top speeds like 200km/h plus – that’s not a something you’d usually use, so we didn’t want to sacrifice the practical areas for that. We made the design sleeker, which resulted in a slightly smaller radiator – with the current "heat management", the bike is capable of running at 200km/h, but if you really want to focus on that top speed you’d probably have to sacrifice other areas, which we thought were more important. We wanted to really maximise the areas in which the motorcycle was designed to be useful."
One of their other related articles points out that the 180kph limit is a Japanese thing. Under the JAMA (Japanese Auto Manufacturers Association) agreement, any vehicle manufactured in Japan must be limited to 180kph in an effort to address Japan's poor road accident situation. For the most part, vehicles destined for export would not have this restriction included. Unfortunately, with the Goldwing, the restriction applied worldwide 😢.
So again, we're not getting a responsive response from Honda. As we know, Honda's ability to tweak their motorcycles for individual markets is nearly unlimited and sometimes ridiculously precise (e.g. Canadian motorcycles come with idle-stop while the US doesn't; 2018-19 Canadian motorcycles come with tool kits while the US models don't). The question is why Honda doesn't precisely tailor speed limiters the way they tailor other features.
In this case, the "one size fits all" approach is not appropriate for bikes sold in the U.S....
Joined
·
9,944 Posts
....computer generated...
Huh. I didn't think of that. I thought maybe a bad translation, but you could be correct.
Not sure of that... Outside of Montana, I believe that doing triple digits not only results in a ticket, but an arrest and suspension of your license.
Using your logic, then all vehicles should be speed limited to the speed limit...there are plenty of roads in the US where triple digit speeds are safe for brief periods of time, legal or not...
So using your logic, how is 120 MPH better than 112 MPH? Unless you're going for 60-70 miles, you're not saving really any time.
To me, 112 MPH is a fine limit.
It's a limit at which I will get a fine.
Who rides 120 MPH for extended periods of time? I'm talking about having a higher top speed for bragging rights. Who wants to hear from a Harley owner that their bike has a higher top speed? Certainly not me, especially when I KNOW the GW would have a much higher top speed without the limiter...
Joined
·
9,944 Posts
Define 'extended periods of time'.
There certainly are places on this
...and the cops aren't there...either on the ground or in their aircraft...
Joined
·
13,090 Posts
Thinking out loud here. Perhaps the answer to the question can be found in this statement. "We made the design sleeker, which resulted in a slightly smaller radiator – with the current "heat management", the bike is capable of running at 200km/h."
With the slightly smaller radiators and current heat management, Honda says the bike is capable of running at 200 km/hr. My question would be; "What ambient air temperature is this based on to maintain coolant temperature within acceptable limits at a speed of 200 km/hr?" In simple terms, you need a delta T between the coolant temperature and ambient air temperature for heat to be transferred from the coolant to the ambient air. As the temperature difference is reduced, less heat is transferred. Air also has to be moving through the radiators. Less air flow, less heat is transferred. The radiators have fans to increase air flow when forward speeds are low or when the bike is stopped. At least Honda got things right with the new wing and put the fans on the "right" side of the radiators.
The radiators are also mounted parallel to the air flow and not perpendicular to the air flow as those found on the majority of sports bikes. The air has to make a 90 degree change of direction and I wonder how much this reduces efficiency. Many sports bikes also have curved radiators which allows for a larger radiator in roughly the same amount of space previously occupied by a flat radiator. FJR's are a good example of this as earlier FJR's had flat radiators.
I forgot heat transfer equations many moons ago. There are really some smart guys here like Fred H. who could figure this out and tell you how many BTU's/hr of heat the new wings radiators transfer to the surrounding air.
Thank you, Murf. Not only is this interesting and educational, this helps me to clarify my question: I don't doubt that running an engine, or any machine, past its design limits can harm it. But it's my machine. If I want to misuse it, I'm allowed.
Given that it's a $30,000.00 toy, I don't believe many would choose to misuse it for long, but many of us might choose to misuse it--to exceed its design limits--just for a minute: Confronted by a straight-away, in good weather, with no one around, many riders might be tempted to briefly accelerate to a speed that, while it wouldn't be mechanically sustainable for very long, wouldn't damage the engine if run at for a moment. Also, it's conceivable a rider might inadvertently get himself into a situation--say a misjudged attempt to pass a group of cars--where he'd want to use that extra speed just for a few seconds. (And maybe even risk damaging the engine in exchage for saving his life.)
There are myriad ways a rider can abuse his motorcycle and his engine. Honda could easily invent and impose ways to prevent those. They could add a mechanism that would limit the engine to running at, say, 40mph after an arbitrary number of miles or days beyond an oil change. The logic would be the same as their speed-limiter logic: Running on used or old oil can damage an engine. Mechanisms like that could easily be added all over these complex, computerized motorcycles to monitor wear items and limit engine performance so as to prevent damage once having past pre-determined wear points. Another example: Top speed could be limited once brake pads wore beyond a certain point.
Honda has done none of those other things. So that's my question: If preventing engine damage is the goal, why only the speed limiter but not other limiters? Why limit only this form of potential damage?
Which is why I'm not buying their explanation. (And I hope no one from Honda is reading this, because I'd hate to be the source of any more nanny aids.)
Joined
·
9,944 Posts
Haven't we been here before? The bike was designed for international markets, not just North America.
There are no speed limits in the home country of Japan above 120 km/h. So, a limit at ~180 km/h gives you all the headroom necessary to travel on highways. Anywhere.
Europe has the same limits; passed in 2019 and going into effect in 2022.
There are no speed limits in the home country of Japan above 120 km/h. So, a limit at ~180 km/h gives you all the headroom necessary to travel on highways. Anywhere.
Europe has the same limits; passed in 2019 and going into effect in 2022.
21 - 40 of 48 Posts
Join the discussion
