Honda VTX Forum banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,041 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Cycle World did a comparison between the Honda Fury and the Star Raider. Of course the Raider won hands down. Bigger engine, bigger brakes, less plastic etc. I blame this on Honda. They opted for smaller engine (56 horsepower compared to 85.9 hp)and single disc brake etc. Athough this is not a fair comparison, I think Honda should have done more homework before bringing out the Fury. The 1800 engine and dual disc front brakes would have made this comparison a lot more even.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
535 Posts
Cycle World did a comparison between the Honda Fury and the Star Raider. Of course the Raider won hands down. Bigger engine, bigger brakes, less plastic etc. I blame this on Honda. They opted for smaller engine (56 horsepower compared to 85.9 hp)and single disc brake etc. Athough this is not a fair comparison, I think Honda should have done more homework before bringing out the Fury. The 1800 engine and dual disc front brakes would have made this comparison a lot more even.
I read parts of that at the grocery store. Does it really matter what Cycle World says? The Fury is a mid size chopper and it's selling like hot cakes. The raider is and entirely different beast and appeals to a different mind set of buyer. Don't compare the two. The Fury is classic american style chopper. The raider is a chopped muscle cruiser more harleyesque than anything else. They are not in the same league. The Raider also cost more. I'll Stick with my vtx 1800. It's a good compromise and it's paid for.:mrgreen:
 
F

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Cycle World did a comparison between the Honda Fury and the Star Raider. Of course the Raider won hands down. Bigger engine, bigger brakes, less plastic etc. I blame this on Honda. They opted for smaller engine (56 horsepower compared to 85.9 hp)and single disc brake etc. Athough this is not a fair comparison, I think Honda should have done more homework before bringing out the Fury. The 1800 engine and dual disc front brakes would have made this comparison a lot more even.
dalechris, Honda specifically stated why they didn't put the 1800 in the Fury. The 1800 requires bigger components to support that displacement. For example, a bigger radiator is need. Take a look at the size of the radiator on a 1300 vs. 1800. Honda needed a small profile to make the radiator seemless and fit. This is also the same with other components on the Fury. The 1800 did not lend itself to that "look" and feel of what they could work with.

Besides, why do you need an 1800? A 1300 has more than adequate power for that platform. Bigger isn't always better. I believe people have been fooled into thinking so. It's an image thing and people are falling for it. :dontknow:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,041 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I agree with you. I am not knocking the Fury, I happen to like the look. I realize that it is a mid size machine. That is why I took exception to the Cycle World write up that compared two bikes that were in completley different categories. You can't compare apples and oranges and get a fair write up. They need to sell magazines I guess.
I still wish that Honda would have opted for the 1800 engine. Now that would be a Badd Ass chopper!!
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top