I'm planning on leaving from NY to Patagonia in 16 months and I am on the process of choosing and buying the equipment for the journey! Honda just released this NC700X It's a brand new model so I do not know if it would be a good choice to choose it. I like it because it makes 60 miles per gallon and it is fuel injection while my second option would be the Kawasaki KLR650.

Haven´t ridden the NC700X yet... but it seems like a road bike, that has some visual and ergonomical resemblance to an enduro bike.. looks a bit weird to be honest. Whereas the KLR650 is a proven, tough machine for all sorts of roads, and even off-road.

So they are two very very different machines. Both could probably do the trip, though, it really depends on what kind of routes you plan to take. And there are many other options in those categories to choose from, if you for some reason decide that it´s not going to be either of those two.

I get around 70 mpg on the NC700X.

70 miles per US gallon??

This bike has been achieving excellent MPG figures in road tests published in motorcycle magazines here in the UK; from memory, the NC700 just beat the BMW G650GS (single cyl, 650 cc) with a MPG figure of about 78 MPUKG (miles per UK gallon) for a range of types of road riding (in one particular mag).

I think it is of interest that the engine design is a parallel twin, which is growing in use by various manufacturers, particularly compared with the other main option for 2 cylinders, the V twin.
Honda have taken the 1400cc 4 cylinder "Jazz" (that's what it is called in the UK) car engine, "cut it in half", and used that for this bike.

Having said that, there is not much interest within these fora for very modern bikes; I've just looked back in the posts here in Honda tech for the past year.

__________________
Dave

Yes 70 mpg U.S. gallons.While I understand the NC700X is not a true "Adventure Bike" and certainly not meant for hardcore off-road use.I think it is more of a modern standard motorcycle,more along lines of the Triumph Bonneville and the Honda CB750.A bike that you can use for most anything.

The so-called "adventure bike" has not been too well defined - that's probably just as well against the day that the fad wanes and there are loads of them stacked up in the motorcycle dealerships (as is tending to happen now with sports/race replica bikes if you can believe what some folks in the trade are saying).
The twin cyl parallel has had renewed interest for a while with a few bike manufacturers (Kawa versys, Triumph x various models, BMW x various models) - much simpler in the design and cheaper to manufacture than a V twin.

__________________
Dave

Biggest problem i see is that you have to lift up the rear seat to fill up , which would become a pain if you carried your gear in a tailpack or similiar . the Mpg on it is nearer 80 mpg (uk) according to some mags .

I was despatching on one for about 5 months until last week when I've moved courier company. This was the 'S' model though. Work was quiet all last year, so I only racked up a fairly low mileage on the bike in that time, 16,000miles.

The fuel economy is good, but not the 'game changer' that various people and magazines have reckoned. This S model has a relatively small 14litre tank, and believe it's the same for the 'X' model. The most I could ever get out of that was 220miles. 200 miles would be a more realistic regular tank mileage.


The bike is slow. I think I read somewhere less than 60bhp. It also has a very low redline, equivalent to single cylinder trailbike, but without such overwhelming low end grunt. Riding into a headwind or slight hill, you will struggle to get it to 100mph, and when riding on the motorway it has no power to accelerate when overtaking, cruising at 70mph you would have to drop to 5th gear to speed up and it still is sluggish, definitely slower than an average family car.

As a utility bike it fares well, and the fake petrol tank storage thing would be real useful when commuting or using it as a run around. But if you're planning on using it for going on holiday (which is what 'touring' is, really?), I think you'd find the engine really disappointing. One of the least 'fun' engines I ever experienced.

__________________
UK to Mongolia 2009, on a DR350

I've owned my X model from new for 7 months and done 4,000 miles on it.
It has a 14 litre tank and I'm getting around 68 mpg in the uk and on a trip to S France I saw between 73 and 75 mpg.
Despite a lack of horsepower it more than keeps up with the traffic, cruises at 80/90mph, handles very well and has excellent brakes. Service intervals every 8,000 miles so makes a great touring/travel bike so long as your not hoping to do too much off road; it will handle gravel tracks and any road where a car can go but for anything more you'll wish you had a KLR
The only downside is it can be uncomfortable after 3 or 4 hours and struggles in top gear going uphill at 80mph

I noticed that feature as well; it is very pillion-unfriendly for a splash and dash refuel stop and a real PITA for anyone carrying luggage strapped across the pillion seat.
It's maybe not so bad if you want to encourage the wifey to get off the back of the bike and pay for the fuel

I surmise that you had no problems with Honda quality in that 16K miles.

A lot of the modern design of bikes are installing smaller fuel tanks against the fact that the engines are far more fuel efficient.
So, a 200 mile range is good enough for most circumstances/people.

I wouldn't use the word "slow" to summarise the characteristics of this bike that you list; it is different from some other bikes but, as an example, the Kawa Versys has a similar maximum power output with a very similar size of engine.
Perhaps a remap of the ECU would sort it for more sporting performance??

__________________
Dave

I would concur that it is a nice handling bike, and the brakes on it are good. The ABS works well but I found the way the lever resistance disappears when it's triggered more disconcerting than on the only other ABS bike i've ridden (cbf5), but you can get used to that. I also like the fact that bike feels light for it's supposed weight, probably due to the a lot of the weight being low down.

200 Miles is a big enough tank range, but I reckon 250 would be 'perfect' for a bike with that fuel economy, so it's a shame they didn't make the tank that little bit bigger.


Speed and power are relative. I've never ridden a Versys but it does appear to be closely spec'd. However there can't be too many other bikes of a similar capacity that slow, especially if you don't include singles. Historical comparison can come into play as well. The thread currently above this one is about the cb550 four (I notice this because I replied to it some months ago). That bike is over 35 years old, yet made more power and was a lot faster despite not being a 'sports' model at the time, and of course smaller capacity. It seems the only way modern bikes can be made to be more fuel efficient is at the expense of performance. But I do maintain that above all else, the 'character' of the engine is not very pleasing when riding.

I didn't experience any problems with my bike. The company I was with had something like 30 of them. The only problems I saw first hand on other people's bikes was a failed spring in a horn switch, and another bike started coming up with an error code and display would flash on and off - They sent it back to the Honda dealership and I don't know what the result was. The two models used by the company (and the other big companies) before this were/are the cbf500 and cbf600. Every bike in the fleet would make it up past 100k miles easily, and don't think this would be any different for the NC (the courier companies wouldn't be buying them if it was).

__________________
UK to Mongolia 2009, on a DR350

Good feedback guys!

Realistically, I don't think much more can be asked of a 700cc engine that is tuned for economy with appropriate teeth fitted on the gears/sprockets (as Nath says basically).
Change down thro' the box is the answer of course.

Low down weight sounds good.

You mentioned earlier that 250 miles per tank is quite possible - I can get that from my Versys (with a couple of litres spare). I believe this to be an achievable range for the Honda, even though some riders may want to play safe and fill up earlier.

Slow is an emotive word: slow to accelerate, slow in top speed, hmm.
The torque is more important for the former and the HP for the latter - it's all a compromise of the design basically.
Slow is also relative of course (my Honda Blackbird was fast!).

Character: Yep. We need that also. The current crop of designs are in danger of losing it, but it is very much a personal thing. You've put in enough time riding this bike to have a clear view on this.

__________________
Dave

...the NC700 red lines at 6,500 rpm so an engine remap would probably be a waste of time/money. It's like riding a bigger bike and shortshifting through the gearbox but I became accustomed to it quickly. However, the top gear seems to have longer legs and there's little chance of hitting the limiter.

Comparing it to a Versys it is slower and not so 'willing' to be ridden quickly. The Versys is a great bike and inspires quick riding; I bought the NC because of build quality, fuel economy, price and storage space.

I have a Versys at present and I have reported on my first impressions of that bike in post number 6 in this thread:-
http://www.horizonsunlimited.com/hub...s-thread-65709

I also bought this bike for fuel economy, initial price and build quality; for the latter I am a little disappointed - various reports have said that Kawasaki quality has caught up with, and equalled, Honda but I am not convinced of that.
(see my comments about the suspension and marking of the finishes, if interested).

__________________
Dave

FYI, I am putting a NC700X together for a part 1 up and part 2 up road tour of UK and EU in 2013.

I am from New Zealand and will be shipping the bike to UK and then ride around for 6 months from May.

I have ridden may road bikes including Blackbirds and 900Hornets. I choose the NC700X because of the very low positioned weight (for handling) and low fuel consumption resulting in 300km range before reserve. I plan to carry a 1 gallon rotopax for another 100km of emergency range before reserve.

The 21L storage box in the tank is another really useful bonus.

Cheers All..