The last bike I owned would put the biggest smile on your face possible, when you did a high gear, throttle role on to pass a car at about 50mph to 80mph. Just wandering how these 1800s are . I know they are not race bikes but thinking of the passing power that I love so much.
torque of a 1800 wing?
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Joined
·
5,086 Posts
I think I would classify it as "deceptive". You know your gaining speed but its not the wind blowing, shaking acceleration of an FJR or 929 but then you realize you are really flying and look down to see you have surpassed 100 with astonishing ease and grace. And for more kick, drop it into 4th before you start the acceleration and then you really feel more like a sport bike. Its eerily fast and amazing.
Joined
·
16 Posts
pulling you off the bike
The 110, 1800 Harley CVO with 6k in engine up grades I did- Axtell cylinders with matching pistons, cams, Pipes, Thunder max ECM, head work, air filter, that I traded in for the 2012 wing would pull you off the bike if you were not careful, it was a real stump puller but did not have the effortless feel of the well balanced 1832cc 6 on the Wing. Different engines for different riding styles. I like the wing for its smooth tork in 5th gear.(40-150) No need to keep the RPMS at certain levels so you won’t bog down the big 4 inch pistons and create engine problems like scissoring the crank if you don't ride it in the proper gears. I am older and like this bike for how I ride now. Smooth and easy
The 110, 1800 Harley CVO with 6k in engine up grades I did- Axtell cylinders with matching pistons, cams, Pipes, Thunder max ECM, head work, air filter, that I traded in for the 2012 wing would pull you off the bike if you were not careful, it was a real stump puller but did not have the effortless feel of the well balanced 1832cc 6 on the Wing. Different engines for different riding styles. I like the wing for its smooth tork in 5th gear.(40-150) No need to keep the RPMS at certain levels so you won’t bog down the big 4 inch pistons and create engine problems like scissoring the crank if you don't ride it in the proper gears. I am older and like this bike for how I ride now. Smooth and easy
Joined
·
2,678 Posts
In 5th gear at highway speeds the Wing will produce enough power to pass, If you need more downshift to 4th, but hold on!!
Joined
·
25,936 Posts
GL1800 is reported to have 118 hp and 125 lb/ft torque but no answer as to what rpm that is (seat of the pants tells me it's around 4500). HD CVO Ultra doesn't list hp, but shows 113 lbs/ft torque @ 3500 rpm. My guess on the hp is near the 'c' note mark from my rides on one. $6k in engine mods on yours Eldon should have produced somewhere in the 130# and 120hp range at the highest. Still pretty substantial gains, but an exhorbitant cost IMO. I've ridden a Fatboy with a 120 Merch in it and it pulls hard, but you can't ride it for more than an hour or you can't hardly walk or pick anything up. Only CVO I've ridden was bone stock and while it's ok, it's no match for a Wing in any situation we compared. Not by any great margin, but just not quite as quick, fast or lively. Roomier though and a bit less of a handful in a parking lot. The gear ratios in the Wing (yes it has 5 the Ultra has 6) are closer naturally, and while the Ultra's box definitely needs stirring to romp past anything at legal highway speeds, the Wing doesn't. Although for a moment's heehaw, a quick trip to 4th will exercise your inner child when passing.
Pros and Cons
Gold Wings won't fry your nuts, won't go into "parade mode" and won't burn your whatevers if you happen to touch your pride and joy in the wrong place...by accident of course.
My 2009 Kawasaki Voyager was a great bike except for the heat problem, typical V-Twin ? Anytime the super slab backed up for an accident, the Voyager went to the side of the road to "rest". Not bad really, gave me time to clean it up while waiting for traffic to resume.
Please fellow Wing owners don't stone me when I say that, IMHO, my Kawasaki Voyager was more comfortable than my Wing. However on my last trip to Sturgess in 100+ temps, that poor, overheated V-twin couldn't exceed 80mph. The Kawi seat was so comfortable I was in heaven. Alas, I got the Wing because of Power, Drive Shaft, Dependability and, last but not least, comfort; however, the comfort came in time, experimenting with what worked for me and what didn't. Road Pegs, Fork Brace, Handlebar Risers, Windshield Modification and Back Rest all in the name of making a disabled rider more comfortable. As I'm getting closer to 70yrs old, a trike-kit is in the future...oh yeah it's $11,500.00
Gold Wings won't fry your nuts, won't go into "parade mode" and won't burn your whatevers if you happen to touch your pride and joy in the wrong place...by accident of course.
My 2009 Kawasaki Voyager was a great bike except for the heat problem, typical V-Twin ? Anytime the super slab backed up for an accident, the Voyager went to the side of the road to "rest". Not bad really, gave me time to clean it up while waiting for traffic to resume.
Please fellow Wing owners don't stone me when I say that, IMHO, my Kawasaki Voyager was more comfortable than my Wing. However on my last trip to Sturgess in 100+ temps, that poor, overheated V-twin couldn't exceed 80mph. The Kawi seat was so comfortable I was in heaven. Alas, I got the Wing because of Power, Drive Shaft, Dependability and, last but not least, comfort; however, the comfort came in time, experimenting with what worked for me and what didn't. Road Pegs, Fork Brace, Handlebar Risers, Windshield Modification and Back Rest all in the name of making a disabled rider more comfortable. As I'm getting closer to 70yrs old, a trike-kit is in the future...oh yeah it's $11,500.00
A couple of thoughts here. To Mr T-Rex. My 09 Road King has never fried anything, never went into parade mode. I'm 72, no trike in my future. My wife likes the Harley over the Wing. Likes the seat much better.Both bikes are stock. I like the Wing for the power & the smooth motor. Drive shaft & belt are a wash. Depending on were we am going, will determine which bike we take. You can't compair a V-Twin to a flat six.
As far as torque for the Goldwing. looking at some old road tests. here goes. (2001)- 95 lb. ft. @ 1500 rpm - peak - 108 @ 4000 rpm HP is 101 @ 5500 RPM (2004) - 89 lb. ft. @ 1500 rpm - peak 104 @ 4250 rpm - HP is 96 2 5500 rpm. (2012) - 90 lb. ft. @ 1500 RPM - peak 105 lb. ft. @ 4250 RPM HP is 101 @ 5750 RPM. Measured top speed-
01 - 123 mph 04 - 130 mph 12 - 126 mph All HP, torque & top speed numbers are rounded off. Info taken from Motorcycle Consumer News. 2001, 2004 & 2011. Hope this helps. Dave
As far as torque for the Goldwing. looking at some old road tests. here goes. (2001)- 95 lb. ft. @ 1500 rpm - peak - 108 @ 4000 rpm HP is 101 @ 5500 RPM (2004) - 89 lb. ft. @ 1500 rpm - peak 104 @ 4250 rpm - HP is 96 2 5500 rpm. (2012) - 90 lb. ft. @ 1500 RPM - peak 105 lb. ft. @ 4250 RPM HP is 101 @ 5750 RPM. Measured top speed-
01 - 123 mph 04 - 130 mph 12 - 126 mph All HP, torque & top speed numbers are rounded off. Info taken from Motorcycle Consumer News. 2001, 2004 & 2011. Hope this helps. Dave
Joined
·
11,013 Posts
Bikeguy: I appreciate the way you voiced your opinion between the V twin and Wing. You didn't lower yourself to personal attacks. But you must expect a little biased towards Goldwings here. I have never had a HD or a 1800 Wing. So I don't want to join in that part of the debate. I have a 1200 Wing which I am enjoying reving the rings off. There is not a lot of torque to speek of. So what ever press your buttons, do it. You have a couple of good bikes to go and press your buttons on. Have fun. Eric
Joined
·
25,936 Posts
Thanks for that great info bikeguy/Dave! It's hard to get accurate hp/torque specs since there are no standards in place to solidify results. I believe the figures I posted were 'engine' values and yours look like rear wheel dyno numbers. Honda admits that they won't post any figures on hp/torque until such standards exist so we're subject to what magazine editors will publish. My figures came from a google search and they were publication values. As no such information does come 'from the horses mouth' it's a bit moot really. In Europe it's a non issue since they post everything as BHP (brake horsepower..."at the wheel") so there's no hiding the truth. Here we have to filter between 'gross hp', SAE net hp (which isn't rear/drive wheel hp either) and whatever engine dyno hp the OEMs/magazines wish to let out. Gimme road dyno and real world rear/drive wheel hp and torque any day. One of my friend/competitor dealers has a rear wheel bike dyno at the shop, and I'm going to take both bikes in next year and get the real goods on both. And I'll be glad to post them both.
Motorcycle Consumer News Always uses a dyno when they test a bike. They have no advertisers, they owe no one anything. They have three riders doing the test. The three years I got the figures from, the Wing was tested against the BMW dresser of that year. the Honda came out two of the three years. I know this is there opinion, but the #'s are real. I know this is a Gold Wing form, that is why I joined. I belong to several mc forms. Whatever the form, that bike is the best. I won't bash any ones ride. To each his or her own. I'd have to say most of todays bikes are very good bikes. Thanks for a great form.
Joined
·
25,936 Posts
good on ya bikeguy. Just as you are, I belong to other sites and not just as a member on some. I try hard to be objective even though I'm a Honda dealer, I have far too much experience on other bikes not to try and impart what I've learned in the years and miles I have. Yes I'm "pro-Honda" inlots of ways, but I'm not above letting it buck on lots of instances...GIMME A DOGGONE ELECTRIC W/S fer Gawd sake! Oops, durned outside voice again. I really gotta get over that!
Oops, durned outside voice again. I really gotta get over that!
Joined
·
23 Posts
I was watching a utube flick of the building the 2008 gold wing. When they tested the wing on a factory dyno its read out screen said...
Required HP 92
Actual 96
The higher hp figures quoted for the wing were on the early pre-ecu
recall models. I don't know if the simple replacement of the ecus
resulted in the lower hp figures or if other factors were involved.
I recently acquired an old pre recall ecu and plan to install in later
this spring and see how it feels.
Required HP 92
Actual 96
The higher hp figures quoted for the wing were on the early pre-ecu
recall models. I don't know if the simple replacement of the ecus
resulted in the lower hp figures or if other factors were involved.
I recently acquired an old pre recall ecu and plan to install in later
this spring and see how it feels.
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!