£105,000 Bike

thats what i thought

Looks like reflections of tree branches to me too.

Originally Posted by Lozzo

Looks like reflections of tree branches to me too.

+ 1, I don't think the LCD screen is broken.

[Biker Biggles]

The bike is interesting from a historical point,but was a total white elephant.The oval pistons were an engineering nightmare and the whole concept was rapidly ditched by Honda as a failure.
Now that aint worth £105 G.

Originally Posted by Jase22

Are you sure it isn't just the reflection of branches on that tree in the screen, rather than cracks?

Originally Posted by Lozzo

Looks like reflections of tree branches to me too.

Im 99% sure it is a crack. I can remember seeing them on my Scientific calculator and it was the same. How would tree reflections look anything like that anyway?

http://buzzblogging.com/wp-content/u...desk_small.jpg How similar does this look?

Had another look at some of the other pictures and you might be right No idea how that is like it is .

Originally Posted by Biker Biggles

The bike is interesting from a historical point,but was a total white elephant.The oval pistons were an engineering nightmare and the whole concept was rapidly ditched by Honda as a failure.
Now that aint worth £105 G.

It wasnt a failue... it was just too expensive and hard to engineer. Ive heard a few interviews where the Honda people are honestly thinking about making some again because they can engineer it resonably cheap.

Can't see the corner being cracked on this one greek, give 'em a ring lol. I think its just the reflection / angle of camera on the second picture



Where as this one appears to show damage in the corner

Originally Posted by at-sv

Can't see the corner being cracked on this one greek, give 'em a ring lol. I think its just the reflection / angle of camera on the second picture



Where as this one appears to show damage in the corner

Aye I edited my post, I think you are right.

[Biker Biggles]

"too expensive and hard to engineer"
Thats a pretty good definition of a failure in my book.
To put it in context,the reason Honda tried this idea was to enable them to compete in the then 500cc GPs without going the two stroke route.IIRC Honda were very anti two strokes and tried everything to avoid them.
These days there is no need for this approach as all the rules have changed.

Originally Posted by ThEGr33k

Aye I edited my post, I think you are right.

I would have checked the pictures for stuff like that if I was trying to sell a £105k bike

Originally Posted by Biker Biggles

"too expensive and hard to engineer"
Thats a pretty good definition of a failure in my book.
To put it in context,the reason Honda tried this idea was to enable them to compete in the then 500cc GPs without going the two stroke route.IIRC Honda were very anti two strokes and tried everything to avoid them.
These days there is no need for this approach as all the rules have changed.

Naaa. I cant agree

It was a good engine, the main reason it flopped in 500gp's is that it was packed out with a lot of new tech. They tried too much, if they had just gone for the engine then it would have worked a treat. By the time they dropped it the bike was making as much power as the strokers and would have probably been more after more development.

They made a 750 for endurance and it actually won a few races with loris caparossi riding it.

Id have one just because you could be getting 20K+rpm easy with one, even a V-win which could out rev and out power a V-4 in theory