Talk:Honda VTR1000F

Techniques ?
This article claims

"The bike also ushered in several new design concepts such as the semi-pivotless frame, where the engine is a stressed member with the swingarm bolted directly to it."

Vincent, 1946, sorry.

"Other innovations were side radiators,"

Scott Flying Squirrel, 1922 ?

"connecting rods with cap screws instead of nuts"

? Both bolts and nuts have been used on connecting rods for decades. Centuries, maybe (if you count steam engines, which also have connecting rods.)

I'm not going to delete the section because of a fear of angered Honda owners surrounding my house with torches, but ... these claims are spurious. 210.22.142.82 (talk) 07:47, 30 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree. The article is poorly written and needs a thorough rewrite. I tried to make it more encyclopaedic, more concise, and less breathlessly journalistic, but my edits were instantly reverted. The fact remains that the page really does need considerable work to get it up to a decent WP standard. The subheading "Techniques" is meaningless, and using Honda's marketing acronyms such as "HMAS" fork is pointless unless it can be shown that there was something new or special about these apparently standard telescopic forks. Accordingly, I propose to restore the modified format, and I hope editors will correct and update, but not to revert to tiresome kneejerk reversion. Arrivisto (talk) 21:57, 4 November 2016 (UTC)


 * The heading has been changed from Techniques to Innovation. If you fail to understand "HMAS" system here is some knowledge for you The HMAS cartridge fork features an exclusive internal piston construction. The innovative design employs smaller-diameter pistons to keep oil velocity high for improved damping characteristics and an expanded range of adjustability. The result: you get more precise suspension performance, especially over smaller surface irregularities. So you see this technology is a actual thing also used in the rear shock and not a marketing gimmick. This is some common knowledge in the motorcycling community as it has been around for about 20 years and was new to the market around the time it was installed on the release of this motorcycle. Your statement in the article about this The so-called "H.M.A.S"[6] suspension comprised a conventional telescopic fork and rear monoshock was changed for a number of reasons, one it is actual technology new at the time, two it was not more encyclopaedic, more concise, and less breathlessly journalistic. Third it is HMAS not H.M.A.S, and also the removal of the (Honda Multi-Action System)information from the body of the article to down with the references was a unnecessary complicated confusion. Also with the Honda Ignition Security System (HISS) you changed to just A "HISS"[8]. Again with the information moved from the body of the article to some sort of reference. This was changed as well as it was not more encyclopaedic, more concise, and less breathlessly journalistic.72bikers (talk) 05:30, 5 November 2016 (UTC)


 * In response to the paragraph above and the query on  72bikers talk page -- "Exactly what are you taking issue with? ": I thought my points were clear.  I have already acknowledged a problem with shifting the photos.  I am happy to leave the SP1 & SP2 off the agenda until another editor intervenes. However, it is difficult to see why you insist on having a separate paragraph called "Techniques" (later "Innovation"), when it has already been pointed out by another editor that the VTR was not innovative per se, but rather incorporated some good (but unoriginal) ideas.  The reverted page reads like a Honda sales leaflet, not a WP page. You say " I also do not in any way feel I own the article", but the fact that you immediately revert my efforts renders that claim unreliable.  I propose to restore the page as I last left it, and I invite you to improve it, but NOT have an edit war.  Why not wait for other editors to have their input?  (I propose any further discussion should be on this VTR talk page). Arrivisto (talk) 12:58, 6 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Also, if the HMAS cartridge fork is indeed "an innovation" (and not merely another cartiridge fork) then perhaps this "knowledge" might usefully go on the VTR page and onto the Suspension (motorcycle) page. There is remarkably little about HMAS elsewhere on the net. Arrivisto (talk) 12:58, 6 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Also, the "Lazareth" appears to be a non-factory special, so one wonders if it should be on this page. If the picture is indeed to remain, would it not be useful to say something about it? Arrivisto (talk) 13:03, 6 November 2016 (UTC)


 * So you are taking issue with the removal of the RC51 but you have no sources that corroborate your opinion correct? You say the VTR was not innovative is this your opinion again or do you have sources that can confirm this. Because there is a reliable sourced reference that states that many of these thing are such as it states this 48mm slanted flat-slide CV carbs are the largest ever used on a production motorcycle and 38mm intake valves - the largest ever used on a Honda production motor also Unique side-mounted radiators allow the VTR to strike a very compact and slim profile and The Super Hawk's unusual frame design The "pivotless" twin-spar frame and there is more so you see were my views have come from reading a source yours appear to be only of your unsupported opinion. It also would appear it is you who feels like you own the page as it is all you appear to be editing. You say you do not want a edit war, and Why not wait for other editors to have their input but are constantly reverting back to your unsourced opinionated state that looks like a stub page. You have now even gone on to include more controversy with removal of sourced information and have introduced these statements The so-called "H.M.A.S"[6] suspension comprised a conventional telescopic fork and rear monoshock and keep reverting back to even after you were shown referenced information on here. If you fail to understand "HMAS" system here is some knowledge for you The HMAS cartridge fork features an exclusive internal piston construction. The innovative design employs smaller-diameter pistons to keep oil velocity high for improved damping characteristics and an expanded range of adjustability. The result: you get more precise suspension performance, especially over smaller surface irregularities. So you see this technology is a actual thing also used in the rear shock and not a marketing gimmick. This is some common knowledge in the motorcycling community as it has been around for about 20 years and was new to the market around the time it was installed on the release of this motorcycle. And when I changed back and gave up to 4 legitimate reasons for doing so your response is this Restore sanity and clarity (again) as if to say I am crazy for removing your unsourced opinions. You say I propose to restore the page as I last left it, and I invite you to improve it but this is exactly what I did I did not just revert everything you did only the parts that were unsourced incorrect opinions.72bikers (talk) 19:56, 6 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Why does it appear that you are trying to sabotage this page? Adding misinformation and subtracting substantial important sourced information. The only reference you added was for your statement Honda produced a race replica version of the VTR, the Honda RC51 of which the source makes no reference to this statement in any way. And you provided the reference like this honda sp1 review mcn  that provided no link to the online page as if to deny the reader the ability to confirm this information. Also your statement said the RC51 was discontinued in 2010 which was also incorrect it was 2006 and your reference again did not even state this. But in a review from this source that did state this incorrectly  HONDA SP-2 (2000-2010) Review  this review also states this  The Honda SP1 enjoyed respectable UK sales, but was soon discounted as dealers realised people wouldn't pay vast sums for what was perceived (wrongly) as a jazzed up Firestorm. Also in a different review of the VTR1000F this was wrote  (the Honda racing v-twin was later introduced as the RC51 — with a different motor). which clearly contradicts your statement of race replica version of the VTR1000F so it would appear you were trying to hide this information from the reader. You also appeared to remove substantial important sourced information and a heading to condense the article to a stub. So why does it appear you are trying to sabotage this page? 72bikers (talk) 21:16, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

I am sorry that my efforts to improve this page have met with such negativity. I have (above) made my purpose clear and I have sought to work co-operatively, but each time my work has summarily reverted. Lengthy responses (above) in bold are the WP equivalent of shouting; hardly a mature way to convince. I would like to help this page move onwards, but it would be a waste of my time. Hopefully, another editor will contribute to improving the page, but until then this VTR article will have to languish in its current substandard form. Arrivisto (talk) 22:25, 6 November 2016 (UTC)


 * This statement by you is a fallacy, responses (above) in bold are the WP equivalent of shouting, that common knowledge would be ALL CAPS. It is used all the time even on wiki policy pages to emphasise in pointing thing out and never misinterpreted as shouting though admittedly to much can be unconstructive. Also bringing up anyone's maturity or sanity is hardly the definition of a civil conversation. Your interpretation of what is substandard form and your inability to accept verifiable facts is troubling. I wish you no ill will and I have heard all you had to say and have incorporate any useful information. I only ask that you would do the same Avoid stating opinions as facts WP:POV also do not use WP:OR also read up on how to leave proper citations. Some of your references could be construed as you just making (POV) or (OR) statements instead of sourcing information. Also infoboxes should have conversions for all stated specs. Cheers 72bikers (talk) 00:57, 7 November 2016 (UTC)