2001 Honda Shadow 1100 Top Speed
Joined
·
16 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've enjoyed lurking for a long time and have posted only a couple of times. So, let me say I'm a daily rider but not a mechanic.
In the year that I've had my '94 1100, I've never been able to get it above about 80-85 mph, throttle wide open. The engine starts and runs good. Gas mileage is in the low 40's, which seems to be reasonable. The previous owner Cobra pipes on it, no baffles, and I haven't messed with them.
This thing ought to be able to do more than that, right?
Joined
·
44 Posts
Yeah, you should be able to do more than 85. On my '96 when I'm
running at 85 theres plenty of throttle left. There was a thread
here awhile back, IIRC most people were able to do more than
100.
Joined
·
33 Posts
Well the fastest I did on mine (05') was 100mph(~160kmh) and I had lost of throttle left.
Joined
·
9,258 Posts
I've never run out of throttle and get 90+ with ease. I've had the speedometer over 100 a couple of times but since it reads high I was probably just over 95. And I still had plenty of throttle left.
You should be able to do the same.
Joined
·
42 Posts
I was able to top out the speedometer (125mph) on mine... It's got cobra pipes. I'm not sure if it has an intake or jets.
Joined
·
4,827 Posts
I had mine up over 100 mph stock. That was before I opened up the pipes and rejetted. The speedometer is abut 4-5 miles off so I have to compensate for that too.
Joined
·
132 Posts
I ride every day on a 94 1100 and cruise on the open highway at 85 to 90, and have plenty of power to pull ahead if I need to.
Joined
·
932 Posts
Davo said:
In the year that I've had my '94 1100, I've never been able to get it above about 80-85 mph, throttle wide open. ...
This thing ought to be able to do more than that, right?
The March 1992 Cycle World magazine staff tested a 4 speed 1100 Honda Shadow which is basically the same bike as your 1994 1100. The article lists top speed as 107 mph. The article states that in 1992 all 1100 Shadows had the more restrictive California emissions equipment on them. Do you know if your's has that emissions equipment?
A test on the 1987 Shadow 1100 4 speed in the June 1987 Cycle World shows a top speed of 115 mph so if your bike doesn't have the California emissions equipment, that may be closer to your top speed.
I'm not positive, but would guess these are actual top speeds (as opposed to speedometer indicated), which means if the speedometers are off by 10% like mine is, the above tested bikes could have been showing 117 mph and 126 mph respectively on their speedometers at top speed.
Joined
·
34 Posts
I have been able to get my '83 Shadow to ~125mph (friend on a Yamaha crotch rocket stayed just behind me to clock me). It took a long (5 miles), mostly straight, and slightly downhill and empty road near my place.
The bike runs very well and has aftermarket exhaust.
Why would a larger CC bike go slower? Also, why the 6 speed with my 750 and only a 4 speed with the 1100? Does the 1100 have enough torque over a decent rpm range to justify broad ratios between gears?
Be safe if you're trying to top out the bike.
Joined
·
16 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
I thought something had to be wrong. Shadowdave mentioned California emissions. I don't think this bike's ever been anywhere near California, but I should check. What do I look for?
It's not that I want to go faster. I'm 50 years old with 5 dependents! Some overhead might be handy some day. But on the interstate the bike struggles to go 75, and I discovered that it just won't do a whole lot more. You can guess what happens going uphill.
So if anybody has any ideas for me to check out, I sure would appreciate it. The dealer that serviced it in May said nothing about any problems.
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
VT750C said:
Why would a larger CC bike go slower?
According to the road tests in bike magazines, the 83 VT750 was faster in the quarter mile than my 85 VT1100. 1985 was the highest horsepower for the VT1100, so your 83 750 should be faster than all of the VT1100s. In 1987, Honda lowered the compression and horsepower in the 1100s. Cams are different also.
But lowering the horsepower is not all bad. The newer 1100s make maximum torque at 3,000 rpm while my 85 does not reach max torque until 4500 rpm. My 85 1100 is faster in the quarter mile than the new 1100s, but in a high gear roll on at 60 mph, the new 1100s will pull away from my 85.
It's a cruiser thing.
Al
Joined
·
44 Posts
Well, since you say it runs well otherwise, the first thing I would
look at would be to see if the throttle butteryflys open completely.
If they were working OK, then next I would suspect maybe a
torn CV diaphram.
Joined
·
932 Posts
callmeal said:
VT750C said:
Why would a larger CC bike go slower?
According to the road tests in bike magazines, the 83 VT750 was faster in the quarter mile than my 85 VT1100. 1985 was the highest horsepower for the VT1100, so your 83 750 should be faster than all of the VT1100s. In 1987, Honda lowered the compression and horsepower in the 1100s. Cams are different also.
But lowering the horsepower is not all bad. The newer 1100s make maximum torque at 3,000 rpm while my 85 does not reach max torque until 4500 rpm. My 85 1100 is faster in the quarter mile than the new 1100s, but in a high gear roll on at 60 mph, the new 1100s will pull away from my 85.
It's a cruiser thing.
Al
I agree with Callmeal. The April 1983 Cycle Guide shows the 1983 VT750 had a top speed (observed) of 127 mph and did the quarter mile in 12.906 seconds. I know my 1100 can't touch that! I used to have a 1984 VT700 and it was faster than my current VT1100 as well. Part of it is that the 1983-1985 VT750/700 had an 8000 rpm redline as opposed to closer to 6000 for the VT1100s.
VT750C wrote:
Why would a larger CC bike go slower? Also, why the 6 speed with my 750 and only a 4 speed with the 1100? Does the 1100 have enough torque over a decent rpm range to justify broad ratios between gears?
The June 1987 Cycle World says the 1987 VT1100 "was retuned for even more torque, so much so that a four-speed transmission replaces the previous five-speed unit."
Davo wrote:
I thought something had to be wrong. Shadowdave mentioned California emissions. I don't think this bike's ever been anywhere near California, but I should check. What do I look for?
If you are looking if your 1994 VT1100 might have the California emissions on it, take a look at the following schematic from Bike Bandit.
http://www.bikebandit.com/partsband...da&model_dept_year=1994&model_dept_id=1132580
I believe the section labeled Cannister(AC) may be the emissions section.
Joined
·
134 Posts
with all my mod pistons cams etc.. i have it 118 in the quarter at 11,8 but top speed is unknown it runs up higher then the odomeiter
Joined
·
932 Posts
Not to belabor the point on emissions, but the following is from the March 1992 Cycle World article about the Shadow VT1100 "Never an all-star performer in previous years, the big Shadow has been made even slower by Honda's decision to fit all '92 1100's with the more-restrictive California emissions equipment. The Shadow already offers 24 paint and logo combinations, and building separate 49-state and California models would have raised the number of choices prohibitively high, to a whopping 48. So, while the public's freedom of choice is enhanced by the paint option, performance paid the price. Still, for the bike's intended purpose as a boulevard cruiser, the engine is very satisfying."
I'm not sure if this was just for 1992 or for how many years Honda didn't offer a separate 49-state model.
Dave
Joined
·
62 Posts
Not something I do on a regular basis by any means but, curiosity got the best of me one time when I felt I had reasonably safe chance to try it out. With a Memphis Shades windshield and the engine in completely stock form, I reached 110 and had plenty left. Just didn't need to go any faster although I easily could have, the bike was flying along straight as an arrow when I let off.
VT750C said:
Why would a larger CC bike go slower? Also, why the 6 speed with my 750 and only a 4 speed with the 1100? Does the 1100 have enough torque over a decent rpm range to justify broad ratios between gears?
Yeah it does, tons. Well, enough for me anyway. I've owned a couple of 6-speed Shadows and loved them. I had A Virago 700 w/ a 5-speed and I always felt it was missing a gear. But the wide ratio 4-speed on the 1100s is matched perfectly to the engine's torque. That's just my opinion, there's definitely nothing wrong with the later 5-speed 1100s.
Joined
·
745 Posts
I would look at airflow as a culprit. check the airbox make sure you didnt get some mice dumping food in the airbox. Next check your carbs for air leaks. You will also want to do a spark plug test at speed to see if you are lean or rich or maybe all good.
My 03 1100 will do over 100 without thinking about it. My buddies 96 1100 will keep with me up over a hundred no problem.
I think you have a problem.
Mark..
Joined
·
9,258 Posts
03SpiritGuy said:
I would look at airflow as a culprit. check the airbox make sure you didnt get some mice dumping food in the airbox. Next check your carbs for air leaks. You will also want to do a spark plug test at speed to see if you are lean or rich or maybe all good.
My 03 1100 will do over 100 without thinking about it. My buddies 96 1100 will keep with me up over a hundred no problem.
I think you have a problem.
Mark..
Yup. And check the air filter, too -- my dealer wouldn't change it unless I specifically asked him to no matter what I was paying him to do.
Joined
·
2,045 Posts
Just remember that a windshield along with rider weight can affect the top end speed.
Joined
·
9,258 Posts
thunderglass said:
Just remember that a windshield along with rider weight can affect the top end speed.
Not as much as he's citing -- not on a VT1100. The speeds I cited were 2-up with a 17" Memphis Shades Fats installed.
2001 Honda Shadow 1100 Top Speed
Source: https://www.hondashadow.net/threads/1100-top-speed.56515/
0 Komentar