Topic: Test Ride: 2017 Honda Rebel 300 and 500

[AutoTrader.ca]

Twinning
Read more...

[Noto]

I still know relatively nothing about bikes, but I feel like these articles give me a bit of education

Interesting take on the bike in light of the styling, btw!

[dkaz]

I test rode this bike and I had the same impressions as you. The rear brake seems useless. The seating position is interesting -- a little cramped for my 6'-1" self although I felt comfortable enough after 30 minutes on the saddle. This was my first ride on a cruiser ever.

I have to note that none of Honda's 300s or 500s have a fuel consumption meter on their gauges. Fuelly does indeed show that there is hardly a difference in fuel consumption between the naked 300 and 500 -- 3.6-3.7 for the CB300F and 3.7-3.8 for the CB500F. There are no Rebel 300s or 500s yet. The gap is bigger on the aerodynamic sport models -- 3.3 for the CBR300R and 3.7 for the CBR500R.

[Blueprint]

It's been awhile since I read about bikes, but the fuel economy is incredibly bad for something so small!

[dkaz]

It's been awhile since I read about bikes, but the fuel economy is incredibly bad for something so small!

It's a motorcycle review, much like their car reviews, they're probably more rev happy than the average rider. In a pure city environment, the 300 would do more like 3-3.5. Constantly rev that engine high or take it at high speeds and the fuel consumption jumps to 4-4.5.

When I rented a CB300F a couple of months ago, I fell into the latter territory -- 4.4 L/100km pinning it at speeds I won't mention here. To the Imperial folks, that equates to 66 smiles per gallon. I'm expecting the Puig windshield Wing's selling me to help with that number on my cross country trip.