The Honda CB1000F and CB1000 Hornet are siblings that use the same platform, including frame and engine, etc. Taking turns on the two cars revealed not only differences in exterior appearance, but alsoaprofound difference in "flavor" intended by Honda's development team.From the riding position to the engine feel and handling, the two cars had distinctly different vectors, creating a completely different worldview.
Decisive difference created by the riding position
The Honda CB1000F was the most talked-about bike of 2025, a rival to the Kawasaki Z900RS, which had dominated the large neo-classic genre for the past few years, and shared the same basic engine and frame (and hardware suspension) with the CB1000 Hornet, a so-called streetfighter. (The suspension also shares the same hardware). We had the opportunity to compare the two bikes over the course of two days, and were amazed at how different the two bikes are from each other. The purpose of this report is to share with you the details of this experience.
The CB1000F (1,397,000 yen) was launched in November 2025. The annual sales target is 5,000 units, almost the same number as the rival Z900RS's annual volume.
The CB1000 Hornet (1,342,000 yen) was launched in January 2025. The actual development was preceded by the Hornet, and the decision to share the platform with the CB1000F was made somewhat later.
The CB1000F is also available in an SE version (1,595,000 yen) equipped with a bikini cowl and other features, but all test rides this time were on the non-cowl STD.
The Hornet also has an SP (1,584,000 yen) equipped with Brembo calipers and Ohlins suspension and exhaust devices, but this time we test rode it in STD.
First of all, the world that a rider feels the moment he straddles a CB1000F (hereafter referred to as "F")froma CB1000 Hornet (hereafter referred to as "Hornet") is decidedly different.The Hornet is positioned extremely close to the front wheel, as if the rider's head is directly above the head pipe. The F, on the other hand, feels as if the rider is sitting about one head away from the front wheel (in fact, the seating position is 38.5 mm behind the Hornet), giving the impression that the rider is seated further back than the center of the vehicle body.This difference in position also affects the fit with the chassis. On the Hornet, the rider's entire inner thigh is tightly attached to the fuel tank and the heel guard of the step, giving the rider the feeling of being one with the machine. The F, on the other hand, has a good fit itself, but there is a slight "play" between the body and the chassis compared to the Hornet. I feel that this is expressed as less restraint or a kind of spaciousness.
Note the red line extending from the front fork and the position of the rider's head, which is somewhat distant in F... (rider is 170 cm tall and weighs 70 kg)
In the Hornet, where the rider sits at the front of the vehicle, the distance between the red line and the head is much shorter. Note also the relationship between the rear wheel and seating position (forward of F).
The Hornet's fit is such that when you straddle it, it feels as if the entire inside of your foot is touching the chassis, from thigh to knee, calf to ankle; not that the F is less fitted, but this sense of unity and closeness in the Hornet is very pleasant.
In terms of foot comfort, there is more than just a sensory difference in seat height (Hornet: 809mm, F: 795mm). In the case of the author, who is 170 cm tall and weighs 70 kg, the heel of the Hornet floats about 2 cm, while the heel of the F is just barely touching the ground, and the F is slightly better. However, the left foot on the ground in F interferes with the protrusion of the side stand, pushing the foot slightly outward.
F on the left and Hornet on the right. In the photo, F's heel is also floating, but in reality it is lightly grounded; notice how F's foot is behind the step and Hornet's foot is down in front of the step, and also how F's left foot is slightly open to the outside.
F's left foot is pushed slightly outward as it interferes with the bar that moves the sidestand in and out when the left foot is on the ground.
Hornet flawless as a high-performance straight-4
As for the character of the enginebased on the one for the CBR1000RR (SC77),it can be said that the two vehicles were created under the opposing themes of "function" and "emotion".The Hornet's engine makes no attempt to hide the fact that it is a high-performance inline 4-cylinder of supersport origin, and although maximum output has been reduced from the SC77's 192 hp to 152 hp (158 hp for the STD SP with exhaust valve, which we tested this time), its acceleration is extremely hard and linear. The engine responds smoothly and faithfully to every movement, from the moment the accelerator pedal is opened to the moment it is released. When the engine is revved up to the high rpm range, it blows up with the precise vibration typical of a high-performance straight-4 engine, providing plenty of excitement to the rider. The most notable feature of the engine is its flexibility in the low rpm range. Even when the rider opens the throttle in 6th gear at approximately 1000 rpm, at speeds below 30 km/h, the engine accelerates smoothly without even a hint of reluctance. Not only the excitement, but also the ease of handling at low speeds is outstanding.If you are looking for speed, the Hornet unit is definitely the better choice.
Although numerically detuned from the CBR, the Hornet's engine is so sharp and powerful that you don't feel it. It is very easy to handle, with no excessive throttle response, etc.
In contrast, the Hornet's engine is very sharp and powerful. [/caption] In contrast, the F's engine is intentionally designed to have a human-like feeling, such as a "clamminess" or "tameness" to it. The F engine, on the other hand, is intentionally designed to have a human-like feel, with a "chipper" or "tame" feel . There are signs of this from the moment the engine is idling, and although the rpms are the same at approximately 1200 rpm, the engine has a slightly more up-and-down feel than the Hornet's. (This may be an individual difference.) When driving, the difference is even more pronounced. The F has shortened the gear ratios of 1st to 3rd gears to make it easier to handle at low speeds, but even so, it stilllacks the low-speed tracking ability ofthe Hornet.The minimum speed for re-acceleration in 6th gear is about 35 km/h. If you don't turn the rpms to about 1500 rpm, the car will make a rustling motion. In terms of ease of handling at very low speeds, the Hornet is surprisingly superior.However, the true essence of the F engine lies in its "richness of expression. When cruising at around 2000 rpm with little acceleration, the engine has a smooth straight-four feel, but when the accelerator is opened wide, the engine starts to rev up with a distinctive "gwagwagwagwagwagwagwagwagwagwagwagwagwagwagwagwagwagwag" feeling, with a reaction that can be taken as a momentary lull in the acceleration. Andwhen accelerating at full throttle, the four-cylinder engine does not produce a clear "fawn" sound, but rather a "whirr"sound with a strong beat and vibration. This feeling is a bit reminiscent of Yamaha's 3-cylinder engines, and is probably intentionally created by the phased camshaft, the most distinctive feature of the F's engine mechanism. Honda says that they "aimed for a feeling like a carburetor car," and this can certainly be taken as a rough, old car-like feeling.
The F engine is tuned with a phase cam, special air funnels with different diameters for the left and right cylinders, and an internal muffler structure. The electronic control system has also been modified by adding a 6-axis IMU, which is not found in the Hornet, and making the TRACON highly intelligent.
The F uses a special camshaft with slightly delayed intake and exhaust timing for cylinders 3 and 4 compared to cylinders 1-2. While maintaining the optimum combustion efficiency for each cylinder, the F has a moderate variation in timing, similar to that of a carburetor car. This technology was first used in the air-cooled four-cylinder CB1100 introduced in 2010.
The F has intake funnel inlet diameters of 40 mm for No. 1-2 and 50 mm for No. 3-4 to produce a throbbing intake sound. The length and aperture diameter have also been changed from the Hornet.
F and Hornet output characteristic graphs. The vertical/horizontal axes are not exactly equal, so please take it only as a reference, but you can see that the Hornet's power extends all the way up to the rev limit, while the F has no valley in torque, although it does hit a bit at high rpm.
When cruising at 100km/h in 6th gear on the highway, the Hornet revs at approximately 4000rpm with a hard vibration typical of the SS, while the F revs at a slightly lower rpm of approximately 3700rpm and revs slowly with a slightly grainy throbbing feeling. While the Hornet is all about functionality, which is a bit of an exaggeration, and claims high performance in the direction of a conventional straight-four, the F is tuned to prioritize "taste" and "emotion" over efficiency. Opinions seem to be divided in this area, with some in the author's circle saying, "It doesn't sound like a straight-4," and others saying, "I'm glad the Hornet was left as is. It is true that those who are experienced may find the slightly tame response sluggish, and some may consider the sound, which is basically that of a straight-4 but with a throbbing flavor, to be a bit bland. Personally, I was impressed by the technology that could change the flavor so much without making any major changes to the bore, stroke, or crank mass, and I accepted that the different character from the Hornet made it possible to set the suspension (which was just wonderful!) as described later. The different character from the Hornet made it possible to set the suspension (which was just wonderful!), but in other words, the F and Hornet engines are "different. Both the Hornet and the F have three riding modes: Standard, Sport, and Rain. Naturally, the response is sharper in Sport mode and milder in Rain mode, but in order to prevent confusion, this comparison is based on the Standard mode.
The Hornet shows its true potential at high speeds thanks to its tight suspension with little pitching and responsive engine. The hard vibration of the engine is also a characteristic of the SS for riders who are familiar with the SS.
In contrast, the F is characterized by a relaxed ride due in part to its lower cruise rpm. The engine's grainy pulse is more like a 3.9-cylinder than a 4-cylinder.
.
Hornet turns from the front wheels, rear-riding F
In terms of bodywork, such as handling and suspension settings, there is a clear distinction between the two vehicles.The Hornet has the feeling of the rider sitting high and the body flopping from a high position and falling to the left or right. The handling is front-centered, or rather, the rider feels as if the front wheels are directly under him, and the front wheels generate a strong turning force. The bike's self-steer is immediately activated as soon as the rider lays the bike down, and the bike turns around the rider, which is the behavior of a modern sportbike.On the other hand, the F has a low center of gravity, which allows the rider to tilt the bike surprisingly lightly from side to side. The up-handle lie position may have something to do with this, but the lightness of the bike makes it hard to believe that it is a liter bike, and it is very comfortable to turn left and right on winding roads.According to Honda's developers, thisfluttering and light banking action was achieved bylowering the center of gravity, including the rider's, compared to the Hornet.
The F has an up handle and high risers to create a raised upper body lie position. The step position is also lower than the Hornet's. [/caption
The Hornet's cockpit view is not significantly different from that of the other two, as the gauges and switchgear are the same.
However, the F's real handling characteristic is that it "flutters and lays down, but that's not the only way it turns. The bike banks lightly, as if it were a liter bike, but at that point the bike is not turning very much, and by opening the throttle aggressively, it begins to turn, giving the feeling that it is turning on its rear wheel.Whereas the Hornet makes a grizzly turn from the front, the F is more like a "rear-riding" sensation, where the rider keeps an eye on the distant front wheel and uses the rear tire's traction to change direction. While the F may not have the turning ability of the Hornet, it has the calmness and responsiveness of a larger-diameter front tire, such as an 18- or 19-inch tire, and the depth of feeling that comes from being able to trust yourself to the car with ease.
The first half of the F's frame is basically the same as that of the Hornet, with no intentional rigidity changes (there are some differences in the stays). The seat rail, however, is exclusive to the F. The upper pipe has a folded shape while the angle is lowered to lower the seat height. The shape of the rear end portion was a matter of trial and error in order to suppress the increased resonance caused by this change.
This is the Hornet's frame; compared to the F, it has a simplicity that certainly makes it seem original. The shape is a diamond shape made of steel pipes, which can be said to be the mainstream today.
I mentioned that there are no intentional stiffness changes to the frame itself, but one point is that the F has changed the shape of the two bolts on the engine hangers to reduce the fastening stiffness, slightly reducing the rigidity. The F is on the left and the Hornet is on the right, and can you see that the F has a slight increase in the chamfer on the bolt heads? The reason why the color of the bolt is silver on the F and black on the Hornet is to make the difference easier to see.
[/caption
Suspension settings as the "Japan Special
As for the suspension, the F's setting on public roads is nothing short of "exquisite.The overall setting is extremely soft and supple, and the ride comfort on public roads is outstanding. Combined with the up handlebars, it has a comfortable cruiser-like feel, andthe way it handles rough surfaces and gaps is almost as ifyou are riding an adventure bike witha long suspension stroke.The Hornet is not at all unsatisfactory when ridden by itself, but when compared to the F, it hasa stiffer setting as if it is designed for the circuit, and it has a toot-toot feeling over gaps and less pitching than the F. (Therefore, the Hornet may not tire easily on long-distance rides. (Therefore, the Hornet may be surprisingly less tiring when driving long distances).In contrast, the F allows for a fairly large pitching motion in response to the on/off of the accelerator pedal. However, this large pitching is the key to the F's ride quality. When accelerating, the front end of the car lifts up with a jerk, creating a sensation of acceleration that is even greater than the actual acceleration. When decelerating or entering a corner, simply releasing the throttle causes the front end to sink in, pressing the tires firmly against the road surface.
The front suspension shares hardware such as Showa's SFF-BP inverted and Nissin radial-mount calipers, but the suspension's internal settings and the brakes' hose expansion rate are different to give a different feel between the F and Hornet (F in photo).
The rear shocks also have their own link ratios in addition to the internal settings. This is the F.
This is the Hornet, and you can see the difference in the shape of the triangular plate. Also note the difference in step position.
Thanks to this "well-moving suspension" and the aforementioned "rear-riding" sensation, the feeling of ground contact and security, especially on winding roads with a series of low-speed corners, and the enjoyment they bring are impressive. Of course, the Hornet is also enjoyable, but in narrow corners with poor visibility, you may feel that the front end of the vehicle is not going so hard. I can't think of any other liter bike that is as exciting to ride as the F on the paved forest roads and mountain passes that you are sure to encounter when touring in Japan. However, the Hornet is by far the best choice for circuit riding, and since I am just an average touring rider, the F might be a different story if a professional rider were to ride it. However, for the average rider who enjoys riding on public roads,I feel that Honda'ssoft and supple suspension setupis an insightful one. The F's main market is Japan, which is why Honda was able to lower the expected speed range of the Hornet.
With the exclusive use of links, the F combines comfort in town driving with a sense of footing on winding roads. The settings are exquisite.
The F is a comfortable, supple ride for leisurely mass-touring situations.
The CB1000F has many faces in one machine.
In general, the Hornet is a machine that responds linearly to the rider's control and pursues "speed and function," in other words, a supersport for public roads. On the other hand, the F is a machine that uses modern technology, but has been reconstructed with "inefficient" elements such as momentary delays in response, the throaty feeling of the engine, and large changes in body posture as its flavor. Of course, this does not mean that the Hornet is tasteless. As long as you ride it by itself, you can enjoy its overwhelming speed and sportiness, and you will be impressed by the ease with which it can be ridden, but theF has the ease of a cruiser, the suppleness of an adventure-like suspension, and the flavor of an old car-like engine. The F has the ease of a cruiser, the suppleness of an adventurous suspension, and the flavor of an old-school engine. It has many faces in one bike, and it has the charm that makes it a pleasure not only to attack a mountain pass, but also to ride it down the road.
The F offers a full range of pleasures, even when driven in a flowing manner.
The F and Hornet showed us that the same engine and frame can change the character of a bike to such an extent, just by setting the bike in different positions, cam phases, and suspension settings.The F is a bike that speaks to the rider in the realm of "sensibility" that cannot be expressed in numbers. I would like to conclude this article by quoting from a question I had with Mr. Tobikaru Tsukamoto (General Manager, Development and Production Management Department, Motorcycle and Power Products Division), who is in charge of the development and production of all Honda motorcycle products. I heard that some riders have different opinions about the F engine, and that it would have been better to keep the Hornet engine...? If the CB1000F development team had come to me with such a proposal, I would have rejected it without a doubt. "If the Hornet engine were to be installed as is, would it be a bike that would satisfy the customers who loved the CB1300, CB1100, and other big 4-cylinder CBs of the past? Because it absolutely won't."
This comparison test drive was held at the "Editor-in-Chief's Meeting" for the media, which Honda has held for many years. In addition to the editor-in-chiefs of various media outlets, this is a unique opportunity for the media to cover Honda motorcycles with the participation of many of the company's leaders, including Minoru Kato, general manager of the Motorcycle and Power Products Division, the aforementioned Mr. Tsukamoto, and Katsuhiro Murooka, president of Honda Motorcycle Japan, which oversees domestic sales.
CB1000F/CB1000 Hornet Comparison Specifications
Comparison of the two cars: the F has a shortened first through third gears. While there are differences in driving performance, it is surprising that the fundamental values of the body, such as wheelbase and caster/trail, are exactly the same.
932
0
Share 
Copy link
X
Facebook
Save
![[Overseas] 2027 New Model "Ninja ZX-6R" Appears in North America! New Galaxy Silver/Twilight Blue Colors Refresh Lineup](https://news.webike.net/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/google-g-icon.png){kind=icon}
