Honda Rebel 250 & 450 Forum banner

New Rebel Rider

2701 Views 30 Replies 10 Participants Last post by  wjmrty
Just bought a 2016 Rebel. Can't wait to pick it up!!!!
1 - 8 of 31 Posts
Awesome, last of the Rebels!

(Not everyone here counts the new models wink wink nudge nudge)
Hahaha. Yeah. New ones are a bit different. Fuel injected etc. they are nice. But I really do like the old school look.
See, that's the thing Honda missed: for those of us that have been around for a bit, when someone says "Honda Rebel" we think of the one that has been around for over thirty years, not a CB or CBR 300/500. Just like when someone says "Shadow" I think of the various cruiser models produced under that name badge since 1983, not a CB or CBR. Why they didn't just stick to the CB & CBR heritage and instead plagiarize the model with a completely different bike's name plate is beyond's like taking a Camaro and changing a few cosmetic bits to call it a Chevette.
Didn't Honda get the old engine from a Nighthawk?
No, as I've explained before in other threads relating the issue, the CMX250 engine hailed from the predecessor CM250 which hailed from the CM185 & 200 TwinStar. It was the exact same design evolving with each incarnation (and technically the engine remained the same when it went from CM250 to CMX250, rather the styling evolved away from the disco-cruiser era instead).

So why was it okay to take that engine from another bike,
They didn't. The CB250 Nighthawk debuted in 1991, several years after the Gen-1 Rebel was nixed. The predecessor nameless CB250 motors were considerably different in design. This could be a parallel issue, however it's not uncommon to resurrect a motor in another line, the single year production 1988 Shadow's engine resurfaced in the 1989-98 PC-800. The major difference being the Rebel eventually returned to the line-up while the 800 Shadow did not.

None of which, by the way, happened with the 300 & 500 models.

but when they do in now, it is terrible, and a travesty?
Because instead of evolving the design they took an engine from a completely different line with a completely different design (CB) and called it something it wasn't (CM). Like I said, they took a Camaro and called it a Chevette. Had they just called it something else, anything else other than what it ISN'T, and there would be no issue. For those that fail to see this logic I can pose a parallel question: why didn't they call it a Magna?

Actually that would have made some sense, after all the Magna was always a street/cruiser that derived from a sport bike.

Okay, the actual parallel questions behind the logic: Why didn't they call it a Shadow? Why didn't they call it a Hawk or Super Hawk? Why didn't they call it a Cub? Why didn't they call it a Dream? Why didn't they call it an Ascot? Why didn't they call it a Gold Wing?

I could go on all day but if I have to explain it any further...(you all know how that old Harley saw goes, right? :D )

I feel that bashing the updated model in no way invites our new model riding brethren into the fold.
Please show me where I or anyone else bashed the updated model.

If anything I was bashing the Honda Motor Company.

We need new blood to keep the hobby viable.
New blood was never a problem in the three decades that the 250 was available or the two decades that Rebel forums were on the web.

I seriously feel that a Rebel 300/500 section should be opened up on the forum. This is the "Honda Rebel Forum", not the "CMX250/450" forum.
As mentioned the web owners opened a separate board.

Which actually makes sense if you think about it: since the 300 & 500 have absolutely NOTHING shared with the 250 (or 450) people here have nothing to offer on the matter. I'm not sure why some folks can't see just how different this "same thing" really is. ;)

I want to learn about them. And perhaps someday get one, either as a younger siblings to my girl, or as an upgrade!
I've shared that very sentiment numerous times.

With several caveats, but I have repeatedly expressed the interest nonetheless.
See less See more
Yep, the 650 Nighthawk is what debuted in the early 80's.

Wikipedia is only as accurate as the mouth breathers that write the articles and furthermore as accurate as each page's "wiki-nerd" that monitors the page. Yes, that's right...every wikipedia page has a self-appointed "expert" that makes sure their page is "factually correct". Sometimes the nerd checks in every five minute, other pages have a nerd that checks it once a year if not longer.

This is one of many reasons why I rarely source it.

Here's another: I can go "edit" any page and say anything I want, as far fetched as I can possibly go, and if the page's nerd doesn't catch it for a few days you can read some total hogwash during that time. Case in point, the wikipedia CB250 Nighthawk page stating it debuted in 1982. Pure BS. Do a google search beyond wikipedia and you'll see the truth.

Here's a page that is far more factually correct:

More specifically, the CB250 Nighthawk entry (not to be confused with the nameless CB250 that preceded it):
See less See more
Are you willing to perform a science experiment to back that up?

Start a new thread here and ask what the correct ignition timing is for the 500 Rebel. Also ask what the correct torque values are for the steering stem, both axles, and both sprockets. Ask what the max safe load rating is. Ask any model specific question. Then sit back and wait for the responses to come flying in as everyone here checks their 250 service manuals.

Now repeat the same questions at the other board and note the difference in times and responses.

P.S. I made some changes to the Nighthawk wiki page:

Pretty far fetched, right? :D
Wow. I didn’t mean to start an argument here. Just like the old style better.
The plagiarized name is a pretty hot topic for some, it's definitely one that I have a hard time getting over. Then again most things that don't pass basic logic tend to have the same effect, and public schooling certainly isn't helping that issue. ;)
P.S. I made some changes to the Nighthawk wiki page:
Heh, my junk edit was up for three days before it finally got corrected. I rest my case. ;)
This is true, one of mine had worn valves and/or rings but was still within spec for compression --- it smoked more than any two stroke could --- and it would not die despite the abuse it went through.
1 - 8 of 31 Posts