Moderator: Steering Group
Murray Betts wrote:They have only a few weaknesses as far as I know, one is that the bulkhead gets quite hot (rear engine) and electrical bits and bobs are attached to the bulkhead, and consequently tend to fail (can't remember exactly what the items are though). They don't rust as badly as the Capp, but the soft-top obviously has a limited life. My friend actually has a new one sitting waiting for the old one to get beyond serviceable condition.
Ian Linden wrote:Murray - you shouldn't. My garage is full
Murray Betts wrote:The individual throttle arrangement is typical of "high performance" engines, motorcycles and at least some BMW "M" series engines use individual throttles to get much faster throttle response.
Ian Linden wrote:Sorry to rain on your parade, but the fitting of those chipsets to Cappos does not, of itself, provide a performance increase. It simply alters the fuelling tables to cope with higher boost, which is achieved as described in the Performance Enhancement section of this post in the FAQ.
It follows that "chipping" an unturbo'd Beat would not be practical.
Ian Linden wrote:Actually, both the Beat and the Cappo have 63 bhp - the Kei class rules maximum value. The Cappo gets there with the turbo; the Beat uses screamingly high rpm. There is not much to choose between them as regards performance.
Murray Betts wrote:Make no mistake the Beat is a lot of fun to drive. .... I really wouldn't dwell too much on those critical reviews, try to get a ride/drive in one, you'll buy it.
Chris da Silva wrote:My argument all along is whether I can get the same performance figures from the Beat [as I do with the Cappo] but with lower revs! ...
Ian Linden wrote: But the Honda engine is built for the high revs, and surely part of the fun is using them
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest