My '98 is a California Model ?!?! Say it ain't so!!

So I'm pretty sure I'm realizing my '98 is a California model and not a 49 stater. Is there anything in the VIN that could confirm it?

I noticed the charcoal canister during an oil change yesterday. A visit to the service manual and parts fiche leads me to believe my bike has different cams, different throttle bodies, and different ignition timing. Holy crap! The charcoal canister is pretty benign and probably easily dispatched anyway. But the other things are (potentially) pretty major because 1) it's likely cost prohibitive to change to 49 state spec and 2) cam specs! throttle bodies! ignition timing!....those are some of the fundamentals on which performance is based.




Are the throttle bodies smaller (I hope not) or is the difference related to vacuum line ports or something benign (I hope)? Anyone know the difference?



The service manual specs on the cams is disturbing. It's gotta be a significant difference. The cali 98-99 cam has less lift and what appears to be wacky timing. The intakes open 15deg later than they should. Instead of 10deg BTDC (the seemly normal spec for the 49 stater) they don't open until -5 deg BTDC. So if I'm interpreting that right, that's 5 degrees after top dead center. I've never seen intake cam timing like that. Similar story with the 98-99 cali exhaust cam timing. They close at 5 deg BTDC instead of 10deg ATDC.

My cam theory knowledge is modest. However, I know enough to recognize the 49 state cam timing as typical while the cali cam timing is like no stock timing I've ever seen. The intakes don't open until the piston is already past TDC and on it's way back down?! That can't be good.

The 00-01 cali models seem to have mercifully avoided the different cams.



The ignition timing appears retarded (literally) on the cali models. I wonder if the pulse generator rotor can be re-indexed to correct the cali models. There's only one pulse gen rotor part number--the cali model just times the ignition off a different mark. However, the PGM-FI unit (the computer "brain") has a different part number for the cali models. So it's definitely possible the ignition system couldn't ever be 49 sate spec without a 49 sate PGM-FI unit.




So unless I'm missing something, my bike does NOT perform as it was originally designed and even if I invest a bunch of time to source "reasonably priced" used 49 state parts it would still cost a bunch.

The bike is what it is I guess. And it's still a good bike. But I'll take a wild guess say it makes 10-15hp less than it's suppose to.

 

This owner's 2000 (California,et al)has plenty of HP in the stock configuration. It has seen 150 mph indicated. Do you think you'll use the extra HP you might find?

 

Sure, occasionally.

It's a fine streetbike as-is and since that's what I use it for it's not like the sky is falling. I'm not indifferent though. I felt like I was making a compromise in outright performance when choosing this model bike anyway. My alternative choice would have been a more focused bike (maybe something like the 900RR I use to own).

Now I'm realizing that my non full-power version VFR is a slightly greater compromise than I thought. Taken at face-value it's still a great bike. But it's not as "good" as it could be. I want the full-blown version not the dumbed-down California-says-this-is-all-you're-allowed version.

It would help if I wasn't somewhat resentful that there even is such a thing as a California model.

 

Oh, yeah...I get 220 miles before the last bar starts blinking.
45 mpg, even up to 55 mpg on longer trips
I don't see a compromise there.

my opinions, of course

 

After taking a quick look at the parts fiche: there are two different sets of cams listed, one pulse generator, and two different throttle bodies. It would cost around $2000 to change all the parts out plus major headaches.

 

what is the part # for your ecm? I just installed a new motor and I am having some fuel issues. |It never occured to me that the motor may be a cali model. Regardless I have good cams and gears from my old motor Ill sell dirt cheap if you are interested also have a spare ecm if I did not by a calli motor

 

Did I mention I have gone 150 miles per hour on a stock bike, AND I get 45 miles to the gallon all the time? I have not spent one dollar on performance. Still not sure why this is such a big deal.

 

There are no specific MPH or MPG thresholds my bikes need to meet before I feel satisfied.

Since you're making me think about it :wink: I suppose I judge a bike based on intrinsic value--what the bike actually does/provides. AND I also consider comparative value--how it stacks up against other models of bike (or versions of a single model as in the case here). Intrinsically, the bike is what it is and as we've both pointed out, it's pretty good. So I'm not scrambling to unload the bike or anything.

But there are two versions of this bike. And all evidence I've uncovered so far points to one version being down on power over the other (if I'm wrong--which I can't imagine given the spec differences--I hope to realize it at some point). Since I value not only what a bike offers but ALSO what some alternative bike offers, this does matter to me. In this case, does it matter enough to actually sell the bike? No. But you bet it will be one of the many pros and cons I consider when I'm looking to change. If I'm still making no sense, read on....







Imagine you were doing a valve adjustment and realized your cams had been miss-timed by a previous mechanic. Or there was a rag stuck in your airbox. Or both. Your flabbergasted. Your bike ran fine and was pretty dang fast even with those issues. You never would have guessed your bike was miss-tuned. There's no way you'd say--ahhh, it went 150mph before and got 45mpg so who cares. You'd want to restore your bike to it's "rightful" state of tune, I'm sure. This isn't a perfect hypothetical but I hope you see where I'm coming from.

Or here's another example that is real-world: The Honda XR650R. I have one and they come from the factory (all states) with an intake boot that has a restrictor plate in it and a handful of other changes from the originally designed state of tune. NO ONE in there right might keeps them that way. In the XR650R's case, they don't even really run well like that. There's an HRC manifold available (the one the bike was designed to have) and the other changes are easy to reverse. I see my cali VFR just like I see my (not any longer) showroom stock XR. They have dumbed down engine tuning that is NOT what the bikes' designs intended. Unfortunately, restoring a cali VFR's state of tune isn't a $100 project like with the XR. Luckily, the dumbed down VFR still runs well. If you didn't know there was another version of the bike you'd never have any reason to question its tune. But I do know there are two versions.

As far as I'm concerned, my California model is nearly a "miss-tuned" bike. It ain't what it was suppose to be in so far as Honda developed the bikes' state of tune and then sacrificed that tune to meet CA's emission standards. It still runs well because the "miss-tuning" was done well by the manufacture. So it's mostly invisible UNTIL you compare the bike to something other than itself (getting back to intrinsic vs. comparative value).

Whether any bike is a good bike in whatever as-is condition does not mean the bike couldn't be (or maybe shouldn't be) better. The HP difference in this case could be half what I suspect and that still would distinguish between "good" and "better" in my book.

 

Right. My bike runs fine too (stock except for a slip on Akro). It's just the bit of very-likely-lost performance at the margin that irks me.

I'm not interested in giving up something for nothing in return but a slap in the face from CA legislation. Maybe if I lived there I could at least feel complicit as a voter. But I digress...

 

Who's RW and how do I check with him? lol


What I would really like to see is similar cali and 49-state bikes run on the same dyno. If the difference came out to less than 5hp, I could try and forget it. After a while I'd probably be able to. If the cali model is down 10hp to an equivalent 49-stater, hmmmmm--I probably couldn't ever totally forget about that.

I've only begun looking for dyno data (haven't searched here at all yet). But so far I've seen some pretty wide ranges. As low as 85hp although most I've seen seem to be just under 100hp. Absolute numbers are hard to take too much from though. Without the often missing baseline runs and/or running two different bikes on the same dyno--it's hard to be sure what I'm really looking at.

I might have to just dyno my own bike and see what happens.



Who's got a 49-state 98-99 that wants to meet me at Firebird (Phoenix AZ area folks) to do some comparative drag racing?? I'm serious.

 

I am aware there are other points of view and other philosophies. Mine are driven by a few basic principles. ONE: Ease-whatever allows me to get along the best most easily. TWO: Finances-whatever allows me to get along easiest and most cost efficiently. THREE: Reliability-whatever gives me these things without requiring constant upgrades, inputs, maintenance, etc.

These points have led me to Honda. Honda rarely lets me down in any category. My 93 Accord gives me 35 mpg, goes 130 mph when I want it to, and is fairly stylish for it's class. I could dump hundreds into it and make it a street racer-BUT WHAT FOR? The VFR far out performs the Accord in every way while still meeting my general ideals.

I guess I can understand the ideas you posted above, but sometimes I just have to ask "Why?". I know plenty of people that have souped up their VFRs for performance sake. I don't have anything against them. Like I said, we have different ideas.

 

I to own a clifornia model 2000 with the canister and a catalitic converter. I to was shocked when I saw the strang valve timming.
I have friend who has a 2001 49 stater with similar mileage and muffler. We ran them both on the same dyno on the same day and the torgue and hp curves were almost the same, his peaked at 105hp and mine peaked at 104hp

I think if you try to modify yours you might spend a lot of money and hasel and not gain anything.

Turbo snail

 

Don't worry... it's still got plenty of power and you can feel good knowing that you are doing good for the environment while running from the popo.

 

That's cool. Although, your 2000 california model does have the normal cams and valve timing. It was only the 98-99 cali model that got different cams. All version after 99 got the normal cams. At least that's what the fiche and service manual indicate.

 

Thanks for all the replies.

About the power difference--I can only speculate. But those valve timing specs are wacky. I can't imagine how that big of a difference in valve timing couldn't have a significant effect (i.e. more than just a couple of HP).

I recall several years ago when I tried a set of TBR cams in a '98 CBR900RR. Lost power everywhere. Yes, I triple checked the timing. They just didn't work well with stock compression pistons. Luckily I bought them from a friend so I wasn't stuck with them. Point is, my experiences (some mentioned, some not) just can't reconcile the 98-99 cali model cam specs with an inconsequential difference in power. I don't see how they can go together.

If and when I know how much power my 98 cali bike actually makes I'll report back. I would love to be wrong.