PDA

View Full Version : Specs... what numbers are the most accurate?



ps2fixer
12-13-2019, 09:01 PM
Digging through service manuals and Brochures and I'm seeing different numbers.

For example, 78 ATC70 brochure states the dry weight is 166.4lbs while the service manuals says 163.1lbs (74kg). Reversing the math, it seems like the brochure metric spec would be 75.5kg. Just guessing, but I suspect the service manuals are kind of a general rule of thumb weight, and the brochures should be accurate per year.

Maybe someone knows more about how they came up with these numbers and why the conflict.


I'm slowly working on a database of specs and if all goes well I'll have a page on my site where you can compare any specs you want against several Honda models, like tire size, rim size, dry weight, and overall length all config-able on the page.

Anyway, these two different numbers are bugging me and I'm barely into many specs, wonder what else conflicts?!


Little less extreme, 84 and 85 200m service manual says 328lb vs brochures both saying 328.5lbs. I'm guessing this is just a rounding difference though, 149kg converts to 328.489lbs. It appears the brochures are attempting to be more accurate with the extra digit.

I think I'm going to work on getting digital copies of all the brochures I can find and maybe buy the ones I'm missing to try to keep info as accurate as possible.

ps2fixer
12-13-2019, 09:51 PM
I think I'm spotting a pattern, service manuals seem to give the first year model's specs for the whole range.

Service manuals:

81-84 - 302lbs (137kg)
85 - 291lbs (132kg)
86 - 289lbs (131kg)

And here's a break down from the brochures.

81 - 302.1lbs
82 - 297.7lbs
83 - 293.3lbs
84 - 293.2lbs (based on 133kg converted to lbs, UK brochure)
85 - 291.1lbs
86 - 290.9lbs


Kind of weird there's almost a 2lb difference for the 86. 131kg converts to 288.806lbs, so going off that I think I'd agree with the service manual. Not a huge difference but weird that 85 when you convert 132kg to lbs it comes up as 291.01, but the brochure put 291.1, mistype maybe?

I know all the weights aren't *that* far off, but I figured there would be an official weight since both data sources are printed by Honda.