1
Cruise control: CCS-100 vs. Rostra 250-1223 Sun May 11, 2014 9:59 am
duck
Life time member
Having done numerous Audiovox CCS-100 cruise control installs on K bikes, last year I found a Rostra 250-1223 unit on FleaBay with free shipping with a $99 Buy-It-Now price and decided to give that a whirl on a recently acquired K75. Now that I have a few thousand miles on the electronic cruise control, I’m of the opinion that the CCS-100 is definitely superior.
Here’s why:
After some fiddling with the DIP switches on the Rostra, I was able to get it to keep from surging below the 70-75 MPH range which is where most of my riding occurs in Washington. However, when I set it for 78-79 MPH for sections of I-5 with a 70 MPH speed limit, it gets up the power curve of the K75 and noticeably surges more than the CCS-100.
The 250-1223 also sometimes lets the speed drop a lot more then the CCS-100 before kicking in.
On the whole, I find the CCS-100 to be a much smoother and less obtrusive cruise control. In a digital vs. analog world, sometimes analog is better. (Yes, I know both are controlled by digital circuit boards. I’m referring to the power supply for the servo cable which is electronic on the 250-1223 and vacuum on the CCS-100.)
Another minor issue where I prefer the CCS-100 is that the CCS-100 allows me to use either the up or down switch for the initial set whereas only the down switch can be used to set the 250-1223.
That said, the 250-1223 does work and does do its job of keeping me at 8-9 over to avoid getting tickets. And the engaged indicator output hooked up to an LED in the cluster is nice for visual confirmation.
The foibles of the 250-1223 are not so extreme that I’ll remove it and replace it with a CCS-100 but if I had it to do over again then I would definitely opt for a CCS-100 on that bike and that’s what I’ll use on any future CC installs.
JMHO. YMMV.
Here’s why:
After some fiddling with the DIP switches on the Rostra, I was able to get it to keep from surging below the 70-75 MPH range which is where most of my riding occurs in Washington. However, when I set it for 78-79 MPH for sections of I-5 with a 70 MPH speed limit, it gets up the power curve of the K75 and noticeably surges more than the CCS-100.
The 250-1223 also sometimes lets the speed drop a lot more then the CCS-100 before kicking in.
On the whole, I find the CCS-100 to be a much smoother and less obtrusive cruise control. In a digital vs. analog world, sometimes analog is better. (Yes, I know both are controlled by digital circuit boards. I’m referring to the power supply for the servo cable which is electronic on the 250-1223 and vacuum on the CCS-100.)
Another minor issue where I prefer the CCS-100 is that the CCS-100 allows me to use either the up or down switch for the initial set whereas only the down switch can be used to set the 250-1223.
That said, the 250-1223 does work and does do its job of keeping me at 8-9 over to avoid getting tickets. And the engaged indicator output hooked up to an LED in the cluster is nice for visual confirmation.
The foibles of the 250-1223 are not so extreme that I’ll remove it and replace it with a CCS-100 but if I had it to do over again then I would definitely opt for a CCS-100 on that bike and that’s what I’ll use on any future CC installs.
JMHO. YMMV.
__________________________________________________
Current stable:
86 Custom K100 (standard fairing, K75 Belly pan, Ceramic chromed engine covers, paralever)
K75 Frankenbrick (Paralever, K11 front end, hybrid ABS, K1100RS fairing, radial tires)
86 K75C Turbo w/ paralever
94 K1100RS
93 K1100LT
91 K1
93 K75S (K11 front end)
91 K75S (K1 front end)
14 Yamaha WR250R
98 Taxi Cab K1200RS
14 K1600GT
