Wildguzzi.com
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: SmithSwede on January 30, 2020, 10:38:00 PM
-
Something I was thinking about while riding today.
What is the *oldest* bike you can think of that would still be honest-to-goodness realistic and practical for real world, daily or regular use, on modern roadways? Be specific about make and model.
Some criteria. It absolutely needs reasonably decent brakes so you don’t die just because you are riding an antique. If you wouldn’t ride it regularly because the brakes suck, exclude it from the list.
Needs to be able to run at least 75 mph to keep up with urban traffic. I’m not talking about an old bike that is capable of merely toodling along on country roads on a Sunday afternoon. Think regularly merging onto a Dallas expressway without constantly worrying about being run over.
Needs to be reasonably reliable. Assume you need to ride it to work most every day. And need to have it start and run without too much hassle.
I said daily or regular use—so don’t suggest something that might only hold up for once a month trips. Or the annual old bike parade downtown. Or only last 3,000 miles before major wrenching or an overhaul.
I can envision lots of stuff that fits this description from the 1970s. And 1960s. But before that, I’m not so sure.
The best I can figure is a BMW airhead from the late 1950s. Even then I’m not sure about keeping up a 75 mph sustained pace on an urban freeway if traffic conditions required.
Enlighten me.
Can we at least draw boundaries to the question? Is it clear that there is nothing from the 1930s that could handle this mission profile?
1940s?
-
Any twin cylinder Vincent with all of the modern upgrades .
Dusty
-
So what’s that in terms of date? 1950s? Late 1940s?
-
Brough Superior SS100, built from 1924-1940.
-
My 72 Eldorado with drum brakes.
-
So what’s that in terms of date? 1950s? Late 1940s?
The first Rapides were built from 1936 until '39 , although not in any real quantities . With modern bushings in all pivot points , and modern brake linings , a guy could ride one in modern traffic . They are high effort for certain , and the suspension and brakes would feel dated .
Dusty
-
Even given modern brake pads any of the drum break bikes are not going to haul down from 60 mph in under a 150 feet, which for me would be the absolute worst breaking distance I could tolerate.
-
If I hadn’t run across my Quota I was looking at a 79-83 Suzuki GS1000/1100. Or a 76-78 goldwing. Any older and handling and brakes are too scary for what I like to do. Of course this is just my opinion, which I think smells like roses...
-
Assuming you also want to be able to panic stop in modern traffic, for me it would be 1980s BMWs with Brembo brakes. Even then you got crappy weak electrical output, same system as the period Guzzis. For me (I rode Triumphs and dirt bikes until the 90s), the BMW K75 was the first all purpose road bike with sufficient power, braking, reliability AND electrical output enough for extra lights, heated clothing, etc. Stone axe reliable, not tiring to ride, plenty fast, easy to change tires and brakes. If my legs had held together, I would never have sold mine. You want Fred Flintstone brakes and constant maintenance, get an earlier bike. :wink:
-
IF YOU WANTED TO RIDE IT EVERYDAY AND NOT GET RUN OVER, HONDA 305 SUPERHAWK. That's as old of a bike that I can remember. Someone might be more versed in earlier Beemers or Japanese two strokes. Nothing Brit or Euro or domestic comes to mind.
Broughs and Vincents? You're thinking with your medical cards.
-
I’d slow down to look at a BMW R90S
(https://i.ibb.co/ggq43Bp/389089-BA-B728-4-A47-B3-B5-854-B9-D17-E69-E.png) (https://ibb.co/ggq43Bp)
-
IF YOU WANTED TO RIDE IT EVERYDAY AND NOT GET RUN OVER, HONDA 305 SUPERHAWK. That's as old of a bike that I can remember. Someone might be more versed in earlier Beemers or Japanese two strokes. Nothing Brit or Euro or domestic comes to mind.
Broughs and Vincents? You're thinking with your medical cards.
Yeah , try riding a 305 Honda at 75 MPH for 20 miles :laugh: I'll take the Vinnie or an R69S any day .
Dusty
-
Right away you can rule out anything with acetylene lighting.
.
-
Right away you can rule out anything with acetylene lighting.
.
:laugh:
Or clincher tyres :grin:
Dusty
-
My 72 Eldorado with drum brakes.
I second that - There are surely older examples, but that was state of the art 1955 Chevy truck technology that worked damn well.
-
I second the selections of an eighties BMW airhead with Brembo brakes and an early K bike. My 1982 R100 (with Brembos) is reliable and stops well. I sold a gorgeous 1976 R75/6 mainly because no matter what I did, those awful ATE brakes were wooden and unsafe in my opinion.
Either of my R100 or K75/K75RT can run 75 mph all day, every day. Reliability nod to the K bikes.
-
I'd say the 70s and the advent of good disc brake systems.
-
Really any of the 70's UJM 4 strokes will fill the bill for sure. Granted time battles them, like us.. But really what made them great then, still holds true. A well kept example from any brand in the early 70's would serve you well, with little care or maintenance just like they did in the day. You go older then a CB 750 and you add a lot of maintenance IMHO. I believe that was the start of the "ride and forget it" era of bikes. There were other good bikes before, but to live in the modern world, with the speeds, and bad drivers, the power, brakes, and not having to fiddle around with it, would make me chose the CB750..
-
My '76 GL 1000 filled the bill for me. Daily commute of 180 miles with no problems. Alas, was stolen in '85 or I'd still have it.
-
I've ridden old bikes as commuters and tourers for a long time.
I love old bikes and have thought about the question a lot over the years. If anyone was going to cash in everything else and buy a Vincent or Brough at $60K/$200K and beat it around on the highways as a regular ride, and be the Bull Goose Rider at any rally or cruise night you happened across, it would be me, but that's not really going to be a thing for me or anyone else we know. WAY too much money per mile when everything is taken into account.
Old American, Brit, or European motors can be properly built, maybe with some internal upgrades that can't be seen from the outside but are an improvement in performance and longevity from what was available when they were new. Forty-horsepower engines, vertical twins and V-twins, are available from the 40's on up, which is plenty for normal riding; I'm building a 990cc Matchless V-twin from 1935 that if I do it right, it will cruise down the highway with traffic pretty easily. Also, the old bikes came with 60 watt generators, which almost have to be upgraded to at least 180 watts (discreetly and internally) if you expect any usable lights for riding after dark.
The big dividing line is between drum and disk brakes. ANY old drum braked bike can be made to chirp both tires with a hard pull, even a seven-inch-diameter-drum Panhead or BMW, with properly machined and arced drums/shoes, modern linings, and optimized hand-control leverage. BUT that trick only works for one or maybe two panic stops or downhill hairpins, and then the lever starts coming farther and farther and farther and .... no more brakes. How hard are you going to work the brakes on your daily rider?
I've followed people who were riding a rigid-framed bike at surprising speeds down a curvy road, but the best and boldest rider on earth can't keep the rear end on the ground in a bumpy curve when the only suspension is the tire sidewall flex. I'm not all that quick a rider so it NORMALLY doesn't affect me, but an unexpected washboard in a turn will upset any old unsuspended bike, like it or not.
Lots and lots of subjectivity in the word "suitable" .... !!
Lannis
-
The Honda CB line of the 1970's works for me.
-
Something I was thinking about while riding today.
What is the *oldest* bike you can think of that would still be honest-to-goodness realistic and practical for real world, daily or regular use, on modern roadways? Be specific about make and model.
I'm thinking the date will be 1969 and the Honda CB750. From that date there are many motorcycles which could be "modern day practical" in their as-delivered condition.
-
Really any of the 70's UJM 4 strokes will fill the bill for sure.
Just the 4 strokes? I still find my '72 Kawasaki H2 to be reliable and don't hesitate to take it on longer rides. I have an aftermarket 6 gallon tank that came with it, and If I were going to tour on it I'd put that on it, as it gets only 30 mpg. Since I got it in 1978 it has never left me stranded. There's something to be said for the simplicity of a 2-stroke engine.
-
Nothing...it wasn’t happening..the tech to do your specifications didn’t exist...otherwise we wouldn’t have so many stories of REPAIRs, tribulations and not making destinations...heck we didn’t have 1000cc until the UJMs came on strong...Vincent exception of course
It was a big freakin deal, a leap in technology and ability when that Honda 4 cylinder hit the market, also too, I remember how freakin strange, ungainly and huge it looked
The Brit version of a motorcycle, requiring constant bad ass Here Came Bronson riders ( and therefore we hold them in high esteem) was replaced with You Meet the Nicest Riders on a Honda
Before that, just brave men and women
How about a BSA Bantam? Nope, too small but you could go around world with it, and your Airedale
(https://i.ibb.co/sywhhY6/B489-B2-A8-C245-4-F33-B5-E1-BFBC0-A6495-C0.jpg) (https://ibb.co/sywhhY6)
Guzzi loopframes ruled the long distance travel world until Goldwings took over..I don’t really see anything that fits your bill...with exceptions because of the riders maintenance and repair skills..the tech wasn’t there yet
-
This is a *very* subjective thing. For me.. no drum brake bike need apply. As Lannis mentioned, one hard stop and they're done..not to mention what they are like in the rain. Doesn't anyone else remember drum brakes in the rain? :grin:
Japanese bikes with their "hinge in the middle" handling don't either, along with the "gummy cow" Beemers. I'm fully aware that I'm prejudiced, but 70s Guzzis, starting with the Disc Eldo would do it, although I prefer the Tontis.
-
Vincent Black Lightning, 1952...
(https://i.ibb.co/x3hyQnr/black-lightning.jpg) (https://ibb.co/x3hyQnr)
(https://i.ibb.co/72czsLr/img-7380.jpg) (https://ibb.co/72czsLr)
-
Just the 4 strokes? I still find my '72 Kawasaki H2 to be reliable and don't hesitate to take it on longer rides. I have an aftermarket 6 gallon tank that came with it, and If I were going to tour on it I'd put that on it, as it gets only 30 mpg. Since I got it in 1978 it has never left me stranded. There's something to be said for the simplicity of a 2-stroke engine.
I do agree. I daily rode a RD 400 for many years.. But it did have its shortcomings, and my GS650 was always around when the RD acted up. I love 2 strokes! But as a everyday ride, and forget it... It wouldnt be my first choice.
-
Changed my mind , anything older than 5 years old should be sent to the scrap yard :shocked:
Dusty
-
"Daily or regular use." As in reliable. Ability to merge and run in rush hour Dallas traffic. Stop in the rain. See in the dark. Electronics that work.
The defining moment in motorcycle dynamic I would echo the sentiments of a few already posted. 1969 Honda CB 750. Game changer.
-
Vincent Black Lightning, 1952...
(https://i.ibb.co/72czsLr/img-7380.jpg) (https://ibb.co/72czsLr)
Red hair and black leather
my favorite colour scheme...
Larry
-
There were other good bikes before, but to live in the modern world, with the speeds, and bad drivers, the power, brakes, and not having to fiddle around with it, would make me chose the CB750.
This was my first thought as well. Then I thought about the CB500-Four. But they made so many CB 750s that parts (and donor bikes) are still easily sourced.
The R90s would be a good one too - but since it's kind of a collector bike, I would not personally want to make a daily driver (which would be my definition of modern-day practical).
-
This is a *very* subjective thing. For me.. no drum brake bike need apply. As Lannis mentioned, one hard stop and they're done..not to mention what they are like in the rain. Doesn't anyone else remember drum brakes in the rain? :grin:
Japanese bikes with their "hinge in the middle" handling don't either, along with the "gummy cow" Beemers. I'm fully aware that I'm prejudiced, but 70s Guzzis, starting with the Disc Eldo would do it, although I prefer the Tontis.
Not only do I remember drum brakes in the rain, but get to experience it on a regular basis! The braking performance on my '69 V700 changes very little wet or dry, same thing with my '69 Ambassador over the past 23 years. The only time I ever had a problem was when in a huge traffic jam in Cumberland/LaVale, MD after a 100 car pile-up clogged I-68. That one time, the brakes became very grabby, but returned to normal after a few miles of dry running the next morning.
And one hard stop and they're done? I'd never ventures into the mountains of WV or any other place with twisty roads if that was the case.
Shoes relined with modern friction materials do make quite a difference.
A '67 V700 does just fine...
-
I do agree. I daily rode a RD 400 for many years.. But it did have its shortcomings, ....
I rode a '76 RD400C for years myself, and unless the rose-tinting is really heavy, it didn't have very many shortcomings.
Nobody could fault the handling or braking even compared to a modern bike ... no maintenance to do except the chain, tires, and keep the injection oil topped up (at 1000 miles a quart, it "used" less oil than many four-strokes whose oil needs throwing away at changing time), no valves to adjust, no points to set or clean.
Cruised all day at 70 MPH at 5600 RPM or so, six speed so there's always a right gear, rubber mounted engine, no vibration, and the best self-cancelling turn signals I've ever used. Light, easy to move around in the shop ....
I'm talking myself into another one here ....
Lannis
-
I owned and rode this 1978 Honda GL1000 for a few years...and it would easily be a reliable, practical daily driver. :wink:
(https://i.ibb.co/LkHCFZW/IMG-7671.jpg) (https://ibb.co/LkHCFZW)
-
A BMW R69 or R69S (available from 1955-1969) is a great choice. Low vibration and sturdy construction preserve these machines very well. Maintenance is simple and must be performed often, but power and reliability is quite good. Parts and service talent are available. Brakes are full width alloy drums. Pagusa and Denfeld solo saddles that are available for these bikes are the most comfortable that I've used.
(https://i.ibb.co/7vV9MqR/IMG-0644.jpg)
1967 BMW R69S with Sport tank, Pagusa saddle, bar-end indicators, and Enduro Side cases. 42 hp, 435 lbs dry. Note the hand air pump under the seat. Equipped with factory sidecar mounts and an Earles fork with trail adjustments.
Another choice are OHV Triumph and BSA twins from the sixties and seventies. They vibrate more than the Beemers, but have equal or better power and are very affordable to own. Parts are plentiful and components that hurt the reputation of the brands are now available in far better forms. Amal Premier or Mikuni carbs, electronic ignition, Hagon Shocks, o-ring chains, dynamically balanced cranks; all bring reliability and ease of maintenance. Go check out Big D Cycle in Dallas...they have lots of cool bikes to consider, a great service department, and parts. Brakes range from steel drum hubs to full width alloy drums to discs (in 1973).
(https://i.ibb.co/YjkKB0w/IMG-0645.jpg)
1970 Triumph TR6R. Single carb, 650ccs, 42 hp, 385 lbs dry
Brough, Vincent's, and Nortons have become too expensive to use daily. Good luck, Prescott.
-
Yeah , try riding a 305 Honda at 75 MPH for 20 miles :laugh: I'll take the Vinnie or an R69S any day .
Dusty
If you noticed, I mentioned Beemers. So far as a Vincent, good luck starting it everyday and keeping it running. It might be nice to live on a big hill to bump it?
I think the 305 will go 75 for 20 miles no problem, it might be better at 65 but it'll get there. I think the Honda was the first bike that you know would start every day and not break down and had enough power to keep up with traffic.
-
If you noticed, I mentioned Beemers. So far as a Vincent, good luck starting it everyday and keeping it running. It might be nice to live on a big hill to bump it?
I think the 305 will go 75 for 20 miles no problem, it might be better at 65 but it'll get there.
Meh , Vinnies have huge support , they can be updated to pretty modern standards . Yeah , it takes some money and commitment , but seriously , try keeping a 1960's Honda running . We have a motorbike wizard here in Muskogee , he owns and rides everything from 1950's English bikes to fairly modern Japanese models . It is interesting to hear him talk about maintaining an early CB 750 as opposed to his Commando that has been updated . The Norton has one carburetor , the Honda has four , and he hates dealing with those four carburetors .
Dusty
-
1970 Yamaha XS-1 650.
Nice simple two cylinder 4 stroke. Nice to look at too.
Maybe change sprocket teeth to accommodate higher freeway running.
-
I owned and rode this 1978 Honda GL1000 for a few years...and it would easily be a reliable, practical daily driver. :wink:
(https://i.ibb.co/LkHCFZW/IMG-7671.jpg) (https://ibb.co/LkHCFZW)
Nice bike! :thumb:
-
1970 Yamaha XS-1 650.
Nice simple two cylinder 4 stroke. Nice to look at too.
Maybe change sprocket teeth to accommodate higher freeway running.
I had two XS-2s. Vibration was an issue, even if geared taller it would still be at 70+.
-
If money is no object, just dreaming, I'd ride a 1939 big tank Crocker. Lousy brakes, I know, but it's a Crocker! And I ride comfortably so the Crocker fits the bill. The Crocker is as nice looking as any Vincent or Brough. Nice T shirts on the Crocker web site too.
-
The R90S has been mentioned a couple of times. I would suggest an R90/6 instead. A more practical bike. Easily maintained and a very reliable bike. The only change I would make would be a better seat, the seats on my /5 and /6 were terrible. My /2 not so much. The over engineered throttle control on the handle bar also sucked. I would come up with something better for that, I didn't on mine but I would have liked the bike more if I had.
kk
-
My very nice R69S was fine or better at speed and stopping, but risking (funny, autocorrect just changed my "riding" to "risking" which is very appropriate) one in vigorous stop & go traffic makes it a huge fail. Even in great tune, basic acceleration is inadequate. Watch your mirror when the light turns green and you'll see nearly every new vehicle behind you have a quick-jerk OMG moment when they realize they're about to run over you because you can't get out of their way.
My 1974 FLH Shovelhead has f&r disc brakes with a post mounted seat and, in terms of unexpected mechanical issues needing parts, can be ridden with greater impunity than my drum 4 shoe V7 Sport. I've deliberately kept both because I think they at the transition between old & cool and reliable & modern enough to actually use. The Guzzi is much more sophisticated. The shovel is a good basic machine. Even if I had unlimited funds, I'd be more likely to keep them (and my 68 CT90) than replace any of them with something different. They're perfect enough for me.
-
I used to have bmw's. I've had a number of Guzzi's in the last 20 years. They are more reliable - as are their owners. Thank you.
I've had some 2 strokes: RD350 x 2, Aprilia RS250, RG500 Gamma, 350 Bridgestone, 200/300cc Bultaco Metralla. LM1, LM 1000, VFR 800, V250 Suzuki, SV650S x 3.
Current: V7 III, Aprilia RS125, Daytona, Honda GB500TT, CX125 Gilera, RD400, Suzuki T500, V65 Lario, V50 III.
If you want arrive at your destination - on time - every time - with clean clothing and clean hands ride Japanese.
For serious cross country or everyday fun? I've had 3 SV650S's. In my view excellent mechanical & electrical systems & decent brakes. I always upgrade suspension frt. & rear and exhaust. IOW: Great sounds w/lower upkeep than a Ducati. R3~
-
Meh , Vinnies have huge support , they can be updated to pretty modern standards . Yeah , it takes some money and commitment , but seriously , try keeping a 1960's Honda running . We have a motorbike wizard here in Muskogee , he owns and rides everything from 1950's English bikes to fairly modern Japanese models . It is interesting to hear him talk about maintaining an early CB 750 as opposed to his Commando that has been updated . The Norton has one carburetor , the Honda has four , and he hates dealing with those four carburetors .
Dusty
I thought we were talking old bikes, I didn't think it meant restomods. Heck you could have an S&S knucklehead and make it a rider.
From my memory, the Superhawk was the first bike that could be ridden all the time at 99% and not a care about it. Oil, gas, tires, chain, points and valve adjustment. Keep going. That's the bike that put Honda on the map. It was the first commuter bike in USA and more than able to keep up with traffic or leave a VW behind.
The little 305 wasn't quite as fast as 650 Brit bike but it would get you there even if it was 10mph slower on the top end (and you can pass the Brit when he was broken down the road). I don't see a problem with 75mph for 20 miles. Commute it, race it, scramble it, beat on it, it just kept going.
I think the Superhawk was the first bike to do it all.
-
I thought we were talking old bikes, I didn't think it meant restomods. Heck you could have an S&S knucklehead and make it a rider.
From my memory, the Superhawk was the first bike that could be ridden all the time at 99% and not a care about it. Oil, gas, tires, chain, points and valve adjustment. Keep going. That's the bike that put Honda on the map. It was the first commuter bike in USA and more than able to keep up with traffic or leave a VW behind.
The little 305 wasn't quite as fast as 650 Brit bike but it would get you there even if it was 10mph slower on the top end (and you can pass the Brit when he was broken down the road). I don't see a problem with 75mph for 20 miles. Commute it, race it, scramble it, beat on it, it just kept going.
I think the Superhawk was the first bike to do it all.
The Superhawk would stay together at 75 , except the rider would have blurred vision from the vibration . A well set up 650 Brit bike was actually smoother at 65 than a Superhawk , with much better suspension . A neighbor in Nacogdoches who owned a Superhawk and a later CB 450 was always slightly surprised when we would swap bikes , he once said my TR6R was like a Cadillac compared to either of his Hondas . Hell , the '75 model XS 650 that a friend traded me out of shook like a paint shaker , I couldn't believe how badly it vibrated .
Dusty
-
My very nice R69S was fine or better at speed and stopping, but risking (funny, autocorrect just changed my "riding" to "risking" which is very appropriate) one in vigorous stop & go traffic makes it a huge fail. Even in great tune, basic acceleration is inadequate. Watch your mirror when the light turns green and you'll see nearly every new vehicle behind you have a quick-jerk OMG moment when they realize they're about to run over you because you can't get out of their way.
The power to weight ratio of a R90S is a lot better than a new FLH. It will run 0 to 60 4.8 seconds which is quick enough to stay well in front of most traffic except for muscle cars. I wouldn't use on for a daily driver though, too valuable. That is why I suggested an R90/6 just about the same except for the carburators. Actually the carburators on the R90's are too large as it is limiting low end torque and and the DelOrtos on the S are even larger.
kk
-
I'm going to go with a 1975 Guzzi 850 T-3. I used one as my daily driver/commuter/only vehicle for close to a decade. Mostly stock and somewhat neglected.
Other than crashes and a clutch that went out, it was stone reliable.
-
my issue with the 50s 60s 70s bikes was the lights, they had to be upgrade for freeway speed travel, and if you did that the generator struggled, nowadays you could fit modern lights with low consumption and power them with ease, so I would vote for an early disc brake bike with modern replacements for the incandescent bulbs.
-
(https://i.ibb.co/sbwzCCX/02-AEF4-FC-F766-4-B86-B22-C-8320-F8-FA0-DEC.png) (https://ibb.co/sbwzCCX)
upload images (https://imgbb.com/)
I just got back from a 1200 mile trip on this 38 year old Honda CB1000, trouble free.
-
A well sorted CB750KO, perhaps.
-
BMW R75/5
Mine dragged me to Mexico and back plus 600 miles a week to work and back for years.
-
This is a very good all around going on 19 years of ownership.1976 R-75/6
(https://i.ibb.co/T0PPtJM/BMW-GA.jpg) (https://ibb.co/T0PPtJM)
-
my issue with the 50s 60s 70s bikes was the lights, they had to be upgrade for freeway speed travel, and if you did that the generator struggled, nowadays you could fit modern lights with low consumption and power them with ease, so I would vote for an early disc brake bike with modern replacements for the incandescent bulbs.
The 300 watt Marelli generator on a '67 V700 (or Bosch on later models) isn't going to "struggle" even with a 60/55 watt sealed beam. Back before LEDs were readily available, I ran a 60/55 halogen headlight and two 55 watt halogen driving lights on my Ambassadors without any charging system issues.
BMW R75/5
Mine dragged me to Mexico and back plus 600 miles a week to work and back for years.
If I hadn't ended up with Loopframe Guzzis, an R75/5 would have been my choice as well.
-
The Superhawk would stay together at 75 , except the rider would have blurred vision from the vibration . A well set up 650 Brit bike was actually smoother at 65 than a Superhawk , with much better suspension . A neighbor in Nacogdoches who owned a Superhawk and a later CB 450 was always slightly surprised when we would swap bikes , he once said my TR6R was like a Cadillac compared to either of his Hondas . Hell , the '75 model XS 650 that a friend traded me out of shook like a paint shaker , I couldn't believe how badly it vibrated .
Dusty
The 450 was always a brute and known paint shaker.
My point was the Superhawk was the first "modern bike". The bike that put Honda on the map and got the average guy to commute on a motorcycle. Buzz around town and take it on the highway. It was first bike reliable enough that it could be the sole vehicle. I can't think of an older bike than this one since it was the first modern bike.
-
Quote from: GeorgiaGuzzi on January 30, 2020, 11:18:37 PM (https://wildguzzi.com/forum/index.php?topic=104298.msg1652443#msg1652443)If I hadn’t run across my Quota I was looking at a 79-83 Suzuki GS1000/1100. Or a 76-78 goldwing. Any older and handling and brakes are too scary for what I like to do. Of course this is just my opinion, which I think smells like roses...
Why not a 75 Wing?
Lots of candidates. Old Panheads can do it though they have to be tinkered on a bit more.
Yeah the old Superhawks got a lot of folks on bikes but in 75-80 mph traffic the little Honda can't do it and stay together for long. The 60s Beemers and Guzzis fill the bill.
-
The power to weight ratio of a R90S is a lot better than a new FLH. It will run 0 to 60 4.8 seconds which is quick enough to stay well in front of most traffic except for muscle cars. I wouldn't use on for a daily driver though, too valuable. That is why I suggested an R90/6 just about the same except for the carburators. Actually the carburators on the R90's are too large as it is limiting low end torque and and the DelOrtos on the S are even larger.
kk
We had an excellent 1971(?) R75/5(?) at the shop that ping-ponged between the original owner (really good & anal mechanic at the shop at the time) and my best friend (owns the shop) for a few years. During a weak moment, it was finally sold to an outsider and is now gone. Great bike. We still regularly regret that it got away. It was an absolute night & day leap in technology over my R69S that I had at the same time- assumable just like BMW intended it to be. I only rode it a few times so didn't have enough miles or other model experience to recommend it or any other BMW. Never found an R90S deal that I had wanted for years to have one to ride & compare to both my R69S and V7 Sport. Still, I would expect one of those /5 or /6 bikes could easily be a bike to fulfill this need.
My FLH is no drag race king, but it isn't as small & black invisible from the rear in traffic as a /2. Being on a taller /5 or /6 would be another plus over a /2.
-
The 450 was always a brute and known paint shaker.
My point was the Superhawk was the first "modern bike". The bike that put Honda on the map and got the average guy to commute on a motorcycle. Buzz around town and take it on the highway. It was first bike reliable enough that it could be the sole vehicle. I can't think of an older bike than this one since it was the first modern bike.
BMW was building really reliable easy to service bikes by 1950 , the 4 cylinder Nimbus was known to be very practical , as were the boxer Zundaps. The Superhawk might have been the first readily available motorbike that was practical , but it wasn't the first reliable motorbike . Heck , there were people in England in the 1920's who rode Scott Flying Squirrels as basic transportation .
Dusty
-
Eldo - first choice. I take mine to work on I 14 regularly.
R90/6. Always liked these.
Late 70's Gold Wing - must be well sorted, but once there, it's good.
CB 750 - early 70s are a sweet bit of coin now....
-
BMW was building really reliable easy to service bikes by 1950 , the 4 cylinder Nimbus was known to be very practical , as were the boxer Zundaps. The Superhawk might have been the first readily available motorbike that was practical , but it wasn't the first reliable motorbike . Heck , there were people in England in the 1920's who rode Scott Flying Squirrels as basic transportation .
Dusty
OK, now you're naming other bikes? Keep a Nimbus running. A Flying freaking Squirrel? I'll stick with the first "modern motorcycle" as the oldest bike to be practical per the subject.
The Superhawk.
I think it will even cross the country. Maybe someone should write a book about that.
:violent1:
-
OK, now you're naming other bikes? Keep a Nimbus running. A Flying freaking Squirrel? I'll stick with the first "modern motorcycle" as the oldest bike to be practical per the subject.
The Superhawk.
I think it will even cross the country. Maybe someone should write a book about that.
:violent1:
I was simply responding to your statement that a Superhawk was the first reliable motorcycle . You are aware that RE Fulton rode a '29 model Douglass L Twin around the world , right ?
Dusty
-
The first Rapides were built from 1936 until '39 , although not in any real quantities . With modern bushings in all pivot points , and modern brake linings , a guy could ride one in modern traffic . They are high effort for certain , and the suspension and brakes would feel dated .
Dusty
They do have twin drums on the front although cable operated.
I hear you about the bushes the Comet I had all of those were sloppy although it was the pins corroded away, electrolysis I think.
One thing they have magnetto ignition, they don't have a key so easily stolen if you know how to kickstart a bike.
(this goes against Richard Thompsons song, I don't know what keys he handed her lol) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0kJdrfzjAg
-
I'm going to add a vote for the Honda CB bikes. It was the first thing that came to mind when I finally looked into this old thread. I've had a 350, 550 and 750. All had the famous reliability. The 350 and 550 would be a little light on top speed cruising for anything but the shortest commutes. I am a bit biased and a bit less experienced (younger) than most here so I don't have first hand experience with any older bikes. It does look as if someone took tally of all the responses, there would be a clear front runner.
-
Lots of reliable bikes pre Superhawk but you had to spend your weekends working on them. Im currently up to my elbows in the guts of a 1963 Honda Cb72. Its like a Swiss watch inside and though its been hammered mercilessly still shows next to no wear. I changed the "strange" centrifugal oil filter for a paper filter kit from a tuner in Italy who also does some pretty nice oil cooler kits and large pump conversions. I also threw away the ignition system and replaced it with an electronic system From Charlies place along with a pair of Dyna coils. Changed to a modern reg rec as well. Brakes are good commensurate with the light weight of the bike. Also converted to LED lights. Get a good one and they are lovely. Get a bad one and they can be a nightmare. But you can get most parts and there are plenty still to be unearthed.
Ive owned 2 R90s's and when I was younger they were my only bikes. Used them as daily commuters and were totally reliable. Brakes are probably getting a bit marginal now. Back then though they were pretty cheap bikes. Um not so much now. Ive commuted on a Jota as well.
http://www.cappellinimoto.it/?language=en
-
They do have twin drums on the front although cable operated.
I hear you about the bushes the Comet I had all of those were sloppy although it was the pins corroded away, electrolysis I think.
That was a common problem , modern bushes and rebuilt pins can make a Brampton or Girdraulic fork work fairly well . In fact both of those designs are stiffer than early tube style forks . Vinnie brakes are better than a 4 leading shoe design , more progressive . Then there is that hammer of the gods engine .
Dusty
-
I did years on a 1978 Bonneville as a daily driver, year round. I didn't know enough that it wasn't good. Won't do that again - who thought chrome brake discs was a good idea?
-
I bought the first R75/5 that came to Denver. I put down a deposit when it was first announced and waited months for it. I put almost 100,000 pretty much trouble free miles on it. It did have a few teething pains in the early days but overall it was a good bike. I up graded a number of years later to a R90/6 mainly for the disc brake and the 5 speed transmission. Also the first /5's were over geared and had the short frame so the /6 was a vast improvement so that is why I suggested the /6. I have no experience with MGs from those days although a road tested a MG at the time I bought the /5. I am not sure what model it was but I remember that I liked it but the BMW was more sporty. I was young in those days. I think a lot of bikes from that era would fit the bill.
kk
-
If I hadn’t run across my Quota I was looking at a 79-83 Suzuki GS1000/1100. Or a 76-78 goldwing. Any older and handling and brakes are too scary for what I like to do. Of course this is just my opinion, which I think smells like roses...
I had a 1982 Suzuki GS1100E back in that day. Holy Cow! That bike easily satisfies my defined criteria. Heck, I’d be tempted to buy another one.
Lots of folks say Honda CB750. Fair point. And I agree since I had a mid-70s CB-500F that would satisfy the criteria. Brakes a bit soft, but if someone gave me a good one I’d commute on it for sure.
I’m not seeing anything from the ‘30s or ‘40s. Or really the ‘50s either.
Maybe the transition point really is late ‘60s. And we are definitely in the zone by the mid-70s with Honda 4 cylinders, BMW airheads, Guzzis.
-
When ever we went from points to HEI is as far back as I would want to go. :grin:
I had to look-up the Honda Cb72 from 1963 to see what it was . I was 10 years old and my cousin had one of them , it was the first bike I remember ridding on that was in 1968 and it made a lifetime impression on me.
Seeing the picture of it made me want one of them , at the time his friend had a 305 so he had the hots for a 305 . :laugh:
My 1971 Yamaha 650 twin had points and was a very like-able bike ! My friend with a 750 Honda would have to down-shift when I rolled the throttle in 5th gear and pulled away from him. :azn: He would fall behind on top end too when I'd lay down on the tank and let it run. I don't run past a hundred much anymore though , and that's OK ! :rolleyes:
-
Eye candy...
Just looking..
https://hartford.craigslist.org/mcy/d/goshen-honda-cb750-k1/7066184765.html
(https://i.ibb.co/XSK4FSj/image.jpg) (https://ibb.co/XSK4FSj)
-
When ever we went from points to HEI is as far back as I would want to go. :grin:
I had to look-up the Honda Cb72 from 1963 to see what it was . I was 10 years old and my cousin had one of them , it was the first bike I remember ridding on that was in 1968 and it made a lifetime impression on me.
Seeing the picture of it made me want one of them , at the time his friend had a 305 so he had the hots for a 305 . :laugh:
My 1971 Yamaha 650 twin had points and was a very like-able bike ! My friend with a 750 Honda would have to down-shift when I rolled the throttle in 5th gear and pulled away from him. :azn: He would fall behind on top end too when I'd lay down on the tank and let it run. I don't run past a hundred much anymore though , and that's OK ! :rolleyes:
If I look at your signature, the Suzuki Savage/Boulevard S40 also belongs on the list. Very underrated bikes, just like the Suzuki DR 650. Anyone who has not tried out either bike should do so. Big old style air cooled thumper pushes the nostalgia button (at least a little for some) with modern brakes and electronics, but not yet to the era of EFI.
Just about any bike with electronic ignition, front disc brake, and 30 rear wheel horsepower would make my list.
-
I rode a '76 RD400C for years myself, and unless the rose-tinting is really heavy, it didn't have very many shortcomings.
Nobody could fault the handling or braking even compared to a modern bike ... no maintenance to do except the chain, tires, and keep the injection oil topped up (at 1000 miles a quart, it "used" less oil than many four-strokes whose oil needs throwing away at changing time), no valves to adjust, no points to set or clean.
Cruised all day at 70 MPH at 5600 RPM or so, six speed so there's always a right gear, rubber mounted engine, no vibration, and the best self-cancelling turn signals I've ever used. Light, easy to move around in the shop ....
I'm talking myself into another one here ....
Lannis
OMG I loved the self cancelling turn singles!! Really why dont other bikes have as good a system so many years later?? Mine was geared a little steeper. I rode mostly mountan roads, and around town, so I needed a little more ommph from a stop to get my fat but moving!! She was a fun ride, and I kinda wish I kept it stashed in a corner insted of selling it WAY too cheap 10 years ago!!
-
1996 Honda ST1100. Twenty four years old is enough.
-
I’m not seeing anything from the ‘30s or ‘40s. Or really the ‘50s either.
Maybe the transition point really is late ‘60s. And we are definitely in the zone by the mid-70s with Honda 4 cylinders, BMW airheads, Guzzis.
The BMW R69 entered production in 1955.
(https://i.ibb.co/Z1MNC2z/BA904-DA9-E097-4-B15-84-B0-8-A9-C5808-ED55.jpg)
-
The BMW R69 entered production in 1955.
I co-owned a '55 model R50 , a survivor motorbike purchased when it was about 40 years old . The 500 would cruise at a comfortable 60 MPH , a bit more if needed . The top speed was maybe 80 MPH , but with the worn out suspension getting near that speed became exciting :laugh:
There were two friends who attended the MGNOC meetings that Shorty held here in Muskogee 20 years ago , one rode an Eldo , the other a '68 model R69S , we would see them together all over the area , maybe Shorty has some pictures , dunno .
Dusty
-
If I hadn't ended up with Loopframe Guzzis, an R75/5 would have been my choice as well.
I've had a Beemer and I've had a Loopframe, and every once in a while (because they suit my riding style well), I have a desire to get a R50/2 or R60/2 or an R50/5 .... but when I get ready to pull the trigger, I always think "A V700 has just as much coolness and panache and character, but is a WAY better bike in every measurable way" and start thinking Guzzi again ....
Lannis
-
I already did the classic BMW thing. It was really fun and the bike was remarkably competent, but I’m doubling down on the old Britbike thing now. Wouldn’t you know it, I get a call from a local pal about a mint 1976 R90/6. “How much,” I ask. “4,500 bucks,” Fred replies...
(https://i.ibb.co/FsVWYVP/D5-BB53-F9-2-F1-C-40-A0-8-B10-63715-AE607-A0.jpg)
Arrgg!
-
To be realistic, for me it would be any bike that one can get all the parts that is crucial for the bike to function as designed and the Ability to do any work necessary or in my case have access to that personal mechanic.
-
SIR REAL ED
Your right about the S-40/Savage from Suzuki . Started in the USA in 1984 and is still in production. I ride mine to South Texas from Tennessee every year . Takes two days to get there for me , but its right at 1000 miles one way . Last year day one was to the end of the Natchez Trace , day two Natchez to San Antonia .
Running 75 MPH is no problem but 85 is getting buzzy.
My longest day on the S-40 was a 835 mile day but I wouldn't want two of them in a roll. The fuel tank is too small but the bike/motor is plenty capable. It only weighs 385 lbs , I've never lost a slow race while ridding it ! :azn:
Yearly dose of the Twisted Sisters ! :thumb:
-
The BMW R69 entered production in 1955.
(https://i.ibb.co/Z1MNC2z/BA904-DA9-E097-4-B15-84-B0-8-A9-C5808-ED55.jpg)
Stunning bike.
-
A '76 R90 was my first BMW 30 years ago. Very dependable, and parts are everywhere. Guzzi parts (especially used parts) aren't anywhere near as accessible. And there are more places that know them and work on them, and definitely more dealers across the map. If you do your own work - and that's the thing with an older bike, you really need to be able to work on it yourself - then getting parts isn't a big deal since mail order is probably the best way to go. I have a dealer 15 miles away but I preferred mail order because the dealer never carried parts for the older machines so I'd still have to wait. And then I'd have to drive over to pick up the parts rather than pull them out of the mailbox.
A 90S is more valuable so I wouldn't tend to use as a commuter, partly my concern about being unattended in the weather all day. The only thing the 90S has over the 90/6 is the dual discs, but the /6 can be upgraded, and they do very well with good pads and the smaller 14mm master cylinder.
I'd think an older Guzzi would fit the criteria as well as the /5 or /6.
-
It would be hard to beat a sohc Honda. I have 3 750s, my fave is 71K. Plenty of parts available when needed. I stuck a cam in, it sounds knarley.
.
-
It seems that the general consensus is that for modern traffic you need to be able to run at 75 or 80 mph, and you need disc brakes. I agree, though the 4ls brake on my Eldo works quite a bit better than you might expect. That pretty much puts us into the 70's. Since this is a Guzzi forum, what I don't understand is all of the love being shown to Beemers, Hondas, etc. and hardly a mention of Guzzis. There was one mention of a t3, but no replies. You claim to like Guzzis and you want an old bike from the 70's that can function in modern traffic? Get a t3! I have had a t3 for 20 years. I ride it all over the PNW. For quite awhile it was my "main bike". If I didn't have a whole fleet, and had to go back to only one bike, it would be my " main bike" again. It has 3 Brembo disc brakes that still work quite well. Not as good as my Griso, but probably better than anything else from 1976. I put Wirth fork springs, FAC dampers, a Tarrozi fork brace and SP handlebars on the front and Hagon shocks on the rear. I always run Avon Road Rider tires. It handles fantastic for a bike of that period. About 18 or 19 years ago, I put on a Dyna ignition. It has NEVER left me stranded and has been as reliable as my Toyota, with very minimal work done to it. It is not going to win drag races, but get it going and it will run 75 or 80 mph all day long, day in and day out, getting 48 mpg. Though I prefer riding back roads, I have ridden it the 350 miles or so to Seattle on I 90 on numerous occasions, and run it up I 5 the 80 miles or so to Bellingham. That means running 80 miles an hour, in heavy, crazy traffic. Often in hard rain. It does it with no drama and no fuss. It is easy to work on and parts are readily available. I had a r75/6 for a bit. It was a very nice bike, and I can appreciate why people like them. Compared to the t3, though, it was quite boring. The t3 is faster, handles better, stops way better, is more comfortable, and in my experience, easier to work on and more reliable. The /6 was lighter and more "flickable", but that was about the only place that I found the BMW to be superior to the Guzzi.
-
While many earlier BMWs could be practical daily riders, I consider the pre 1970 BMW's to be too collectable to want to do that from a money stand point.
The 1970-1995 "Airhead" BMWs stand out as likely the most practical vintage bikes to use as a daily rider. I would also add that pretty much any v-twin Guzzi (1968 and newer shaft drive, not talking about the 135-degree Bicilindrica racer from the 1930's) would also fit the bill.
In both cases, parts are readily available, both are simple and robust designs with shaft driven drivetrains.
While I know that drum brakes can be setup to work reasonably well, I'd want to go with discs up front. It isn't hard to retrofit a pair modern four piston calipers to either the BMW's or Guzzis when starting with a disc brake model. There are even adapters available form the /6 "swinging" caliper front ends.
My Eldorado, R90S, and R75/5 are all running stock points setups, but, if I was using any of them as a daily drive, I'd surely go electronic ignition to reduce maintenance.
-
Still no consensus on anything before BMW /2 and Guzzi V700. I've had both and hands down the guzzi wins..I thought the question was for something earlier..Cannonball Run style
https://newhaven.craigslist.org/mcy/d/westport-1925-henderson-deluxe/7063890206.html
(https://i.ibb.co/C10sJ9P/image.jpg) (https://ibb.co/C10sJ9P)
-
I had a r75/6 for a bit. It was a very nice bike, and I can appreciate why people like them. Compared to the t3, though, it was quite boring. The t3 is faster, handles better, stops way better, is more comfortable, and in my experience, easier to work on and more reliable.
I've had a Beemer and I've had a Loopframe, and every once in a while (because they suit my riding style well), I have a desire to get a R50/2 or R60/2 or an R50/5 .... but when I get ready to pull the trigger, I always think "A V700 has just as much coolness and panache and character, but is a WAY better bike in every measurable way" and start thinking Guzzi again ....
That has been my experience with 70s bikes, too. I don't get all the love for the old Beemers. Sure, they are "pretty." Ride them back to back, though.. and the Guzzi wins every time. Gimme a Tonti, any Tonti. :smiley:
Of course, YMMV, and that's why they make all kinds.
-
My first bike, when I got back in to motorcycles was a 1973 Norton Commando. I rode that bike as my daily rider and my only bike for years. It was not unreliable but I could never trust it fully. A broken engine mounting bolt necessitated a call to my wife to bring the truck. A generous oil leak prompted the same. I kept up with the maintenance but it was difficult. I finally got a Honda VFR800 so I could ride more than wrench.
I saw an article in a national motorcycle magazine. One of the editors was a Velocette aficionado. His bike had been updated and upgraded and was as good as he could make it. On the way back from an event, at highway speeds, the crankcase casting split. It dawned on me that while I might build a bike to a high standard ultimately you are fighting old manufacturing processes, metal fatigue and possibly substandard materials. I knew in my heart of hearts that I could never get my Norton to reliably perform like a modern Honda.
(https://i.ibb.co/F8gx6Bs/Norton2.jpg) (https://ibb.co/F8gx6Bs)
-
I couldn't recommend a Guzzi because I don`t have any past experience with them.I felt I could only go with what I know and from the era that fits the bill there are only few that I know well enough. That includes three BMW's that I owned and a few bikes that friends have had. The Yamaha XS650 is a good bike which mostly measures up but the vibration eliminates for me. An Evolution Sportster is good but I think it is probably too new. An Iron Head, not so much. There are some others but not even worth mentioning. I have always had a soft spot for Guzzis but have never owned one until this past July..
kk
-
Le Mans - fast, disk brakes, good handling, good looks
-
I guess I've owned and ridden nearly every major brand in the last 60 years. I don't think anything older than the 83 Honda GL 650 would work for me today. Even then I would hesitate to do some of the trips I do today. As I age I find out I would rather be riding instead of working on my bikes. I wouldn't do extended road trips on anything older than an ST1100 today and they were made between 1993 and 2002. I guess that makes them old now too. The old bikes we recall with so many fond memories really where not that great. We were just younger then. I can't recall any that were really bad but none of the older bikes compare to what is out there today. I love old bikes and old pickup trucks but I want something more modern for today's traffic.
-
Any twin cylinder Vincent with all of the modern upgrades .
Dusty
Modern upgrades Dusty? That is cheating. :grin:
-
I think my 72 Ducati with Amal's could go across the country just fine. I did 2 up with my ex and camping gear on a couple of small trips. It's top end was maybe a ton but I hardly go there anyhow. The only time it let me down was on Grandfather Mt. on the BR Parkway. It went to one cylinder. The rear cylinder was fouling due to the crankcase venting into the air filter. I replaced the plug roadside and after I got home I put a PCV valve on it and vented it to the outside. No more fouled plugs after that. It really was a simple bike except when adjusting the valves. Carrying around a big selection of Winkler caps on a long distance trip would be a drag. It's total lack of vibration and it's well known excellent handling made it an easy rider even if not fast.
-
I was searching for a suitable bike made earlier than the ‘69 Honda CB750 - which would actually be the obvious choice for me, like everybody else who has mentioned it. What eventually came to mind is the first Laverda twin, in 1967 650 cc form. That might qualify as modern day practical if you could live with the brakes. I think maybe more so than the very first Guzzi V7.
(https://i.ibb.co/HqZfN62/B74-ED628-6-CBC-43-DB-8-D4-F-ECFC734-B4-FD5.jpg) (https://ibb.co/HqZfN62)
https://www.mcnews.com.au/laverda-650-twin/
Not surprisingly the Laverda was inspired by and to some degree copied smaller Honda’s of the ‘60s, but was available with more power than those Honda twins, and sooner than the Honda four. Ten years later (1977) there were all kinds of bikes that you could ride daily today. 1967-77 was really an amazing decade for motorcycle development. Then by 1983 we had ten years of Italian superbike production accomplished, mostly bikes completely useable today, and the introduction of the Honda VF750F Interceptor which at least in my mind is a functionally modern bike.
-
Maybe it is just winter but...
Took a nice ride today on the T-3 and I see no reason that I couldn't jump on it tomorrow and ride it on a major trip. Have to thank "Flynguzzi, Dusty, MotorChuck250 and FUBAR for upkeep help over the years and Moto Guzzi to have designed such a durable and enjoyable ride. That era still is a very doable ride today.
GliderJohn
-
Maybe it is just winter but...
Took a nice ride today on the T-3 and I see no reason that I couldn't jump on it tomorrow and ride it on a major trip. Have to thank "Flynguzzi, Dusty, MotorChuck250 and FUBAR for upkeep help over the years and Moto Guzzi to have designed such a durable and enjoyable ride. That era still is a very doable ride today.
GliderJohn
I agree. My T-3 is a transitional bike from an older era to the modern one, with brakes that are really adequate for today's traffic and speeds. It also has all-day usable power, more than enough for any interstate. Finally, it has a heavy flywheel effect that I find very desirable for long trips, and that is missing in modern bikes, including Guzzis. It is completely adequate and in some ways unsurpassed for highway travel. (With good maintenance, it is also very reliable.)
Moto
-
...... The old bikes we recall with so many fond memories really where not that great. We were just younger then. I can't recall any that were really bad but none of the older bikes compare to what is out there today. I love old bikes and old pickup trucks but I want something more modern for today's traffic.
Well said. The primary reason old guys (& girls) like old bikes is they transport you back..... to your youth.
Back then, their massive horsepower sped life up! Now, the same bikes lack of horsepower (relative to new bikes) slows lie down.
-
I believe the best part of the bikes from the fifties and sixties is their sustainable nature. Old bikes need for you to do things like change the oil more often, solder condensers to point sets (with a heat sink to protect the condenser), monitor generator brushes, re-torque the rockers at every valve adjustment, spark plugs every 5-6000 miles, and adjusting mixture for various altitudes...yes, the work is substantially greater than with a newer bike. However, these machines are made to be repaired over and over. There are no electric doo-dads; even starting is kick-only, but the weight is low and the maintenance/repair is simple. I rode a '60 BMW R60 for five years when I lived in Albuquerque. It was my commuter, as well as my traveler and never let me down. One really cold morning at the PITS Rally in Flagstaff it was the only bike that would start! Old bikes are a commitment, but have really great rewards...plus I sold it for more than I paid for it. It had 99,000 miles...
(https://image.ibb.co/eSivDp/BB53296-B-EA6-D-4-DEB-B3-DC-FD5436-B9784-D.jpg)
At the
-
'80 GS850G.
-
(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/RMIAAOSwfH9bUiNL/s-l640.jpg)
Landmark. The first modern motorcycle.
-
This is what I rode in the 70's...67 Triumph 650....Daily rider except in the worst weather..I lived in a city at that time and the bike served me well for about 5 years.I see no reason why a younger guy with limited funds couldn't use the same bike today.The photo was taken in 1975
(https://live.staticflickr.com/5644/23691158100_67601888a0_c.jpg)
-
(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/RMIAAOSwfH9bUiNL/s-l640.jpg)
Landmark. The first modern motorcycle.
Well , except if you read the claims made in that it all kinda falls apart . 102 MPG and 102 MPH :shocked: :rolleyes: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
The NSU Fox was probably a better example .
Dusty
-
'80 GS850G.
Nope. '81 GS850G. Better seat. :whip2:
-
I worked in a rental shop that had 3 or 4 Super Hawks. I found them to be a bit crude and the gear spacing was terrible. The 350s that we replaced them with were a vast improvement. I really liked them a wouldn't mind having one now but they go for pretty good $'s.
kk
-
Well , except if you read the claims made in that it all kinda falls apart . 102 MPG and 102 MPH :shocked: :rolleyes: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
The NSU Fox was probably a better example .
Dusty
huh? NS what? Funny.
Take away the hype and it was still all that. It would run 90 and get 45mpg. It was cheap and would start and run. Go like hell. Race it, beat it, commute it, cruise it, tour it. It was the first reliable motorcycle.
They sold thousands.
Nothing comes close. Laverda copied it. I have no idea why deny the obvious.
wiki:
The Honda CB77, or Super Hawk, is a 305 cc (18.6 cu in) straight-twin motorcycle produced from 1961 until 1967. It is remembered today as Honda's first sport bike. It is a landmark model in Honda's advances in Western motorcycle markets of the 1960s,[4] noted for its speed and power as well as its reliability, and is regarded as one of the bikes that set the standard for modern motorcycles.
-
Well said. The primary reason old guys (& girls) like old bikes is they transport you back..... to your youth.
Back then, their massive horsepower sped life up! Now, the same bikes lack of horsepower (relative to new bikes) slows lie down.
The T3, R90 or LM4 have no difficulty keeping up with traffic. Sure, the newer bikes are a bit faster, stop quicker with better suspension.
The point is, from sometime around the late 60s, bikes had evolved sufficiently to be capable every-day machines.
Those of us who prefer the older bikes aren't into them due to nostalgia or reliving our youth. It's because they're simpler machines that for a lot of reasons are better than the new stuff, whether it's aesthetics, maintenance, cost of repairs or cost of ownership. I'm sure there are other reasons.
After the 70s I believe there's a point of diminishing returns. There were improvements in all areas, but nothing like the giant leaps in the years before that. By that time bikes could do 100 - how much more is needed on the road?
-
my everyday riders in the last 15 years have been...
1970 triumph t100c. - perfect for the city, yes those TLS drum brakes can stop you in a hurry if need be. I once had to brake from 40mph to 0 to save my life and those brakes worked.
1970 moto guzzi v7 speciale (ambassador in the US). - became a perfect do anything bike after I converted the front end to discs and modern forks. Until then I would say it was marginally appropriate for modern city riding and superslab stuff.
1989 moto guzzi lemans 1000 - perfect do-it-all bike. I keep up with my friends on GXSRs in the real world. Can tour on it, do anything really.
2001 triumph sprint rs - stolen from me within a month of ownership, A bit of a handful round town, snatchy on/off FI at low throttle, but so much power!
I think mostly anything from the 70s on and you're golden.
-
Nope. '81 GS850G. Better seat. :whip2:
:thumb:
IMO to meet the definition you have to have disc brakes to make it "modern day practical." That puts you in the mid 70's or later although I'm sure some of you old geezers would call me a wimp. It also needs to be able to wear modern bias tires in fairly common sizes in case you have a flat. My mind got to either the early Wing or the GS's and my Suzuki bias kicked in.
The 850g was always the practical choice of the GS's. I had the 550T and while it did it all (I rode it Daytona bike week) the 100mi range and the chain are cons to the bigger shaft drive 850.
So there's my .02
-
'80 GS850G.
:thumb: RUN forever......... also the GS1000G Forget the CB.............Suzu ki made a better stronger engine as did Kawasaki
-
.
1970 triumph t100c. - perfect for the city, yes those TLS drum brakes can stop you in a hurry if need be. I once had to brake from 40mph to 0 to save my life and those brakes worked.
I have expereince with 68-70 TLS front brake on 650 Triumphs...I believe they are equal to the early Japanese disc brakes...Obviously how the bike performs depends on the riding, city or highway....
-
Nope. '81 GS850G. Better seat. :whip2:
I owned a 1980 GS1000G for 17 years. Hard bike to beat in lots of different circumstances.
-
The T3, R90 or LM4 have no difficulty keeping up with traffic. Sure, the newer bikes are a bit faster, stop quicker with better suspension.
The point is, from sometime around the late 60s, bikes had evolved sufficiently to be capable every-day machines.
Those of us who prefer the older bikes aren't into them due to nostalgia or reliving our youth. It's because they're simpler machines that for a lot of reasons are better than the new stuff, whether it's aesthetics, maintenance, cost of repairs or cost of ownership. I'm sure there are other reasons.
After the 70s I believe there's a point of diminishing returns. There were improvements in all areas, but nothing like the giant leaps in the years before that. By that time bikes could do 100 - how much more is needed on the road?
I agree with pretty much everything you said. Lots of different reasons for owning older bikes. Maybe due to when I came of age, born in 1959, but to me the 1970's are the golden era. Perhaps culminating in 1978 with the introduction of the Z1-R, the XS11, GS1000, and the CBX. Considering some technologies, delta box frames, etc, maybe 1988 was the real end of the golden era. I recall Cycle magazines raving about the Kawasaki EX 500. Brilliant idea, half of a Ninja 1000 motor.
Probably greatly dependent upon one's age and childhood/early adulthood experiences.
I'm referring primarily to Japanese bikes. Since I grew up on the wrong side of the tracks, European bikes, street or dirt, or for that matter any new bike at all, were never, ever considered, due to cost.
Back when there was actually information in motorcycle magazines, I recall Cycle magazine doing a huge comparison of the 1973 super bikes, Norton Commando, Z1, CB750, H2, Harley, Trident, etc. These were bikes that only the experts could master. 64 rear wheel horsepower for the Z1!!!! What a killer!!!!
Fast forward (no pun intended) to 1999 and the Suzuki SV 650 could eat them all for lunch, yet was considered a beginner's bike at the time. I bought one for my wife, primarily based on weight, not performance.
Still one of the all time great street bikes. When the SV debuted in 1999, I told one look and thought "Wow! Modern day Norton Commando!" Ended up buying two!
-
I have expereince with 68-70 TLS front brake on 650 Triumphs...I believe they are equal to the early Japanese disc brakes...Obviously how the bike performs depends on the riding, city or highway....
Fay and I ride in the NC-TN-VA mountains every year with friends; we're all on old Britbikes.
Not many of the group ride with a 400-pound two-up payload, but I do, so I'm particular about the brakes on an all day, loaded up ride on steep mountain roads.
We used to do it on my BSA A10 with a TLS brake upgrade on the front, a brake like I have on my Firebird Scambler, which I do believe is (as you say) about as good as an early disk. Good brakes, but not good enough for that job, not with my precious pillion-in-a-million behind me.
So I went hunting for a old Brit with suitable brakes. There were only two that had the brakes for that job - a Triumph Trident triple, or a '75 Norton Commando with disks front and rear. I chose the Norton and we've been riding happily ever after with no brake worries ....
Lannis
-
:thumb:
IMO to meet the definition you have to have disc brakes to make it "modern day practical." That puts you in the mid 70's or later although I'm sure some of you old geezers would call me a wimp. It also needs to be able to wear modern bias tires in fairly common sizes in case you have a flat. My mind got to either the early Wing or the GS's and my Suzuki bias kicked in.
The 850g was always the practical choice of the GS's. I had the 550T and while it did it all (I rode it Daytona bike week) the 100mi range and the chain are cons to the bigger shaft drive 850.
So there's my .02
I had a GS650G and it was a great bike! Shaft drive, and more then enough power to get the job done. Loved that bike, and had it for 20 years. Ended up selling it when the kids came.. Sorry I did, but if I still had it I would not have ended up with my Guzzi.. so thats good
-
Fay and I ride in the NC-TN-VA mountains every year with friends; we're all on old Britbikes.
Not many of the group ride with a 400-pound two-up payload, but I do, so I'm particular about the brakes on an all day, loaded up ride on steep mountain roads.
We used to do it on my BSA A10 with a TLS brake upgrade on the front, a brake like I have on my Firebird Scambler, which I do believe is (as you say) about as good as an early disk. Good brakes, but not good enough for that job, not with my precious pillion-in-a-million behind me.
So I went hunting for a old Brit with suitable brakes. There were only two that had the brakes for that job - a Triumph Trident triple, or a '75 Norton Commando with disks front and rear. I chose the Norton and we've been riding happily ever after with no brake worries ....
Lannis
Yes, The TLS front brake was great on a 400 pound 650 but marginal on the 500 pound Trident...I do believe a good disc brake is easier to control near the point of lock up..
-
Yes, The TLS front brake was great on a 400 pound 650 but marginal on the 500 pound Trident...I do believe a good disc brake is easier to control near the point of lock up..
That's a fact. The "self-energizing" nature of properly arced TLS shoes has surprised me with a "chirp" from the front tire more than once - disks never have.
This whole thread has convinced me that the word "practical" has a completely different meaning to a Wild Guzzi member in his early days on the road, where anything you could afford was by definition "practical", and the Wild Guzzi member today, for whom "practical" has a long list of "must haves" having to do with comfort (or the perception of it), convenience (or the perception of it) and safety (or the perception of it).
I used to do things that I look back on now and say "Did I REALLY do that? Wow, what a stud!" :laugh: :bow:
Lannis
-
That's a fact. The "self-energizing" nature of properly arced TLS shoes has surprised me with a "chirp" from the front tire more than once - disks never have.
This whole thread has convinced me that the word "practical" has a completely different meaning to a Wild Guzzi member in his early days on the road, where anything you could afford was by definition "practical", and the Wild Guzzi member today, for whom "practical" has a long list of "must haves" having to do with comfort (or the perception of it), convenience (or the perception of it) and safety (or the perception of it).
I used to do things that I look back on now and say "Did I REALLY do that? Wow, what a stud!" :laugh: :bow:
Lannis
You still ride an A10 that many here might consider quite crude.... :azn: I showed a photo of the 650 Triumph I rode daily in the 70's. I rode in the rain with no front fender....I certainly would have a fender on that bike today but in reality it's not much different than the 79 T140 I ride now..But I didn't ride long distances then or now so my situation is different...
-
This whole thread has convinced me that the word "practical" has a completely different meaning to a Wild Guzzi member in his early days on the road, where anything you could afford was by definition "practical", and the Wild Guzzi member today, for whom "practical" has a long list of "must haves" having to do with comfort (or the perception of it), convenience (or the perception of it) and safety (or the perception of it).
I realize more all the time that I am an "outlier" in my vehicle preferences, both two and four wheeled. But, I find the same types (if not brands) of vehicles to be just as practical now as they were in '79 when I got my license. I find "modern" technology and convenience features no more desirable now than they were then.
-
You still ride an A10 that many here might consider quite crude.... :azn: I showed a photo of the 650 Triumph I rode daily in the 70's. I rode in the rain with no front fender....I certainly would have a fender on that bike today but in reality it's not much different than the 79 T140 I ride now..But I didn't ride long distances then or now so my situation is different...
There's three main things that are different from back then, to now.
1) Back then, I didn't have a car. I went everywhere on the bikes. I only owned one at a time, so whatever I owned was what I was riding, short, long, highway, dirt, didn't matter.
Owning only a bike takes a lot of commitment. I COULD do it today but am not willing to put up with the downside.
2) Back then, I didn't have to look like anything when I got where I was going. I could be ragged, wet, and dirty and it didn't matter, because no one at the places I went CARED if I was ragged, wet, and dirty, especially me. If you wanted me to show up somewhere, you got what you got when I arrived.
Today, there ARE folks who care what I look like when I get where I'm going (a district nominating convention, a funeral, a 50th anniversary party for a friend, etc) and I'm not willing to affect their sensitivities and draw attention to my eccentricities.
3) Back then, I was willing to ride in weather that MIGHT potentially turn wet and freezing. I rode roads where I could feel the wheels slipping on the ice, I rode in temperatures that had icicles trailing from my mirrors even though the road wasn't frozen ...yet ...
WAY too much danger downside for these getting-older bones today for that sort of behavior. When you're young, you just bounce up from a low-side fall. Not now.
So what is "practical" for me has changed quite a bit over the years. I'm still putting 15K a year on a gaggle of bikes, and I can still handle a 7000 mile continuous trip, but my "limits" of "practicality" have shifted to the safer and more comfortable side.
Although if it's not going to freeze, I'm still ready willing and able to throw a tent on a 60-year-old 35 horsepower drum-braked bike and head out for a 1000 mile weekend rally. The oldsters are practical in THAT sense!
Lannis
-
I realize more all the time that I am an "outlier" in my vehicle preferences, both two and four wheeled. But, I find the same types (if not brands) of vehicles to be just as practical now as they were in '79 when I got my license. I find "modern" technology and convenience features no more desirable now than they were then.
Very well stated. I agree completely.
If I lived a different life or in a different area, maybe it would be different. Few new or newer things interest me at all. A machine is a tool and once it reaches a certain level of development, that's all I need. More or different isn't necessarily better. And I hate needless depreciation.
To me, luxury is still driving/riding and depending upon the same old machines (same models, if not the actual machines I got back then) and needing no more. I'll enjoy it while it lasts...
-
Very well stated. I agree completely.
If I lived a different life or in a different area, maybe it would be different. Few new or newer things interest me at all. A machine is a tool and once it reaches a certain level of development, that's all I need. More or different isn't necessarily better. And I hate needless depreciation.
To me, luxury is still driving/riding and depending upon the same old machines (same models, if not the actual machines I got back then) and needing no more. I'll enjoy it while it lasts...
Hmm,I was ripped on for offereing the same opinion here a week ago...Must be my abrasive personality :wink:...
-
Hmm,I was ripped on for offereing the same opinion here a week ago...Must be my abrasive personality :wink:...
Naw, just someone having a recreational zing at you, likely just to keep the party going. Not something to worry about. You can't get "ripped" on through a keyboard and screen!!
Lannis
-
I realize more all the time that I am an "outlier" in my vehicle preferences, both two and four wheeled. But, I find the same types (if not brands) of vehicles to be just as practical now as they were in '79 when I got my license. I find "modern" technology and convenience features no more desirable now than they were then.
Wat Charlie sez. I *don't want* a computer to tell me how hard to apply the brakes or throttle. I *really don't want* my motorcycle not recognizing my key(!) because some stupid antenna broke in the middle of BF Utah. Failure prone ABS? Nope.
My 79 G5 has literally been all over the country. It's comfortable, reliable, and totally rebuildable. It handles well (same frame as a LeMans) stops well, (triple disc brakes. It will easily outlive me..and.. the next guy or girl.
-
Hmm,I was ripped on for offereing the same opinion here a week ago...Must be my abrasive personality :wink:...
Sorry I missed it. If I had seen it, I probably would have happily replied the same way.
I understand I'm (happily) behind the modern curve. it's nice to know there's others around here in the same place and happy to be there. Very cool.
-
This whole thread has convinced me that the word "practical" has a completely different meaning to a Wild Guzzi member in his early days on the road, where anything you could afford was by definition "practical", and the Wild Guzzi member today, for whom "practical" has a long list of "must haves" having to do with comfort (or the perception of it), convenience (or the perception of it) and safety (or the perception of it).
Lannis
Yep, "practical" can mean whatever the hell I want it to!!!!! Cause it's my bike, my money, and my time@
Seems to me, "old," both in terms of bikes and humans is a matter of personal taste and past experience. No one knew that some bike or feature was "bad" when it was state of the art, or if it was the best you could afford.
One of my high school friends, one of the few people in high school with a car, had a Carman Ghia VW. No functional windshield defroster or heater. Not optimum in Rochester, NY in the winter, looking thru a 3" x 6" scraped section of windshield, driving down the road with the window open so the driver could scrape the outside of the windshield with his left hand. But if the heater doesn't work, does it matter much if the window is rolled down? But hey, much "cooler" (literally) to ride with him than ride the bus.
Now that we are older, we can pay more for old bikes that really aren't more functional than a modern beginner bike that costs less. But, hey it's about the emotional buttons the bikes pushes for each of us, than it is about any aspect of functionality that is measurable.
-
Sorry I missed it. If I had seen it, I probably would have happily replied the same way.
I understand I'm (happily) behind the modern curve. it's nice to know there's others around here in the same place and happy to be there. Very cool.
it's often difficult to be a minimalist in a group like this.... :wink:
-
Hmm,I was ripped on for offereing the same opinion here a week ago...Must be my abrasive personality :wink:...
Could be a South vs. North thang!
-
I'm in total agreement with Charlie as well...
-
it's often difficult to be a minimalist in a group like this.... :wink:
If there's more of us than we thought, are we still actual outliers or do we become relevant to the mode and become statistically significant...? It's been a long time since I did much with statistics.
Could be a South vs. North thang!
Maybe not- I didn't see any posts like "Well, Bless your heart!" or the Northern equivalent "Is that right?".
-
Could be a South vs. North thang!
Well..........but I am reading the Stonewall book, and it's very good! I take pride in less is better...but I am fascinated by modern engines..And have applied some of the tech, if in a limited way, to my old bikes..Old junk can be made to run nicer than it did when new..
-
Wat Charlie sez. I *don't want* a computer to tell me how hard to apply the brakes or throttle. I *really don't want* my motorcycle not recognizing my key(!) because some stupid antenna broke in the middle of BF Utah. Failure prone ABS? Nope.
My 79 G5 has literally been all over the country. It's comfortable, reliable, and totally rebuildable. It handles well (same frame as a LeMans) stops well, (triple disc brakes. It will easily outlive me..and.. the next guy or girl.
Don't ride a Ducati with Brembo anti-lock and traction control.
Never do that unless you want your world view shattered into a million pieces.
-
I’ve ridden quite a number of modern Ducatis and much prefer the ones I own, all four of them built without what I see as superfluous nonsense. I think the peak for Ducati was just after TPG took over, but before they and subsequent owners screwed up the product. That would be 1997.
-
I’ve ridden quite a number of modern Ducatis and much prefer the ones I own, all four of them built without what I see as superfluous nonsense. I think the peak for Ducati was just after TPG took over, but before they and subsequent owners screwed up the product. That would be 1997.
uhm, no.
-
Umm, yes. I have exactly what I want, based on extensive experience and the resources to buy any motorcycle available. Thanks but no thanks to excess complexity, nonsensical features, poor esthetics, dealer dependence and design for obsolescence.
You buy what you want with your cash. I’ll certainly continue buying what I want with mine.
-
Good points Tus. But my comments were clearly on the riding experience. And I was clear about that. You might not like the trade-offs but there's no comparison with riding one. Specifically the braking and handling and rideability. No comparison with gen 2 SS Duc vs a new one.
-
I agree enthusiastically about brakes. On a pavement bike the front brake has to work, which means a disc or a properly set-up big double-leading-shoe drum. My TR6R is iffy on long steep downhills -- I'd never experienced serious brake fade until I heated up this drum. So I don't consider it practical going over Colorado passes.
How about what's the newest bike that's practical today? I'm one of the Luddites who wants to do all the maintenance myself, which lets out desmo and inverted-bucket valves (tho my F650 has the latter) and nearly all black-box electronics (electronic ignition excepted). Who was the guy who rode his KTM from Europe to SE Asia only to abandon the bike when the "disabler" quit recognizing his key, and the factory couldn't or wouldn't help? In 55 years of riding I've never had a problem I couldn't fix by myself at roadside, and I'm too old to start now.
-
Who was the guy who rode his KTM from Europe to SE Asia only to abandon the bike when the "disabler" quit recognizing his key,
My point exactly. I don't want that stuff. <chewing through corncob pipe.> Sure, Honda with it's gazillions of yen in reliability testing and quality control money can do it, but small manufacturers who buy components, mix and match, and expect them to work?
The Mighty Scura is my newest bike. Yeah, it has a computer, but it is simple and reliable.
-
Good points Tus. But my comments were clearly on the riding experience. And I was clear about that. You might not like the trade-offs but there's no comparison with riding one. Specifically the braking and handling and rideability. No comparison with gen 2 SS Duc vs a new one.
Perhaps..How many guys on this site can ride a 90's 900 Ducati to it's full potential on a public road?
-
Maybe not- I didn't see any posts like "Well, Bless your heart!" or the Northern equivalent "Is that right?".
As a former NY Stater who lives in VA, I think the proper translation of "Well, bless your heart!" is "Screw you!"
I enjoy telling my Southern friends, back in NY we have a saying for these situations, the polite Southern translation of which is "Screw em if they can't take joke!"
-
Well..........but I am reading the Stonewall book, and it's very good! I take pride in less is better...but I am fascinated by modern engines..And have applied some of the tech, if in a limited way, to my old bikes..Old junk can be made to run nicer than it did when new..
Hey Buddy, I know where you live, but what a lot of Southerners don't realize that plenty of rednecks live above the Mason-Dixon Line. :wink:
I know cause I got my redneck membership card!
-
I was riding my 90’s 900SS to something near it’s full potential on a public road yesterday :smiley: I enjoy it more than I’ve enjoyed riding new Ducatis etc on the same roads. The dumbed down, numb feeling you get with traction control etc doesn’t do it for me, the last newer one I rode (a 1299 Panigale S) had about double the power that is useful, and in order to accommodate that power when it’s used in the track, the handling on the street is compromised and awkward, particularly on tighter roads.
A good friend is one of the highest volume Italian bike dealers in the US and the way he explains it is simply to say “Ducati has lost their way, no longer understand who they are, but the current customers buy a lot of bikes from me” Maybe not exactly the same as my reaction but similar.
-
My point exactly. I don't want that stuff. <chewing through corncob pipe.> Sure, Honda with it's gazillions of yen in reliability testing and quality control money can do it, but small manufacturers who buy components, mix and match, and expect them to work?
The Mighty Scura is my newest bike. Yeah, it has a computer, but it is simple and reliable.
I recall a KTM mechanic who said "Anyone who wants to take the modern adventure bikes anywhere remote should carry two things. A cell phone and a good pair of hiking boots!"
-
I don't want that stuff. <chewing through corncob pipe.> Sure, Honda with it's gazillions of yen in reliability testing and quality control money can do it, but small manufacturers who buy components, mix and match, and expect them to work?
The Mighty Scura is my newest bike. Yeah, it has a computer, but it is simple and reliable.
Exactly my view. My newest bike (of nine) is a 2002, same era and for the same reasons.
Fabio Taglioni of Ducati once said “the Japanese build easy cars, I build difficult bicycles” (this was around 1986) and while I much respect for example Honda’s capability in making complexity reliable with money and persistence, the European manufacturers in my experience don’t have that capability... and anyway I prefer to own and ride what Taglioni started at Ducati, and what Todero and Wittner built at Guzzi. These bikes are relatively simple to own, have good brakes, handling and power, and are also a great deal better looking (satisfying the esthetic imperative, as a friend puts it :grin:)
Aprilia was the first in the 21st century to attempt to build Japanese style bikes in Italy. I disliked like them in 2000, don’t like them now. KTMs can be fun to ride and are probably more Italian in philosophy than some Italian bikes today, but they are not well designed for reliability and serviceability and they are ugly as sin. BMW in 2020 builds ridiculous bikes in direct opposition to its practical tradition and manipulates its customers in a distasteful way. And so I keep my 90s Italian bikes in top condition and love them more as time goes on :wink: In addition to giving me a lot of pleasure, they are the newest bikes that are practical for me today.
-
As a former NY Stater who lives in VA, I think the proper translation of "Well, bless your heart!" is "Screw you!"
I enjoy telling my Southern friends, back in NY we have a saying for these situations, the polite Southern translation of which is "Screw em if they can't take joke!"
There are as many hillbillys here as anywhere...On Saturday night, the local Amercian Legion is the place to be....I'm a member but rarely go there beacuse I rarely consume alcohol..I don't eat "Garbage Plates" either... :grin:....i want to move south but my wife has family here....While in the Army I got along with Southerners best...
-
Umm, yes. I have exactly what I want, based on extensive experience and the resources to buy any motorcycle available. Thanks but no thanks to excess complexity, nonsensical features, poor esthetics, dealer dependence and design for obsolescence.
You buy what you want with your cash. I’ll certainly continue buying what I want with mine.
1998 900SS FE. Mighty fine motorcycle. Oh, how I wanted one!
(https://i.ibb.co/g6fsTf4/1998-Ducati-900-SS-FE-L-Side.jpg) (https://ibb.co/g6fsTf4)
-
Perhaps..How many guys on this site can ride a 90's 900 Ducati to it's full potential on a public road?
You're missing the point and have it backwards. My Duc SS 939 allows ME to explore more of MY potential on a public road, not the bike's. And if you haven't ridden one, you'll never know. Otherwise everyone would ride mopeds or EletraGildes but for some reason we all have a preference for different bikes because of the riding experiences.
-
Funny thing about this thread. I mentioned the 1962 Superhawk as the oldest viable bike. I think it was by far the oldest bike mentioned here.
And when we talk about modern bikes, I am alone discussing the virtues with the latest tech bikes (which is fantastic). So many are stuck in the 70s and 80s.
-
You're missing the point and have it backwards. My Duc SS 939 allows ME to explore more of MY potential on a public road, not the bike's. And if you haven't ridden one, you'll never know. Otherwise everyone would ride mopeds or EletraGildes but for some reason we all have a preference for different bikes because of the riding experiences.
Perhaps.... I assume you mean the new Ducati is a far more precision than a 90's Ducati....So, is it more challanging to ride a perfect machine or one that with a few flaws compared to the new one? And back to my original question, could you ride a 90's Ducati with a good suspension to it's limit on the street?
-
So many are stuck in the 70s and 80s.
As many have said here, the dawn of truly practical motorcycle was roughly 1970. For my purposes, owning a collection of practical bikes versus just one (which changes your needs and reduces time availability for each), the period of real practicality for different manufacturers is as follows. I'd argue that it extended a lot longer than 1989.
Honda and the Japanese: 1969 to date, although less so now than in say 2002.
BMW: 1973 to roughly 1995, some might say later, say 2000 or so.
Guzzi: 1971 to 2005 for big block bikes, some might say a lot later for small block bikes.
Ducati: roughly 1970 to 2002.
Buell: 2003-2009.
These are the model years from which I select bikes now. I mention Buell because the XB12s were the last new bikes that seemed to me designed for my interests. I'm trying to talk myself into a V85 TT as per the above note on Guzzi small blocks, but without result so far. Generally anything newer is no more fun and is too annoying for me to own and maintain long term along with the others - I don't use dealer service. Anything older doesn't have the performance I want.
So generally my time slot of interest is mid-70s to very early 2000s.
-
As many have said here, the dawn of truly practical motorcycle was roughly 1970.
But that's just among us and our age group, with our Ameri-centric sense of history.
Almost ever motorcycle produced since about World War I in this country has been a recreational vehicle, a toy, or at most a backup. At least that's how they were marketed, and how the vast majority used them.
In England, until the introduction of the Austin Mini, motorcycles were the working class mode of transportation for 50 years. A BSA or Ariel or Panther single, with a single or double sidecar, was the standard family transport, taking Dad to work, and taking the family to the seaside on holiday.
One might say they weren't "practical" by some standard, but people put big mileages on them .... and they could run big mileage because the speed limit in towns was 30 MPH, and outside of town it was 50 MPH until the advent of the limited-access motorway.
I've got a couple of those bikes, and they were serious practical business. In Southern California ... ? No, but SoCal isn't the whole world, or even a significant bit of it ....
If we're limited to talking about "Only by today's standards, preferences, and desires" then ....
Lannis
-
But that's just among us and our age group, with our Ameri-centric sense of history.
Well, for what its worth my father started with an ex-WD 16H Norton and progressed through BSA Bantams and eventually a Panther Sloper, trying every end of the market that he could afford to find something that worked. All of them were impractical for his very non-Ameri-centric use. He hated relying on them, every day, in real time (not history) and he'll equally tell you that today in real time, with all the nostalgia that 60 years of time has failed to generate!
I caught him the other day eyeing my carb'd SV650 with interest, its smaller and lighter than the others, but unfortunately its no longer possible for me to toss him the keys and see his reaction to a test ride. I think he'd like it if he could try it.
-
Perhaps.... I assume you mean the new Ducati is a far more precision than a 90's Ducati....So, is it more challanging to ride a perfect machine or one that with a few flaws compared to the new one? And back to my original question, could you ride a 90's Ducati with a good suspension to it's limit on the street?
I've ridden a 90's era Duc, I've got an EV and a V11 Sport, a 1200 Bandit. There's no comparison to my 939 SS. I enjoy the older machines. But I am blown away with new bike. Will all the electronics leave me on the road somewhere? I dunno and appreciate the criticism, I almost didn't get it for that reason. My Guzzis have stranded me because of a fuel pump and simple electrical connections. But there's no comparison with the riding enjoyment and performance with my 939. I've never ridden a bike in the twisties that's come close to this one. It's also more comfortable than any bike I've ever owned.
The oldest bike I could own and ride anywhere would be the 305 Superhawk. The best bike I could ride anywhere is my '17 Duc.
-
Thanks for the info, I have only ridden one fairly new bike, a friend's 2010 Triumph Speed triple...My Ducati is a 1996...So I have no clue about what it's like to ride new sport bikes...The roads around here are more friendly to my modified 79 Triumph T140... :grin:
-
If you want to compare the riding experience of the 939SS with 90s Ducatis, it’s in many ways more like an ST4S with the bags at home than a 900SS. The engine and power output of the newer bike is similar, but it’s lighter. On the positive side for the ST4 is better bags when you need ‘em and better comfort, particularly for two and if Helibars are fitted, as they are on my ST4. Also the fuel tank is about a gallon larger on the ST.
-
If you want to compare the riding experience of the 939SS with 90s Ducatis, it’s in many ways more like an ST4S with the bags at home than a 900SS. The engine and power output of the newer bike is similar, but it’s lighter. On the positive side for the ST4 is better bags when you need ‘em and better comfort, particularly for two and if Helibars are fitted, as they are on my ST4. Also the fuel tank is about a gallon larger on the ST.
I just don't there is any comparison riding them. I enjoy old bikes too but that isn't the point.
-
I just don't there is any comparison riding them. I enjoy old bikes too but that isn't the point.
Sorry, but the heading "What is the oldest bike" sort of indicates that old bikes should be the point in this thread. Maybe I misinterpreted what the op was asking. If so my mistake.
Steve
-
So generally my time slot of interest is mid-70s to very early 2000s.
We must be brothers from different mothers.. :smiley:
-
This old lump is very practical for me...79 Triumph T140D..No it's not stock.It's been modified by me with Honda Interceptor front forks, Ducati front disc and caliper, rear set pegs .etc...The engine is modified with tricks I learned from the Triumph race bike but it's not a radical engine...Sure it vibrates some but it's fun to ride, like you think left and it banks left.. and has enough speed to surprise many other riders in the straights and curves..No it's not for cross country trips or commuting long distances on the freeway and there's the kick thingy to start it....And it doesn't leak oil or shed parts.... :wink:
(https://i.imgur.com/w2cuLDIh.jpg)
-
Rough, that bike of yours brought back some fond memories.
Me with my 1982 Vision 550 water-cooled shaft drive, and my best riding pal
Paul(R.I.P.) on his '79 T140D. Photo taken around 1987 somewhere up in Tennessee..
Great times and great rides on two very different motorbikes.
(https://i.ibb.co/rxB9RZ9/IMG-20180707-223646411-LL.jpg) (https://ibb.co/rxB9RZ9)
-
I caught him the other day eyeing my carb'd SV650 with interest, its smaller and lighter than the others, but unfortunately its no longer possible for me to toss him the keys and see his reaction to a test ride. I think he'd like it if he could try it.
Damn shame he can't try it out. First Generation SV 650's are the very definition of motorcycling fun! Anyone with a pulse will agree!!!!
And IMSMO, the best looking OEM frame ever is a plus. Zlock Racing used to/maybe still does make a 744cc kit. With a rear wheel sprocket two teeth smaller than stock the 744 would wheel as easily in second gear as the SV 650 did in first gear.
-
There are as many hillbillys here as anywhere...On Saturday night, the local Amercian Legion is the place to be....I'm a member but rarely go there beacuse I rarely consume alcohol..I don't eat "Garbage Plates" either... :grin:....i want to move south but my wife has family here....While in the Army I got along with Southerners best...
You are welcome down here anytime. All my relatives say the same after visiting: "I must be an idiot not to move south from Rochester NY!"
-
Sorry, but the heading "What is the oldest bike" sort of indicates that old bikes should be the point in this thread. Maybe I misinterpreted what the op was asking. If so my mistake.
Steve
really?
-
Nobody stipulated that you couldn't have a support vehicle as part of the package.
(https://i.postimg.cc/FspkzwVF/0.jpg)
.
-
Dog.. I'd look good on that..^^^^^ support vehicle or not. :smiley:
-
what is that bike?
-
my 1982 Vision 550 water-cooled shaft drive,
My son is riding my old 82 vision I bought new back then. Once you get the carb sorted it's a very good ride,even today. Puts out 60hp and very stable in the turns. The market is cruel,it only had a two year run. Hell,I road it from NJ to Yellowstone NP and back in 83
-
This old lump is very practical for me...79 Triumph T140D..No it's not stock.It's been modified by me with Honda Interceptor front forks, Ducati front disc and caliper, rear set pegs .etc...The engine is modified with tricks I learned from the Triumph race bike but it's not a radical engine..
That would be practical for me, too, and so would my '70 TR6R if it had your brake and suspension upgrades. The consensus emerging is that we all want proper disc brakes and DIY maintenance.
-
That would be practical for me, too, and so would my '70 TR6R if it had your brake and suspension upgrades. The consensus emerging is that we all want proper disc brakes and DIY maintenance.
The stock disc brakes on the 73 and newer Triumphs are adequate but the master cylinder bore is too large and gives a "wooden" feel.But the large disc and Brembo caliper is so much nicer.The stock forks can be improved some but they give a stiff ride...The 90's Showa front ends are not a bolt on, you need to pay attention to the yoke offset ,the tubes may need to be shortened, springs fussed with and steering stem and axle fabricated...but the cost is very reasonable if the labor is free. The 41 MM forks, compared to the stock 35mm give a nice ride and better steering feel..This bike seems to vibrate less than most and 75 MPH is tolerable for short trips on the freeway.The engines are ok with 5000 rpm cruising but the rider usually isn't..
-
"my 1982 Vision 550 water-cooled shaft drive"
i test rode one when new and was really impressed, but they were just too expensive for a 550 by a long stretch. somewhere around 3,000+ which was 750 territory in 1982. that and i didn't have that kind of money to spend on a bike anyway. in those days, when a bike was 3,000 compared to 2,200, it was a mile.
another fun bike from that era by yamaha was called the 650 seca. not to be confused with the 550 and 750 cruiseresque american versions, this one had shaft drive, an 8 inch headlight, low bars, more rearset pegs and a euro feel and riding position. the pundits at the time reviewed the euro version and clammered for yamaha to import it, which the eventually did, but at 3,200. tested it, loved it, but again, way out of reach for me. like the vision, didn't sell well, dropped after only a few model years.
it was interesting that yamaha was so bold at that time. however, most will remember that the early 80s was when the japanese makers were dumping massive quantities of bikes on our market, so in the end these great, visionary (no pun intended) bikes were partially doomed by their own practices.
-
"my 1982 Vision 550 water-cooled shaft drive"
i test rode one when new and was really impressed, but they were just too expensive for a 550 by a long stretch. somewhere around 3,000+ which was 750 territory in 1982. that and i didn't have that kind of money to spend on a bike anyway. in those days, when a bike was 3,000 compared to 2,200, it was a mile.
In 1984, I bought my 1982 550Vision brand new when I lived in Venice, Florida.
It was a "Left over" model and I payed $1600 out the door. THOSE were the days!
This bike ran great and served me well. I've heard of the fueling issues but they were never pronounced in my bike. (The same is said of my 2015 GRiSO, but 27k miles later I've not been moved enough by any issues to do something about it. Love this bike but I guess one day I'll pour some of that "Beatle Juice" in it and get it correctly mapped and learn all of what I've been missing :boozing:)
The 1979 Bonnie that I bought after my time with the Vision dragged me and my girl all over the southeast for a few years. Miss that beautiful bike, did everything I needed it to do at the time for the type of riding I did and where I rode..
(https://i.ibb.co/RN5g7qY/IMG-20180707-223632274-LL.jpg) (https://ibb.co/RN5g7qY)
-
"my 1982 Vision 550 water-cooled shaft drive"
i test rode one when new and was really impressed, but they were just too expensive for a 550 by a long stretch. somewhere around 3,000+ which was 750 territory in 1982. that and i didn't have that kind of money to spend on a bike anyway. in those days, when a bike was 3,000 compared to 2,200, it was a mile.
another fun bike from that era by yamaha was called the 650 seca. not to be confused with the 550 and 750 cruiseresque american versions, this one had shaft drive, an 8 inch headlight, low bars, more rearset pegs and a euro feel and riding position. the pundits at the time reviewed the euro version and clammered for yamaha to import it, which the eventually did, but at $3,200. tested it, loved it, but again, way out of reach for me. like the vision, didn't sell well, dropped after only a few model years.
it was interesting that yamaha was so bold at that time. however, most will remember that the early 80s was when the japanese makers were dumping massive quantities of bikes on our market, so in the end these great, visionary (no pun intended) bikes were partially doomed by their own practices.
Yep, back in the day Yamaha was my favorite manufacturer. Big balls in the US market. The SRX 600 was another beauty that only sold for a year or two. I lusted after all three, but being poor white trash at the time........ as opposed to white trash now....
As I recall, the Seca 650 cost $400 more than the Seca 750, which was also shaft drive, but butt ugly!
-
I owned a Pearl White/Red-Black stripe '81 Seca 550. Kinda a sportbike/pretender. I owned it for 17 years and put 44k miles on it. I tested a 550 Vision and was impressed with it's midrange and go. Didn't compare top end to the Seca. Finally got rid of the Seca due to intermittent ignition failure. Replaced it with 1200 Bandit which I still own with 82k miles on it.
None would be the oldest viable bikes nor would compare to my newest.
-
Ed: it always struck me as odd that in a class as important as 750, yamaha didn't have a real competitor to go against the other big 3 (all chain drive, 5 speed) until they brought out the 1985 20 valve model. quarter mile times in magazines were king back then and all things being equal, shaft drive just couldn't cut it. and of course, those unusual looks, another critical factor among young men. man were we shallow.
-
I bought a CB72, a 250 Hawk, in 1962 from Dreyer Cycle in Indianapolis. I rode it to Tucson and then to the Bay Area and part-way home. I met an H-D flat-track racer in a cafe somewhere in the west. He was headed for the Midwest just as I was, so he loaded my little red Honda on his three-bike trailer between his half-miler and his mile bike. We rode together in his pickup for hundreds of miles. The Hawk was my first bike, so I was not educated enough in our sport to appreciate the wealth of stories he told me. I believe, as LowRyter does, that those two Hondas, the CB72 and CB77, were the first bikes that were practical for all kinds of uses. You didn't have to be an engineer to keep one running or to keep the lights lit or the parts screwed on where they belonged. The floor under the bike stayed clean.
They were genuine enthusiast motorcycles that young working people could afford to buy and maintain. Parts were plentiful and not terribly expensive. The brakes were powerful, double-leading-shoe front and rear. Looking back sixty years, the bike could have used a five-speed gearbox. Maybe alloy wheelrims. The dual-point ignition worked fine, I thought, and you could time the ignition with a strobe -- the rotor was marked. The rider footpegs could be mounted in three positions. The oil spinner was useless and you destroyed it the first time you tried to clean it per the instructions in the manual. There was one place to put oil, a quart and a half if memory serves. You didn't have to learn how to read British moto-jargon to maintain the thing. You could ride across town in traffic and when you reached the far side of town the clutch still worked. You could find neutral.
As I reread what I've written, I can imagine that those of you who started riding in the '70s or '80s may not find any of the Hawk or Super Hawk (305cc) qualities remarkable. In the '60s, we couldn't take any of it for granted, not on a working person's budget. LowRyter is ryte on.
-
Ed: it always struck me as odd that in a class as important as 750, yamaha didn't have a real competitor to go against the other big 3 (all chain drive, 5 speed) until they brought out the 1985 20 valve model. quarter mile times in magazines were king back then and all things being equal, shaft drive just couldn't cut it. and of course, those unusual looks, another critical factor among young men. man were we shallow.
I agree now. I owned two of the XS750 triples, a 78 XS 750 and a 79 XS 750 Special. The 1976 and 1977 models were slow and heavy, 1978 saw a dose of horsepower added and redline increased from 7500 to 9000. A couple magazines (Cycle Guide?) rated the 1978 Yamaha as the best and fastest 750. High 12 second quarter miles IIRC. Mid range torque allowed the Yamaha to stomp the Suzuki GS 750 in everyday riding. The SOHC Honda was getting long in the tooth. Yamaha seemed to give up on the 750 by 1980 when it became the 850 and lost power. Honda came out with the four valve 750 in 1978, Suzuki's GS 750 went four valve in 1980, and that seemed to become the new focus.
I think Yamaha sank a lot of money into shaft drive and viewed it as the future of big bikes. And also as a brand identifier. But better, longer lasting drive chain technology and belt drive dethroned it. And shaft drive became synonymous with big touring bikes.
My brother to this day regrets trading in his 1979 Yamaha 750 Special on a Yamaha 1100 Special. I think it was the early 80's before anyone cared about weight, and of course the GSXR 750 was a game changer.
-
There are probably people out there who would regard a NON ABS, NON traction control bike to old.
If my needed criteria for a motorcycle was dictated by its ability to get me to work (I fly) in peak hour traffic or crawl through bumper to bumper chaos or drone down a multi lane motorway or interstate it would be time to hang up the helmet.
I just watched a You Tube series where a guy rode a new Honda Monkey bike nearly 5000 miles from Melbourne to Perth and back for charity.
I guess ones persons impracticality is another's adventure.
-
There are probably people out there who would regard a NON ABS, NON traction control bike to old.
If my needed criteria for a motorcycle was dictated by its ability to get me to work (I fly) in peak hour traffic or crawl through bumper to bumper chaos or drone down a multi lane motorway or interstate it would be time to hang up the helmet.
I just watched a You Tube series where a guy rode a new Honda Monkey bike nearly 5000 miles from Melbourne to Perth and back for charity.
I guess ones persons impracticality is another's adventure.
Brings to mind the Hodaka ad of the early 1970's. A 200 lb guy rode one around Australia, almost 10,000 miles and carrying 200 lbs of gear IIRC.
-
I owned a Pearl White/Red-Black stripe '81 Seca 550. Kinda a sportbike/pretender. I owned it for 17 years and put 44k miles on it. I tested a 550 Vision and was impressed with it's midrange and go. Didn't compare top end to the Seca. Finally got rid of the Seca due to intermittent ignition failure. Replaced it with 1200 Bandit which I still own with 82k miles on it.
None would be the oldest viable bikes nor would compare to my newest.
Funny you mention that. I too had a 1981 Yamaha Seca 550 in pearl white/red with the bikini fairing. Boy, I loved that bike. Very pleasant and easy to live with. I put about 50 or 60K on it before I went to a Suzuki.
But that Seca nearly killed me. I was testing its top speed on a ratty back road on Avery Island, La near the Tobasco place. Got it up to 100 or 105 and it went into a very nasty tank slapper.
Never did it again. But it darn sure spooked me.
-
(https://i.ibb.co/gz43fxY/IMG-0577.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gz43fxY)
(https://i.ibb.co/1JSVJkk/IMG-0684.jpg) (https://ibb.co/1JSVJkk)
As old as I'll go for a trusted daily rider. 78 XS750, 79XS1100. I've owned the 1100 since 84 and has over 130K miles on it (? gets fuzzy). Retired from regular riding in the late 90's, and rode a bunch in 2005, but infrequently.
No fuel pumps, no FI, but both have electronic ignition, self cancelling turn signals, shaft drive, terrible brakes even with new MC, SS lines, and scintered pads. etc. The 750 (red) is a garage sale buy that I hoped my wife would ride, but even with custom 9" shocks and lowered seat, it was too tall. Sweet little triple. The bikes are currently in storage since 2013, and though I drained the carbs and fogged the motors before storage will have to rebuild the carbs & such. Prior to this, I would have ridden either anywhere. Hopefully one day when I retire, they will rejoin the land of the living.
-
Funny you mention that. I too had a 1981 Yamaha Seca 550 in pearl white/red with the bikini fairing. Boy, I loved that bike. Very pleasant and easy to live with. I put about 50 or 60K on it before I went to a Suzuki.
But that Seca nearly killed me. I was testing its top speed on a ratty back road on Avery Island, La near the Tobasco place. Got it up to 100 or 105 and it went into a very nasty tank slapper.
Never did it again. But it darn sure spooked me.
True enough, that bike would get a little fiddly when you approached top end. Mine gave me some warning, so I never got to the point of losing control. Some said it was the bikini fairing that caused it. I would just clamp down the preload nut on the steering bearing and it would tame it for a while- until the bearing was shot.
-
How about a 1980 BMW R80? Asking cause I just bought one. Only 166,000 miles.
Any thoughts on preferred break-in procedure?
-
My Yamaha dealer could ride anything he liked. His personal choice was a 550 Vision. I grew up on Yamaha 2 strokes. I rode 650 Yamaha twins for years. Fell in love with my GS1100 Suzuki, and lucky to live thru it. Power is addictive. Never liked the Goldwings. Actually liked the 750 Honda automatic I got to play on. I couldn't bring myself to care for the Kawasakis, I did like that 750 twin they had for a short while. My neighbor had a Yamaha triple and it was a fine bike. I lusted a long time for the Suzuki water buffalo. I've had a couple of Viragos and they were really competent, nice powerband, best clutch in the business. Never saw one with a bad charging system or final drive. Not for distance, tho. My best these last couple of decades....GS 850 Suzuki and my Cal 2. I have fond memories of my 1984 650C Guzzi. My son has a 750 Guzzi that is wonderful.
-
My Yamaha dealer could ride anything he liked. His personal choice was a 550 Vision. I grew up on Yamaha 2 strokes. I rode 650 Yamaha twins for years. Fell in love with my GS1100 Suzuki, and lucky to live thru it. Power is addictive. Never liked the Goldwings. Actually liked the 750 Honda automatic I got to play on. I couldn't bring myself to care for the Kawasakis, I did like that 750 twin they had for a short while. My neighbor had a Yamaha triple and it was a fine bike. I lusted a long time for the Suzuki water buffalo. I've had a couple of Viragos and they were really competent, nice powerband, best clutch in the business. Never saw one with a bad charging system or final drive. Not for distance, tho. My best these last couple of decades....GS 850 Suzuki and my Cal 2. I have fond memories of my 1984 650C Guzzi. My son has a 750 Guzzi that is wonderful.
Thats nice..
-
Nobody stipulated that you couldn't have a support vehicle as part of the package.
(https://i.postimg.cc/FspkzwVF/0.jpg)
That's cool! What is it?
From the exhaust, looks like it is maybe a V4?
-
Shirley :smiley: it's a V4. Whatever it is, I'd definitely look good on it.
-
Or just a v-twin with split exhaust ports.
Found it: Koehler-Escoffier v-twin
-
Shirley :smiley: it's a V4. Whatever it is, I'd definitely look good on it.
That picture is familiar somehow , I think it is a prototype OHC conversion using two BSA Vtwin engines . Don't make any bar bets on that .
Dust
-
1929 Koehler-Escoffier 1000
2 cylinders, 980 cc
Entrant: Dominique Buisson (France)
Participant, Class B | Best of Show, selected by jury
The Concorso d’Eleganza is the place to go if you’re looking for truly obscure motorcycles. Koehler-Escoffier was founded in 1912 by former Magnat-Debon mechanic, Jules Escoffier, and funded by Marcel Koehler. The company was bought by Monet-Goyon in 1929, then faded from view in 1957. Known as the ‘Four Pipes,’ this model featured a 980 cc twin with a shaft-and-bevel-driven overhead camshaft. And we suspect this might be one of the few—if not the only—remaining examples.
https://www.bikeexif.com/concorso-eleganza-villa-deste-2019
(https://i.ibb.co/gdqFYyD/1929-koehler-escoffier-motorcycle.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gdqFYyD)
-
Thanks Charlie :bow:
Dusty
-
The earliest I owned that was every day dependable was Honda 90S. Commuted every day while working in the Phillipines (before it was stolen).
-
Great thread. I rode this old bike on a 2000 mile tour of the Great Lakes last year. Snapped the clutch cable 400 miles from home and had to rig up the front brake cable. 400 miles with only the rear brake was an adventure.
(https://i.ibb.co/ZmVJbqZ/B01096-E7-9-C4-F-42-E6-91-A8-3645-DC577-B8-B.jpg) (https://ibb.co/ZmVJbqZ)
Bought this one in Silver City New Mexico and rode it that day to Colorado Springs. Two days later rode from Colorado Springs to Tipton Mich (1300 miles).
(https://i.ibb.co/170hphJ/0970-ECCE-247-E-4071-BCEC-4234-B1-A8-D7-B0.jpg) (https://ibb.co/170hphJ)
-
My Yamaha dealer could ride anything he liked. His personal choice was a 550 Vision. I grew up on Yamaha 2 strokes. I rode 650 Yamaha twins for years. Fell in love with my GS1100 Suzuki, and lucky to live thru it. Power is addictive. Never liked the Goldwings. Actually liked the 750 Honda automatic I got to play on. I couldn't bring myself to care for the Kawasakis, I did like that 750 twin they had for a short while. My neighbor had a Yamaha triple and it was a fine bike. I lusted a long time for the Suzuki water buffalo. I've had a couple of Viragos and they were really competent, nice powerband, best clutch in the business. Never saw one with a bad charging system or final drive. Not for distance, tho. My best these last couple of decades....GS 850 Suzuki and my Cal 2. I have fond memories of my 1984 650C Guzzi. My son has a 750 Guzzi that is wonderful.
Visions are real oddballs, I have this 81' but have to say my Ambo far more practical for everyday riding.
(http://scoot.net/gallery/bbs/20191124_174101.jpg)
-
I've forgotton all about the cable trick. I did that a couple of times with my R75/5. It snapped clutch cables all the time.
kk
-
I'm going to fit a rack on this and use it to go shopping. Maybe things are different here.
(https://i.imgur.com/Xeh5Qb4.jpg)
-
I'm going to fit a rack on this and use it to go shopping. Maybe things are different here.
(https://i.imgur.com/Xeh5Qb4.jpg)
Why not. I use my Convert and V700 to go shopping. Both are fitted with Pelican cases, so that makes it easy.
-
I'm going to fit a rack on this and use it to go shopping. Maybe things are different here.
(https://i.imgur.com/Xeh5Qb4.jpg)
I think I’d fit a real air cleaner to that thing if I was planning to rack up serious mileage with low maintenance.
Cool bike though
-
I think I’d fit a real air cleaner to that thing if I was planning to rack up serious mileage with low maintenance.
Cool bike though
I did 200-250 thousand miles on my old AJS?Matchless Bitsa.
I don't need no steenkin air cleaner. :grin:
Just change pistons and rebore on a regular basis. :thumb:
-
seeing this photo, I couldn't resist
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-HR54K8eED8I/U70BNI5jU0I/AAAAAAAAG40/IGA6kRGh-NM/s1600/Steve+McQueen+19.jpg)
-
At different times in my life from 17 years old on I have had bikes for daily's. '70 Kawi H1 triple, '79 Suzuki GS1000sn, GS 550L (sucked), BMW R90/5, /6, R100s, '77 and '79 Honda GL1000, Ural 650, '79 MG G5 (one of the best), '66 then '67 BSA A65L (both converted to tls front brakes), '68 MG Ambo, BSA B44vs (NOT recommended for top speed or comfort or brakes).The Honda's and the Suzuki were easily made for the criteria. But currently my '67 Bsa does that commute easily (with the '69 tls brake upgrade). But the Ambo does it soooo much smoother. The Ambo wears an old Steib s350 sidecar for use a school bus taking my youngest to middle school. The BSA is for the days that I miss leaning into corners.
I guess the point is, you need more than one. Switching up every other week makes you appreciate the differences. It also keeps you on your toes trying to remember shift patterns and which foot to use!