Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-07-2009, 08:18 AM   #11
nferr
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 33
Default

Nice bike. I could see myself owning one of these someday. Comfortable, nice looking and only a little over 300 pounds. Seems to have decent performance from that little single too. There are rumors that Triumph is/was working on a 500cc bike in this vein. That would interest me.

Last edited by nferr : 10-07-2009 at 08:20 AM. Reason: addition
nferr is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 10-07-2009, 08:23 AM   #12
acecycleins
Founding Member
 
acecycleins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: North Georgia
Posts: 4,129
Default

Love to see a scramble version of this bike. I'd pay $200 more for high pipes and slightly longer suspension. It'd be a great camp ground toy.
__________________
"Slack" - a state of being in which everything flows smoothly.....a frame of mind so at ease that the universe naturally cooperates.
acecycleins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2009, 09:33 AM   #13
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin_Duke View Post
We knew at least one of you malcontents would comment on this. You cherry picked the dissimilar bikes from the early '70s rather than note the similar ones (inline-Fours) a little later on:

- Kawi Z1, KZ650, KZ750, Z1000
- Suzuki GS550, GS750, GS850, GS1000.
- Honda CB350, CB400, CB550, CB750
- Yamaha was the most independent thinking, but it still had bikes like the XS1100, FJ600 and Radian, plus 550, 650, 750 and 900cc four-cylinder models.

If there wasn't a lot of common elements in the '70s and '80s, then why are we all familiar with the term UJM?
And things differ today, how?
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2009, 11:02 AM   #14
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default

Everyone needs to calm down here! It's not like Cruz Yurup dissed your Mom or anything!
__________________
I'm a knucklehead
longride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2009, 01:09 PM   #15
anrajala
Founding Member
 
anrajala's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,490
Default Too shallow oil pan

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin_Duke View Post
We knew at least one of you malcontents would comment on this. You cherry picked the dissimilar bikes from the early '70s rather than note the similar ones (inline-Fours) a little later on:

- Kawi Z1, KZ650, KZ750, Z1000
- Suzuki GS550, GS750, GS850, GS1000.
- Honda CB350, CB400, CB550, CB750
- Yamaha was the most independent thinking, but it still had bikes like the XS1100, FJ600 and Radian, plus 550, 650, 750 and 900cc four-cylinder models.

If there wasn't a lot of common elements in the '70s and '80s, then why are we all familiar with the term UJM?
I get your drift. If we think of UJMs as inline-4 Japanese they are very similar. But if the definition of UJM is any Japanese from -70s the correct term surely is "amazingly different".

... and we must add to the list the key players Gold Wing (4-cyl 4-stroke boxer) and Yamaha XS750 (3-cyl 4-stroke). Who could ever forget the howling noise of the three-winged Yammie abruptly ending up in a complete engine meltdown due to too shallow oil pan?

- cruiz-euro
anrajala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 07:42 AM   #16
hayser
Founding Member
 
hayser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 18
Default Awesome little bike.

I knew this bike would be a hit. If it could be modified like a Royal Enfield with the Cafe kit and others, it could become very popular among people who would like to customize it. Although it does look nice now.
hayser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 10:30 AM   #17
theDuke
Founding Member
 
theDuke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 94
Default California Certification?

Darned CA emissions strike again. I liked this bike when I first saw it... but then again, I actually bought a GB500 new back in the day and later got a W650 so I am definitely a fan of simple light-weight bikes and have a soft spot for spoked wheels.

Given the bike's fuel injection, is the lack of CARB certification really a question of emissions or a cost-saving move on the part of Suzuki due to the cost of testing?
theDuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 11:24 AM   #18
Kevin_Duke
Motorcycle.com Staff

 
Kevin_Duke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theDuke View Post
Darned CA emissions strike again. I liked this bike when I first saw it... but then again, I actually bought a GB500 new back in the day and later got a W650 so I am definitely a fan of simple light-weight bikes and have a soft spot for spoked wheels.

Given the bike's fuel injection, is the lack of CARB certification really a question of emissions or a cost-saving move on the part of Suzuki due to the cost of testing?
The usual issue for Cali certification is evaporative emissions. I'd expect Suzuki to bolt on a charcoal canister soon so it can sell these in the country's biggest market.
Kevin_Duke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 11:42 AM   #19
theDuke
Founding Member
 
theDuke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 94
Default Evap emissions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin_Duke View Post
The usual issue for Cali certification is evaporative emissions. I'd expect Suzuki to bolt on a charcoal canister soon so it can sell these in the country's biggest market.
I do have to laugh a bit at those charcoal canisters on bikes. Their purpose is to capture evaporative emissions while the tank is being filled with gas, yet I've yet to find a motorcycle gas tank that can accomodate the filler neck from a gas pump. It's usually necessary to hold the California emissions "bellows" device up with one hand to switch the pump on... thus leaving a gap between the pump and the tank and negating the benefit of the evaporative controls system. Am I missing something here?
theDuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2009, 12:01 PM   #20
The_AirHawk
Founding Member
 
The_AirHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Leanin' Tower O' P-P-P-P-POWAAAAAAAAA!!!!
Posts: 11,490
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theDuke View Post
I do have to laugh a bit at those charcoal canisters on bikes. Their purpose is to capture evaporative emissions while the tank is being filled with gas, yet I've yet to find a motorcycle gas tank that can accomodate the filler neck from a gas pump. It's usually necessary to hold the California emissions "bellows" device up with one hand to switch the pump on... thus leaving a gap between the pump and the tank and negating the benefit of the evaporative controls system. Am I missing something here?
Just because you put the cap on the tank, doesn't mean the fuel has stopped evaporating.
__________________
Parfois, on fait pas semblant
Sometimes, it's not pretend
Oderint Dum Metuant
Let them hate so long as they fear
политики предпочитают безоружных крестьян
Politicians Prefer Unarmed Peasants
Nothing to see here, Citizen. Move along now...
The_AirHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off