Suggestions for lightweight runabout?

bad form post:

http://images.google.co.uk/images?svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=CX5
00&btnG=Search

Mine Dew, that was a Continental colour. Smart, thobut.

We got the 650 in a deeper red whch was *really* nice.

 

http://www.elsham.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/cx500/history/

 

What a good site!

Love the archive snap of the CB200 hybrid. And that D "De Luxe" version
has the ugliest seat I have ever seen on a motorcycle.

I remember the CX400 version from when I was a student in France in the
late 1970s - they got a lot of sleeved down 500s and 550s like the
XJ400 and GPz400. I always thought a CX400 would be a bit gutless....

The poor old 650 version never sold in the UK because most insurance
companies (well, Devitt and NU, who between them commanded most of the
market) at the time had policies running to 600cc, above which
everything was classed as "unlimited". So why pay masses to insure a
650 when a Z1000 or similar would be the same?

Always been equivocal about the CX - loved the comfort and engine,
admired the incredibly advanced thinking that went into the design,
especially as regards maintenance, never really liked the handling.

 

I'm not sure I've ever had a 'hatred' of them, although it's true that
I've not owned one since about 1980 (a C90 I used as a runabout). But
I share your views <snipped> on the CX. Fucking abortion of a
motorcycle, it was. All extant examples should be crushed for the good
of humanity.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2
`\|/`
`

 

Champ wrote:
pushrods.

Something they're maintaining with the VFR.

Corporate pride and all, but surely at some point they have to upgrade
the engine size and drop the trickery which they've proven with their
own Fireblade is utterly unnecessary...

I might consider one then.

 

I think you're missing the point here. Carb/knee interface problems
existed on some Guzzis too. As for watercooling, Honda realised this
was the way bikes were going to have to go, as much for noise regs as
anything else. The more I look at a CX engine, the more I think what an
incredibly thoughtful design it was. Shame they never developed it into
(say) a 750.

Here I agree. Turbo-ing a vee-twin was just daft.

Sometimes, yes.

 

That's part of the attraction of owning one - its a bike that arouses strong
feelings. People generally seem to be at one extreme or the other - liking
or loathing but rarely without an opinion.

 

I don't see why?
If you knew about the cam chain (1) and rocker hardening woes, dealt
appropriately, they were excellent workhorses.

You could have the engine out the frame in 20 mins and the 'chain was
then a cinch to replace. Back in the frame and watered up in another 45
mins. The rockers could be done in situ.

The only other trouble I can recall was the occasional water pump seal
(ceramic).

We had a small fleet of them for courier work, I liked them and liked
working on them.

(1) if you ever saw how small the crank drive sprocket was, and the
subsequent tightness of the chain run around it, one could immediately
understand the root of the wear problem.

 

I'd argue that point: air cooling fins are bulkier than water jackets.
Water cooling (spit) does quieten engines and give faster warm-up, and
potentially greater cooling for hot climates, too.

I prefer air cooling for road bikes though, simply because of the
extra hassle water that cooling brings.

Weell, the twisted barrels were to tuck the carbs in , but any
transverse Vee-twin has that problem. Honda used a narrow-angle twin
to make the bike narrower, too. I think it was quite clever. And how
they managed to wring nearly 10K RPM out of a pushrod engine...

That does seem odd.

<wild guess:>
Maybe they wanted to increase the model life and felt that the only
way to do it was by increasing the power, and the only way to do that
was to turbo it. The pushrod valves would limit top-end breathing, but
a turbo would get round that.

They do seem to go in for that.

 

Nonono, I was expressing an opinion.

 

TOG said...

NU's capaicty brackets went:

Up to 100cc
101 - 225cc
226 - 350cc
351 - 600cc
601 - 900cc
Unlimited.

You don't remember the kerfuffle regarding NU's insurance brackets when
the original CB900F and then the GPZ900 came out then?

 

Nah, I'm with Champ here. The Turbo Race was on, and Honda decided to
showcase their technology and prove they could turbocharge a vee-twin.
of all things.

If they wanted simply to increase the power, hogging the thing out to
750 or large would have been easier.

 

That's right!

I remember now.

 

I very much liked everything about my Guzzi V50 except the lack of
oomph and the need to carry a full electrical repair kit around with
it. But having once dropped a bigger bike in snow on a deserted
hairpin, and found I was too cold and tired to lift the bastard up on
a slippery surface, I'd long ago decided that in general a 500 was as
big as I could handle as a general purpose bike.

At 35,000 miles it had already needed a new clutch, two new ignition
switches and sundry minor tinkerings. It was a delight when it went,
but all too frequently it wasn't feeling too well. While considering
dragging it out of the shed, fitting a new starter motor, and getting
it going again, I spotted an old CX500 with 35,000 miles on it and
bought it to see if I liked it, and if I didn't at least I'd have a
rideable bike until I got the V50 going.

It's taller and heavier and feels dodgier and less predictable in
corners, but it's already demonstrated a most endearing level of
imperturbably solid reliability in all weathers.

It's not fair to compare it to a sports bike, that's not the kind of
bike it's meant to be. It's meant to be a reliable low maintenance
long lasting general purpose bike. In general terms that means a more
conservatively specified and heavier engine. It was very popular with
couriers because it was a good member of that rather sparsely
populated category of motorcycle, the sensible workhorse.

Now I'm a pensioner I no longer have the reactions and concentration
to guarantee my immortality while scaring inattentive car drivers. I
prefer these days to do my overtaking by failing to decelerate rather
than by accelerating. Nor do I have the income to support a bike with
expensive tastes. This CX500 looks to me like a suitable bike to grow
old on.

 

I doubt it. What people seem to forget is that even the youngest CX is
20 years old now.

If the swinging arm hasn't rusted away from the inside yet, it's about
to ;-)