James England- questions for you

[mharrington]

For Mr England and anyone else from the UK who was into cycle in the 1970s. Ive had a fascination lately with bikes from the 1970s of poor quality- but that are very valuable today. Thus- BSA, Triumph, Norton- Harley Davidson...
When the XS650 became available in the UK how was it received by die hard dedicated Brit bike loyalists? I know the Yamaha offered verticle twin 650cc riding fun but with reliability not found with the others- and less expensive. Was there a true hatred for the Yamaha by loyalists? Did a Triumph buddy and riding partner disown you for buying a Yamaha? In a drag race how did the XS650 do against the Brit 650s? How about the Honda CB450 twin` was it desirable over there? Then how about the super powerful Japanese inline fours- how were they received and perceived? Honda CB750 four and then the big Kawasaki Z900 Four?

I work with some Harley guys and even though they are just joking I can tell deep in their heart they dont like the big Japanese 4 and would never own a metric even if their lives depended on it. I enjoy the sound of a verticle twin and a big V Twin but what is not to like about a big inline four that rips your arms from your shoulders when you accelerate?

I am crazy about my XS650. Neat torquey cool raw bike- kinda small but still fun. I love my XS1100 too. Smooth fast and hauls a passenger-all in style.

So I am wondering how a Japanese inline twin- the XS650 was received in the land that really invented the verticle inline twin.

[Crusty Snippets]

Seventies.

James, thanks for asking.
But lets not forget the Kawasaki 650 twin, a copy of the BSA. Very few know about this bike.
As a street bike the 650 twin Yamaha was quite popular. Mainly because it did not leak oil. As the years go by they also went faster in the minds of their ex owners. I have heard 120 to 125 quoted. Dreamers.
The handling was awful and they did vibrate. Yvon ( Miguel's dad ) road for Yamaha. He was required to ride the 650 in the production class. He deliberately threw one away at Westwood BC in the esses. I was there.

The CB450 was popular for similar reasons and there was a lot of hot rod stuff available. The torsion bar valve adjustment was also unique.

The Kawasaki 900 was a good motor in a lousy frame, okay for straight line stuff like the 500 and 750 two strokes. Bloody awful handling.
A 900 motor in a Rickman frame was a fast good handling bike at the track near Seattle WA. I still beat it tho.

The Triumph 750 twins of the early seventies were nice bikes but had too many flaws and warranty problems.

What upset the apple cart was the CB750 by Honda. Fast, reliable, smooth, everything that the British failed to produce.
I would file a warranty claim to Honda, on about one in ten bikes. Warranty was 6 months.
I would file about 3 claims per every Triumph. Warranty was 3 months.
Honda welcomed the claims and wanted to fix the problem. Triumph did not.

Check Robins classic bikes on line, to see how much money is being asked for early British bikes. The buyers likely never rode the stuff when it was new. For the same amount being asked for a 750 Norton, I could buy a GXSR 1000 Suzuki.
Speaking of the Norton, that isolastic suspension handled bloody awful.
And there were lots of warranty problems. The Norton that Williams rode at the IOM in 71 had some interesting changes to the rubber mounts. I was there.

With the exception of the 650 Yamaha I have riden all of the above and in most cases sold the above.

My best twin was a 650 BSA A7 ( 500 ) with A10 ( 650 ) barrels a rocket cam, hepolite pistons and so on. That was in the sixties.

Unkle Crusty

[mharrington]

"My best twin was a 650 BSA A7 ( 500 ) with A10 ( 650 ) barrels a rocket cam, hepolite pistons and so on. That was in the sixties."

Great reply. How was the reliability of your modified BSA? I forgot to mention the KZ Kawasaki 750 twin. I will say the Kawasaki was 100cc larger with dual overhead cams than the XS650 but yet the Yamaha accelerated slightly quicker.

Mr Snippit- were the Japanese bikes loathed with deep seated hatred by the Triumph and BSA fans? By the way I think the BSA with the chrome plated tanks are beautiful bikes....But the "Divers Helmet" look of the XS650 is a wonderful thing too!

What about when Suzuki brought out their GS750?

[TomB]

My experiences are of mixed feelings to the Jap bikes, they were appreciated for the modern features and electric starts.

My feelings are that the british bikes of the era were built on out of date worn out machine tooling which gave problems for build quality, and faults with them were not ironed out by continuous development, something the Japs seem good at. All of this can be attributed to the management of the time.

The Japanese have built some crap bikes but are good at quickly moving on and building something else, if you build enough different models the good ones get remembered and the crap get forgotten.

I own a 1966 Triumph 500 I built from parts that I went through blue printing everything in a very Japanese style of being meticulous, from first running it I thrashed it upsetting a few Jap bike owners, its reliable needing no maintenance other than the same a CB750 requires, I also own a CB500 four, the Triumph gearbox is far superior. A well built/maintained Norton Commando (with Norton Mod done to the Isolatics) will easily match a CB750 on the road .....as long as you have a good boot for kickstarting as the later electric start versions were a poor add on to an old design not suited to it. A mate has a Triumph 650 Trophy, that thing is a joy to ride, I would prefer to ride that than any XS650 even though I like the XS650's.

I can see why the Jap bikes gained a reputation earlier than the 70's, I own a '62 CB72 250, similar to your CL72 Hawks. Can you imagine the reaction to a 250 size bike in 1962 that came with 12V, electric start, flashing indicators, twin leading shoe front and back brakes, rev-counter, and power absolutely unheard of back then on a 250.

I love the big Jap fours, and love the early Jap twins, and love the British twins, they're all great bikes to ride if maintained well, yes I can see why folk went off Brit bikes because of poor quality having had to correct some of my Triumph crap quality when building it. However I have to do as much work on my Old Jap bikes as I do on my Triumph, look at our XS1100's and how many mods we have/choose to do.

[Crusty Snippets]

BSA and others

I am moments away from hoping on Bluzu in the rain.
More long winded post later. Thanksgiving weekend in Canada.

A quick note. In the early 70's Triumph was having bore problems, as in drilling round holes. Barrels were lasting about 20,000 miles.
They used to last 50,000.
The Triumph techies explained to us how difficult it was to drill a round hole.
At the same time Honda had a machine, drilling four quality round holes for the CB750. The cylinder blocks were on a conveyor. I watched the movie.

If the Norton engine was made to produce any decent horsepower the crank would break. Mine made 85, same as the John Player Nortons. That was max for the crank. We could make more power by increasing the revs but the piston speed was too high. 7600 feet per minute if I remember correctly.
The math is easy.

Triumph leaks later.

Unkle Crusty

[mharrington]

This is very interesting! The Kawasaki 650 twin was mentioned- I think here in the states that model was not offered- at least in the 70s. I was born in 1969 but had older brothers and their friends- and my dad all into bikes. Not many Brit bikes were I grew up in Michigan. My dad briefly owned a Yamaha TX750 twin. It was mint and only 4 years old when he got it. The way he road it Im sue it would have lasted forever but my 17 year old brother locked up the motor. That was around 1979. I learned recently that engine would froth the oil when revved to redline and starve the engine of lubrication. Like I said- would have lasted my dad forever but my brother did it in! That's a Bike I believe Yamaha wanted people to forget about.

Here in the states die hard Harley guys cant stand any rice burner even though they grew up riding dirtbikes- 3 wheelers-quads. I can see why after WW2 the Japenese bikes were despised. But the guys I know whom dislike the jap stuff give a pass to BMW, Ducati, Triumph,BSA, Norton- and those bikes are from countries the US had a war with as well. Interesting cultural stuff.

I see Kawasaki makes a W800- an inline twin that looks wonderfully nostalgic. Not avail here in the states. I was disappointed that this 800 twin doesn't even make 50 hp though. I also recently learned Kawasaki was all set to release the first Japanese 750cc inline four in the 1960s but Honda beat them to the market. Supposedly Kawasakis prototype 750 four was no faster in the 1/4 mile than the Honda CB750 so....Kawasaki upped the displacement to 900- thus the Z900. In the 1960s the USA had musclecar wars- whatever car could do the 1/4 the fastest was king- nevermind braking and handling! Emissions killed the muscle car around 1972 but BOY DID THE MUSCLE BIKE WARS START UP THEN! Every year a new 1/4 mile king was crowned (at least it seemed) Kawasakis crazy 2 stoke H series bikes, KZs, GSs, XS1100, CBX Honda 6 cyl............And what the hell was up with that Frankenstein KZ1300 liquid cooled inline 6 cyl Kawasaki?

Looks like I got off the original subject matter a bit.
Anybody know why the Suzuki GT550 and water cooled GT750 2 strokes were so slow in the 1/4? The other 2 strokes of the day would destroy them in acceleration.

[TomB]

Triumph leaks later.

Haha yeah, it took me a while to get my head round them, I ended up making my own pushrod tubes and seals for them, and skimming all the mating surfaces and ditching all gaskets apart from cylinder base and head gaskets, a practice I still use on my XS11's.

While talking about the CB750's and reliability, did you lads get the chocolate camshaft bearings chewing up, or the later CB900 DOHC cam chain tensioner failures, or the CBX cam chains snapping, got sick of rebuilding them with new chains.

Suzuki electrics, oh man!!! don't remind me!!

Yamaha gearboxes!! OH NO!!!

later Kawasaki Z1000J or GPZ Ninja or Z750L with oval jugs, if we're mentioning none round holes, all my mates bought them and all had warranty claim after warranty claim, using more oil new than my 80K mile XS does now.

When I look back like that maybe the Brit bikes and Jap bikes ain't so different


.

[Mathh]

Looks like I got off the original subject matter a bit.
Anybody know why the Suzuki GT550 and water cooled GT750 2 strokes were so slow in the 1/4? The other 2 strokes of the day would destroy them in acceleration.

Yup... Kawasaki was already in the process of building it power image. Suzuki deliberately went for comfort, economy and reliability instead of 1/4 mile times.

[mharrington]

I watched via youtube a 2 hour History Channel show on the motorcycle made around 2003. I was off due to back surgery so I had lots of time!!!!!! Love the show.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mghAJy94KUE

[Crusty Snippets]

Leaks and stuff

The new Triumphs in the show room would leak oil before we had serviced them, as in added fluids. The older bikes had a separate tank which worked well. From the oil tank was a breather tube. Same thing with Norton. When the horsepower and revs were increased, the breather from the tank would blow an oily mist.
This was fixed by putting the aft end of the breather into a big block of foam.
The foam was housed in the tail piece of my Norton.

Triumph made the back bone of the frame larger to hold the oil. A steel plate was bolted to the bottom. It leaked. Rather than machine the surface, Triumph changed to an aluminium plate that bent to match the oil tube / tank.

Most Triumphs, Nortons, BMW and Motto Guzzi were using four speed gearboxes and no oil filter. The CB750 had an oil filter and five gears. A Quaife five speed was available for British bikes for a lot of $$.
Some of the above were still using small drum brakes. A Guzzi and some Triumphs needed about 180 feet to stop from 60mph. About the same as a 37 Ford on cable brakes. A CB400 needed about 120 feet.
Most of this group required the sludge trap to be cleaned at about 50,000 miles. Many BMWs exploded because this was not done.
Opening an engine and cleaning inside did not appeal to bikers in the 70s.
A few of the Triumphs had a front disc and five gears.

My piston speed number previously posted was wrong. Should be 4600 feet per minute not 7600. 3.75 inch stroke X 2 X 7500 revs divided by 12 equals 4687 feet per minute. If the crank was not perfectly balanced the explosion would happen sooner rather than later. I always used an on off switch, not a press button requiring a constant pressure. Not easy to do when crashing.

The British guy that went 232 on a 650 Triumph at Bonneville was a genius.
Streamliner running fuel. Info on the Bonneville Salt Flat site.

Unkle Crusty

[Crusty Snippets]

Midgets

Midgets were a boon to the bike and speed shops.
The big units had a max of 221 cubic inches, and the three quarter midgets were 650cc. Which meant the the bike shops got lots of experience hot rodding Triumph and BSA engines. My BSA required much aluminum welding on the engine casing. With friends at an airline ( name withheld ) I was able to get the welding, xraying and so forth done at mates rates. Helicoils were used on the BSA and later the Norton to hold things together. With the cam specs from a BSA rocket, a local machine shop ( Mundell and Slaughter ) could built up the stock cam with stelite, and then grind to specs. Hepolite pistons were available and porting was well understood.

Used to be if there were two broken down bikes on the road it would be a BSA and Harley.
The Harley riders ( back to James original question ) never really mixed well with the rest. It is likely worse now than before.
They pay twice as much for a bike that is slower than most others. All they can provide is criticism. None will chat if I am on Bluzu. Some will chat if I am on Yami. Most will chat if the sidecar is on Yami.

In 1934 Norton made a primary chain case cover that leaked oil. It was still leaking in 1968.
My 1968 350cc Kawasaki was faster than a 650 Bonneville.
My 1971 Norton Commando had many warranty problems, and would not exceed 110 mph.
My Kawasaki 500 would not go where I pointed it. The 750 Kawasaki had a high end vibration that caused the throttle piece to rotate and prevent the front brake lever from pulled in. One dead friend, and one very busted friend resulted.
The 70s were ripe for change. The Japanese bikes provided it, the British did not change.

The 1972 750cc Triumph Tiger with a front disc and five speed, was a nice bike once the glitches were fixed. They were still handling better than the Japanese bikes.
A 750 Guzzi Sport was better. The Guzzis were a better cruiser than the BMW IMO. But the best bike in my show room was a CB750.
And a 180 Vespa or a 200 Honda were great for around town travel.
My town bike back then was a 500 BMW with earls forks. Very comfortable, awful handling. Later the best around town bike was a CB400 four.

Unkle Crusty

[Crusty Snippets]

Question

Just re read the original post.
The question was for James not by James.
Short answer. In 1971 when I was in England, the South of London bike shop that I was in, had Nortons, Triumph, Rickman frames either frame only, or with a Royal Enfield motor. There were few Japanese bikes about.
I bought Norton for myself, a Rickman frame for a friend and the other guy with me got a Norton.
We had sold our mutual share in a Kawasaki H1R which was the factory road race version of the 500 triple. I had also sold a 250 Bultaco.
In the very long line up to the ferry heading to the IOM, I saw very few Japanese bikes. A CB450 from Holland was all I can remember.

Friends Norton did not make it across London. The O ring on the chain case cover was not installed correctly. He had other problems but had gone a separate way.
My Norton would dim the headlight when the brakes were applied, blow up the ignition advance system, seize the top end from lack of oil, and had a hinge in the middle over uneven terrain. The oil lines to the top end had solder blocking the oil flow.
And it could not exceed 110 mph. Never again would I buy British bike.

I also had some handling problems with the 500 Kawasaki. Never again would I buy a bike that did not go where I aimed it.

Fast forward and we know why I love my XS11 and SV1000.

Unkle Crusty

[jetmechmarty]

J
As a street bike the 650 twin Yamaha was quite popular. Mainly because it did not leak oil. As the years go by they also went faster in the minds of their ex owners. I have heard 120 to 125 quoted. Dreamers.
The handling was awful and they did vibrate. Yvon ( Miguel's dad ) road for Yamaha. He was required to ride the 650 in the production class. He deliberately threw one away at Westwood BC in the esses. I was there.Unkle Crusty

I bought a new XS650 in 1983. That was the last year for the model. Back then, I had to see how fast it would go. Using the tach and the speedos of two chase bikes, we figured I ran out of poop at 112 mph. I think that was pretty damn fast for a bike of that price point, even if I'm off by a few mph!

I still have that bike and ride it regularly. I find it's handling comfortable on twisty mountain roads. I have ridden the earlier models and by 1983, there had been some improvements. The extra weight may even absorb more of the vibrations.

When I was 10 to 14 years old (born 1959), it was a Triumph that I wanted. The Yamaha TX models came next on my wish list.

[Crusty Snippets]

Top speed

[QUOTE=jetmechmarty;423876]I bought a new XS650 in 1983. That was the last year for the model. Back then, I had to see how fast it would go. Using the tach and the speedos of two chase bikes, we figured I ran out of poop at 112 mph. I think that was pretty damn fast for a bike of that price point, even if I'm off by a few mph!

That sounds more reasonable. Hitting the ton ( 100 mph ) was about all any of the earlier 650s would go. Listen to Mike Sarn " Bird up on my bike "
The BSA Rocket was quoted as going faster. But like my Norton that was claimed to do 120, I think the advertising department were dreamers.

Go back to 1972, about the year of the original question. Triumph and BSA are stalled. Only thing new is the triple 750, which is derived from the twins.
And Norton is still playing with an antique design.
Meanwhile Yamaha, Honda, Suzuki plus other brands are advancing new designs that are improving.
The Suzuki 500 twin was a nice bike to ride. Still two stroke but probably handled better than all the rest. Their 500 road race bike was a rocket for Jim Allen, the number one plate in Canada after Yvon Duhamel.

A side note. BSA had a nice 450 on the drawing book, that was never built.

[mharrington]

These stories are great. The Discovery Channel had a short lived show called Philly Throttle. This shop repaired and restored pre 1980s bikes. The show focused on Brit bikes and some 1940s Harleys although I saw a SOHC 750 in their shop.

The Japanese did force Harley to do better. Sounds like BSA Triumph and Norton were to far gone to pull out success- in the 1970s anyway.
I like the newest Triumph twins. 800 plus cc inline twin and 63 hp sounds pretty fun.