Bikes we love to hate!

I was just reading through the October issue of Two Wheels magazine which is an Australian bike rag that's celebrating 500 issues since 1968. Anyway, part of their best-of/worst-of line up included the subject list. It reads as follows:

1. Norton Combat - too high compression - destroyed crank within 2000km
2. Yamaha TX500/750 - gutless, oil frothing probs, other probs with overheating and the crank
3. Suzuki GT380 - detuned to coma-inducing boredom, worthless brakes

4. Honda VF750F - (exact words reproduced here in full) - It promised so much. The original V4 engine used to eat its cams and bearings, not to mention that 16-inch front wheel was like pushing a laden wheelbarrow around the garden. Honda's VF750F followed the disastrous VF750S (a shaft-drive sports-tourer abomination) and promptly had such cam issues it almost sank the boat. Still, to make amends, Honda built the VFR, which led to the RC30 and its derivatives. From the ashes of disaster, one of the truly great motorcycle engines was born. Still not enough of a reason to buy one of these. Avoid.

5. Triumph Tiger Cub/T25SS - v'poor reliability - electrics and engine lubrication
6. Suzuki RE5 / Norton Commander - rotary engines with attendant throttle lag - commercial disasters
7. Any AMF HD - nuff said
8. BMW R1200CL - crappy bavarian chopper
9. Buell Ulysses - good concept wrong bike
10. Any bike we own that left us stranded by the side of the road!

Can't say I'm super familiar with any of the bikes on the list (including the early VFs) but I was surprised that the 750F had/has such a reputation :mellow:

Here's some pics of the offenders :ohmy:
[image: Posted Image]
[image: Posted Image]
Norton Combat
[image: Posted Image]
GT380
[image: Posted Image]
AMF Harley
[image: Posted Image]
R1200CL

I think they changed the cams in some later years of the 750 to fix that or something.

[image: View Post]rangerscott69, on 19 November 2010 - 01:00 AM, said:

I think they changed the cams in some later years of the 750 to fix that or something.

That's what they say. Something about the steel being correctly hardened or something...

It was a good idea, but the technology of the time was too limited for the idea to really shine until '86, when we got the VFR.

Thanks for letting me know to never read that magazine. They obviously failed to mention that the VF750F is better than it's compatible 1983 Japaneses sport bike. Magazines......

Hmmm, I remember my Suzuki GT380 much more fondly, and I dare you to find anything in 1973 that had what you would call great brakes. It had a single disc front and drum rear, nuff said. I remedied the weak power with porting and polishing, expansion chambers and K&N filters. When I bought that bike, the economy was much like it is now. I traded in a clapped out Kawasaki 100 and gave them $900 and rode out on a brand spankin' new bike.

[image: View Post]JamieDaugherty, on 19 November 2010 - 07:19 AM, said:

Thanks for letting me know to never read that magazine. They obviously failed to mention that the VF750F is better than it's compatible 1983 Japaneses sport bike. Magazines......

Yeah, motorcycle development has come along so quickly, you have to compare the bikes of the era to each other. I'm sure the Model T had terrible brakes and soulless acceleration as well

I owned a Seca 900 shafty and I recall it really did not have running issues but it did have riding issues. It turned more like a air craft carrier and felt about as long. It was only cooler after I painted the damn thing. It did do killer burnouts. I was much happier with my CB1100F.

Tell the Ozzies to keep that rag to themselves