The CB 750 Auto was indeed a POS for the ages. However an interesting thing was that at 60 + MPH the bike would stumble and hesitate when the throttle was opened, all were puzzled until a switched on Dealer Mechanic worked out that due to airflow around the bike the carb float bowl vent tubes were routed into an area of low atmospheric pressure at "high" speed. With maybe 0.4 kpa max available fuel pressure with a full tank it required buggerall pressure differential variation to starve the carbs. . If there is a Mechanic's heaven that Bloke deserves a place.
Pretty much all Brit bikes had crappy wiring. The good news is that there just wasn't that much wiring on the bike, and the shop manuals were fantastically good. So wiring could be fixed with a soldering iron, no big deal. Leaking a few oil drips - who cares? I didn't.
Actually period Cycle World and other road tests had the 1972-3 H2's having one of the shortest stopping distances in the whole of it's class at the time, but hey let's not let facts get in the way of the boring predictable repeated nonsense about all the Kawaski triples, repeated usually by people just reading stuff online by other people who were not there or have not owned one. Same old cobblers with the 500 triples, get all the usual "frame bends" / "wheelies at 100mph" / "won't go around bends" yadda yadda every time I go out on my 1975 model, I had them in the 70's and compared to other bikes of the era, by doing the standard tyre change / rear shocks / fork oil and shims on the 500's plus adapting you style, they were fine, good enough to win their class in the Bol'Dor production 24 hour race, something an "unrideable" bike should not do. Lots of these fantastical stories were exaggerated by the press at the time, and promoted even by Kawasaki as a selling point, a 500 for example has the same power to weight give or take as a Norton Commando, that sorts of puts the lie to the test.
Very interesting that non of Harley Davidsons efforts are included here. Calling a Laverda heavy was a bit rich. Also , two bikes here have to be ridden differently to most other bikes : they have to change direction under throttle and not under over-run or braking. Those two bikes are the Laverda 1000 and the Triumph Trident and incidentally the production racing results for both these bikes were unmatched at the time so neither of them should be on this list. Just focusing on Harley Davidson: the small Harleys which were bought from Aermachi: how to ruin a masterpeice by not developing it and making it heavier. The large Harleys: very slow, very heavy, very dated, dubious styling. My assessment of this article is that it is mostly American flag waving nonsense.
I raced Maico 490-ies, FAR superior frame , if u were a midfielder u started winning when changing to Maicos ; FAR superior bike, cannot recall any transmission problems , the transmission components had an aeronautical finish compared to any other bike , I know as I am man aeronautical engine engineer.- The problems cam later when one of the brother sabotaged the production when trying to take over the company... The Tridents might have leaked oil , possibly , but they were markedly faster than a the leadsled Honda, I had a leak that was xd to find , until I found a production fault in one of the oil cooler hoses....As for the Kawa 750 H2 it was firstly the swing arm bushings that had a half life of a mere 500 km the frame was, as all on all Japanese bikes made of melted down battle cruisers ,, pretty useless , in comparance to European bikes , but working swing arm bushes would have vastly improved things...
but they all looked way better than the stuff that is build nowadays!
The CB 750 Auto was indeed a POS for the ages. However an interesting thing was that at 60 + MPH the bike would stumble and hesitate when the throttle was opened, all were puzzled until a switched on Dealer Mechanic worked out that due to airflow around the bike the carb float bowl vent tubes were routed into an area of low atmospheric pressure at "high" speed. With maybe 0.4 kpa max available fuel pressure with a full tank it required buggerall pressure differential variation to starve the carbs. . If there is a Mechanic's heaven that Bloke deserves a place.
Pretty much all Brit bikes had crappy wiring. The good news is that there just wasn't that much wiring on the bike, and the shop manuals were fantastically good. So wiring could be fixed with a soldering iron, no big deal. Leaking a few oil drips - who cares? I didn't.
Actually period Cycle World and other road tests had the 1972-3 H2's having one of the shortest stopping distances in the whole of it's class at the time, but hey let's not let facts get in the way of the boring predictable repeated nonsense about all the Kawaski triples, repeated usually by people just reading stuff online by other people who were not there or have not owned one.
Same old cobblers with the 500 triples, get all the usual "frame bends" / "wheelies at 100mph" / "won't go around bends" yadda yadda every time I go out on my 1975 model, I had them in the 70's and compared to other bikes of the era, by doing the standard tyre change / rear shocks / fork oil and shims on the 500's plus adapting you style, they were fine, good enough to win their class in the Bol'Dor production 24 hour race, something an "unrideable" bike should not do.
Lots of these fantastical stories were exaggerated by the press at the time, and promoted even by Kawasaki as a selling point, a 500 for example has the same power to weight give or take as a Norton Commando, that sorts of puts the lie to the test.
Very interesting that non of Harley Davidsons efforts are included here. Calling a Laverda heavy was a bit rich. Also , two bikes here have to be ridden differently to most other bikes : they have to change direction under throttle and not under over-run or braking. Those two bikes are the Laverda 1000 and the Triumph Trident and incidentally the production racing results for both these bikes were unmatched at the time so neither of them should be on this list. Just focusing on Harley Davidson: the small Harleys which were bought from Aermachi: how to ruin a masterpeice by not developing it and making it heavier. The large Harleys: very slow, very heavy, very dated, dubious styling. My assessment of this article is that it is mostly American flag waving nonsense.
Thanks for the input! Will cover that in a future video
AMF Harley Davidsons.
WOW! You really missed the mark on most of these!
Let me know which ones you would have put! I’ll include them in a future video
I raced Maico 490-ies, FAR superior frame , if u were a midfielder u started winning when changing to Maicos ; FAR superior bike, cannot recall any transmission problems , the transmission components had an aeronautical finish compared to any other bike , I know as I am man aeronautical engine engineer.- The problems cam later when one of the brother sabotaged the production when trying to take over the company... The Tridents might have leaked oil , possibly , but they were markedly faster than a the leadsled Honda, I had a leak that was xd to find , until I found a production fault in one of the oil cooler hoses....As for the Kawa 750 H2 it was firstly the swing arm bushings that had a half life of a mere 500 km the frame was, as all on all Japanese bikes made of melted down battle cruisers ,, pretty useless , in comparance to European bikes , but working swing arm bushes would have vastly improved things...
Hello HONDA! What was that?
What are you referring to?
@@Motor-Sphere their worst model
Facts