.... My Trident was no mpg meister either....
Seems to be a recurring thing with Tridents..... My Hinckley Trident was only good for ~34mpg (if that).
.... My Trident was no mpg meister either....
They can just grab you by the throat quick ? I have seen some guys have real purler crashes off H2 Kawasakis. One was halfway up the front straight on Calder Raceway. The bike was on full noise and upright and it just stood our and launched the rider. Another was a bike coming around turn two at Winton, which stood out and launched the rider as it came on song. He went the furthest for the lowest speed that I have ever seen any rider go.Re; Super Seven's comment "Kawasaki 750 not that quick in its day"
Maybe it was not to some people's eyes, but this is straight out of the crate, without any tuning mods which would improve the ss1/4 times.
What was eye watering and a pocket/ wallet killer was the fuel consumption.... could it get any worse?
That was the S3. I had one too. The power band was from 6 to 8K. The gearing was set up such that when you get to 8K and shift it dropped back to 6K.my 73 Kawalski was just a 400 triple but I put expansion chambers on it with those little snuff can 'silencers' ported the cylinders, and put drag bars on for a café racer look I took it to blue ridge parkway and had a blast carving the mtn curves......it had a power band of about 1500rpm it was a lil bomb with a short fuse 'cause later the middle cylinder seized up
I have owned two Kawasaki triples a 1972 H2 and a 1974 H1E... The 750 was impressive, but the even torque spread made it easier to ride, the 500 was a handful, it went from noise to 60Hp in 1500 rpm... I still miss the smell.
Unique bikes that marked an iconic 5-6 year time span, that we will never see again in motorcycling.
You misquote me. I stated:Re; Super Seven's comment "Kawasaki 750 not that quick in its day"
Maybe it was not to some people's eyes, but this is straight out of the crate, without any tuning mods which would improve the ss1/4 times.
What was eye watering and a pocket/ wallet killer was the fuel consumption.... could it get any worse?
You misquote me. I stated:
"74 H2 Not that quick on this day:" and attached road test data backing up the statement. On that day, in that test, the 1974 H2 didn't make it into the 12s, and barely broke 100 mph in the quarter. Nothing incorrect was stated. It also averaged 26.4 MPG, for a range of 118 miles assuming you could run it for the entire 4.5 gallons. Neither of the (piped and jetted) '79 CBX I owned ever made 30 mpg. They consistently made high 28s to high 29s. They held nearly another gallon though. The H2 range prevents me from ever thinking of it as a real motorcycle. Its 113 miles from Cantwell to the gas station at Talkeetna, Jct. CBX could do it. My RD400 couldn't, and an H2 couldn't either. Toured on the CBXs a bit. having to stop for gas every 150 miles was tiresome.
CBX and GS850G at Worthington Glacier. The GS850 didn't have anything like the mid range power of a Commando, but it was local, cheap and reliable, and there were already Commandos and an Atlas in another state.
On that day, in that test. Please acknowledge the misquote. Most Japanese bikes got slower and slower every year in those days. The early 72 was quicker than a late one. No doubt the quickest bike available at the time. The '74 test results posted with the text you misquoted was not impressive.
In the early 90s i exported about 200 bikes to the UK from the states. I rode all that ran. Some more than others.
I had my mk2 850 and a Honda V45 at the time.
I thought the H1 and H2 were pretty average. They may have been a bit long in the tooth by then, but i still liked the C'do way more. It could handle.
I bought a lot of Z1 900s. Straight line bikes.
I had a couple 850G as well. Good commuter bikes.