Just as a side note I've had my Commando over 40 years it has done over 100,000 miles and is still going strong. I agree it has its faults, but most have been long sorted now.🇬🇧
I suppose the big worry is those freshly imported from the US bikes , good condition outwardly but it may have sat for years without improvement or attention, ditto barn finds I expect
But not out the factory they weren’t. How much to make it reliable? I expect better Carbs n ignition system would make a massive difference. Then there’s the most important part, a degree of mechanical sympathy. Some all too often lacking when they were new
@@bikerdood1100 The 73- 74 850's were good right off the showroom floor when compared to other British bikes of those years. If you run a Commando today you need the Boyer ignition and sleeved Concentrics. The single Mikuni conversion is sweet but has no top end. Plan on rebuilding the Isolastics. Anything older may need some serious sorting, especially the Combat models. They were never the "world beater" they were promised to be, just very sweet bikes if you maintained them meticulously and awful if you didn't.
9:35 The CB400F was not replaced by the 500/550. The 500 was produced before the 400. The 550 was an update to the 500. In the UK those nightmares (2 cyl Dreams) came along after the 4/4.
Yea I no 🙄 It was the lighter cheaper and more powerful 400 dream which I do show so I not The 400f was too darn expensive to build Of course the twin came after That’s what replacement means
The 6 valve twins, 400 Dream and Super Dream were dull dogs to ride though. Really were. Might have been fractionally better on paper but that was all you could say for it. I worked in the trade back then and have ridden just about the whole late 70s/early 80s Honda range and most of the Yams and Suzukis too. In my opinion the CB400F was the standout bike of the era (well perhaps the Yam 350LC, but that was the next generation). Suffers in modern terms because its low powered to contemporary bikes, but back then it wasn't. One of my favourite 400F moments was when I did some gardening work for a chap a few years later, and turned up on my then rather elderly 400F with probably 40 or 50k on the clock and tatty with it. The chap I was doing the work for had a Kawasaki Z 400 four cylinder, which they made for a while (and admittedly wasn't a standout) . "Is", he asked me "the 400F as good as its reputation?" 'Are you insured for other bikes? Take it out and have a go' He came back about quarter of an hour later with a very glum look on his face. "Its better than my bike". One of the things about the 400F is that it was basically crammed into a 250 sized frame, whereas the earlier 500 and later 550 were more like small 750s. It was funny, because there were a lot of chassis parts in common with the G5 and CJ 250/350s, but in the 400F chassis they just worked better.
@@JimChamp for Honda as a company though they were a win win. The twin was more powerful, had better torque and most importantly for Mr Honda much cheaper to build. That’s why there are so many mid sized twins around today and very few mid sized 4s.
Had a DB34 Gold Star that I rode every day to work and back for 7 years. Initially in Touring trim I converted it to the full DBD34 Clubmans specification with 1 1/2" GP carburettor, close ratio gearbox, clip ons and rear set footrests etc. Only needed to slip the clutch for 2 to 3 seconds to get it away and I used to ride around town in top. The GP carburettor being a racing design had no idling provision hence the slow blipping technique whilst at traffic lights and roundabouts. Rode it through the centre of London a few times too. Top speed on mine 115 mph. It was an absolute credit to the BSA Development Engineers.
I also had a DBD34 with RR2T gearbox for years back in the 70's used it for work shopping just riding around every day bike, no way did I have to slip the clutch till it reached 30 or 40 mph, would reach 100 mph on the clock, great bike, also had a BSA A10 Road Rocket another great bike of the day, just two of many Made in England bikes.
The worst problems with British twins like the Bonneville were that they vibrated like paint-can shakers on the highway, and they leaked oil everywhere in spite of your best efforts. But lovely on 50 mph back-roads. And damn, they sure looked good and were a teenage boy's dream.
Honda Twins, like my CB360 were as smooth as butter and. Revved to 11,000 rpm, almost 1hp for each 10cc and just over 100mph with its 6 speed box.......Honda were at the top of their game......the Poms didn’t stand a chance.
I got my bike liscense in 1970. BSA went out of buisness and everyone I met with Bonnie or Commando were waiting on parts and doing them up. They were all fantastic to ride when they went.
My 500 Norton is much smoother than any British 650 I have ridden. But not as fast. I have seen 90 mph on it, versus 110mph on the BSA Super Rocket I once owned. Otoh, the handlebar vibes on that got to your hands on a decent ride.
@@colinrashleigh6488 I agree ghastly hipster builds. It is the most genius bike ever built if you want to get somewhere and actually get there. But that’s not what most want out of a bike these days. More look at my wad posturing.
The Commando required an hours maintenance for a days ride in some versions but I’d gladly own another if they didn’t require a mortgage to own. You’re dead right about the T160, they were fantastic to ride, and so was the BSA Rocket III. That’s a beautiful Bonnie at the start of the video! I have a 1982 T-140 and remember when they came out - strong motor but everything else was scraping the bottom of the barrel in fit and finish. It still rides with minimum fuss and maximum fun though!
having my Norton Roadster turn 50 this year, seems like it has never let me down...My '69 P11 did, but the most fun I had was on my '76 CCM580... All these required that you know them intimately and be prepared to maintain them ...and the alloys didn't let you down., but never overrated.
I loved my 850 Commando Mk2a, which I bought new in 1974, but it needed a lot of maintenance, and I was 19 and using it for everyday transport, so it got neglected and I paid the price with all kinds of vibration-related issues. I gave up 2 years on and bought a car. My next British bike was a Triumph T140V, which I still use now, 30 years later. It is much more reliable, but it does get a lot better treatment than the Norton.
I bought a new Commando 750 Interstate 'Combat' in 1972, it was unreliable rubbish, sold on 'patriotism'. They were called unreliable in those days, now it's changed into 'maintenance intensive'.
Good video , I had two 400 4's when they first came out , put ace bars and faring and racing seat on it ,this greatly improved the handling and top speed , as it was very light on the front end as standard , I really thought this was the dogs nuts until one day while going flat out cranked right over on a dual carriageway roundabout one of the new 400 twins came sailing past round the outside , I knew then the 400 /4 had had it's day ! but I've always had fond memories of that bike !
with respect flat out, leaned over on dual carriageway is not what these bikes were about I had one 10 years from 1975. used everyday all year round it was a very capable bike lightweight low COG commuter that would do the coast run every weekend with the GF on the back. the 4cyl sound from the 4 individual pipes was something else, completely lost when a 4 into one was fitted. later on I got the 550 for more power but it wasn't the same bike.
@@bananabrooks3836 good catch typo error bike was new 1975 comment edited. 1985 swapped it for a Kawasaki 305 belt drive also new regretted it after the first week of riding.
@@yorkiecol7973 The 400/4 never had 4 individual pipes, it had a 4 into 1 from the factory, It was a very distinctive looking 4 into 1, with all 4 header pipes angled to the right hand side...The 350/4 had 4 pipes...
@@MickH60 nope it was a 400 and did have 4 pipes it's one of the reasons I bought it they looked cool, besides I'm not sure the 350 was ever sold as a UK model some may been grey imports like the 500 and 650 models though.
Love this video!! I started riding in the late 60's which was on small Honda's. Later I rode several Triumphs and I agree with what you said. The CB 400 four had character, the 2 cylinder 350 did not. IMHO if you want a vintage 4 cylinder get a CB 750. I now own a 05 GS 1200 and I agree, it will do anything but nothing perfectly. I do my own maintenance so that's not an issue. I got it at a reasonable price four years ago with less than 2000 miles on it so that's not an issue. If I had to buy new, no way! Too much money and they have to be serviced at the dealership and that's even more money. Very well done video.
Velocette Venom, Velocette Thruxton, Velocette Viper. they handled well and had a decent turn of speed, they also attracted a crowd with their retro looks.
Had A Venom Clubman , Viper clubman and a Thruxton all great bikes . Velos looked mean. However, my favourite was a pre unit Triumph Speed Twin ,ultra reliable and fun to ride.
The only Velo I owned (briefly) was a Valiant. I always fancied a Thruxton but the prices were like phone numbers. In the 60s there used to be a guy ride over from the next town on his Thruxton and go for a burn with the other guys - they would visit the White Post transport cafe near Mansfield and on the way back to Newark would let rip down the Averham Flash. One of the guys had a T120 Bonny that he had spent a fortune on around at Johnny Duncan's shop, partly with dreams of beating Cowboy's Velo down the Flash. Initially the Velo would be eating the Bonny's dust but on the return to base (Cross Keys pub), the Bonny owner would be heard to say he had lost again, "I can't understand it" he would moan, "it never seems to go faster, it only bangs louder"...
I bought a new 400 Four aged 19 in 1977 and I loved everything about it. Looking back, it had a combination of power and gearing that made for a really fun ride when you ragged it. I had no experience at the time of more powerful bikes, having come from a Yamaha RD200, but I enjoyed every second I rode it, and given how I used to ride in those days, I'd have probably seriously hurt myself or worse if I'd bought something bigger. It's the only bike from my past I would consider buying again, As for the BSA Gold Star, I remember a lecturer while I was a student being totally unimpressed with the prices they were fetching in the late 70's. He owned one in the 60's, and it was so unreliable, he left it behind a hedge somewhere in North Wales because he couldn't be bothered with it anymore, and it was, in his words, the biggest pile of junk ever made.
Yes, I totally agree with your mate, the Goldie is useless junk! Er‘m, just out of interest, I don’t suppose you remember exactly where that hedge was… 🤔
I had a CB 400 super four but much later model. Brilliant, solid, bike that was called pocket rocket at the time! One the best EVER! The guy with this channel just needed to put a jap bike in the list so he can feel good about his Brit self. A real wanker. Not watching his content anymore! C.nt
I had a Kawasaki Z1B and due to a financial catastrophe had to downsize to a 400-4, got to say after hating it for the first month or so, I came to love that little thing.
400-4 was the best bike I ever owned, living on the isle of Mull with single track roads everywhere it was super nimble, just as well because I had 13 hairpins to negotiate in 7 miles! I swapped the standard exhaust for one of Mr Yoshimuras as the standard one kept catching the road Going to work every morning was an absolute pleasure
I look at motorcycles in a very different way than you do. To me a motorcycle is far more of an emotional thing than a functional thing. If you want a transportation appliance, get a modern car, or scooter. I owned a 1966 Triumph T120 Bonneville from 1983-1988. It was an absolutely wonderful motorcycle. Out of more than 50 motorcycles I have owned, it was my favorite. Yes it had it's issues as far as reliability and function goes, but its emotional appeal was off the scale. It was a beautiful bike, it made a beautiful sound, and it had a wonderful feel. Riding it gave you an almost euphoric feel. If there is one thing I hate, it is a smooth, quiet motorcycle. It was a simple machine, easy to work on, and it had absolutely NO electronic parts. Today's motorcycles are nothing but computers on wheels, and every single one of them are as ugly as it gets. Most of them are 99% flat black. I made a serious mistake in selling it, and cannot afford to replace it, or I would. In 2013, I bought a new Royal Enfield Classic 500. It was dirt cheap, and in stock form it was a horrible bike. It looked great, but it wheezed and hesitated like crazy. and it had a three foot long 50 pound exhaust that produced no sound. I trash canned the EFI, and replaced it with an Amal Concentric MK1 carburetor, and replaced that horrible exhaust with a shorter, lighter, much louder one. It now felt and sounded like a long stroke British single should. It's certainly not a replacement for the Triumph, but I have put 21,000 miles on it, and thoroughly enjoyed every one of them. As for the Gold Star, it is also a beautiful bike, and while I would love to own one, I admit it would not get ridden much. It's just too high strung for my more relaxed type of riding. I have only seen one Brough Superior, at a motorcycle show, I did not hear it run, but I love the way it sounds in your video. I had always heard about the super high quality, but the one I saw, while beautifully finished (obviously a very expensive restoration) I was not impressed with the manufacturing quality of its parts. It was rough. It looked like it had been hammered out by the village blacksmith. While it was an intriguing bike, it did not meet my expectations. That might have been different had I been able to ride it. As someone who has worked on Model T Fords, I do accept the fact that the finish was pretty much representative of the period in which it was built. It is much older than the Triumph or the Gold Star. I don't even know what that BMW is doing here. It is 100% JUNK. Not only is it super ugly, but smooth, quiet, more computer than motorcycle, and as unreliable as it gets. Modern BMWs are less reliable than 1960s British bikes. I don't hate all BMWs, those made from around 1970 and back were actually quite desirable, and far more reliable than new ones. The Honda CB400F is a bike I have conflicting feelings about. First, it's Japanese, which kind of puts me off to begin with. But there is a beauty to it, starting with those four chrome pipes that wrap around to a single exhaust. It would likely be a lot of fun on curvy mountain roads, but would take a lot more effort to ride. I think it would be fun for a short ride, on the right kind of roads. But I'm the type who prefers to just sit back and ride at a fairly steady speed, enjoying the sound and feel of the engine. An inline four would be a bit too smooth, and too well balanced to have much of a feel. Everything is relative, and if modern bikes were not so disgusting, I probably wouldn't give it a second look. But when comparing it to modern bikes, it looks a LOT better than it probably did back in it's day. If I were going to buy a Japanese bike, it would probably be a Yamaha XS650. Besides the Royal Enfield, I also have a 1997 H-D Sportster 883, a 2002 H-D Sportster 1200, and a 2004 Suzuki DR400 dual sport bike for off road riding. Oh, and a 1979 Vespa P200E 2 stroke manual shift scooter.
If you think I don’t see motorcycles in an emotionally you would be very wrong. I’ve been passionate about all of. I love riding them, the history and everything about them. Nothing brings more joy than to ride my old BSA. What makes me a green is the way that classic bikes are treated as a commodity and not something to be enjoyed. When bikes like a Brough are put on a pedestal it means that real riders never get to experience them and that can only be a very bad thing. The Gold star is beautiful but look at the prices they sell for absolutely obscene. But ultimately we have to be realistic, I say right at the beginning of that video that they are all great bikes. I just want people to consider that are very worthwhile alternatives, would I like to be able to ride a Goldstar, yes but owning one I’m not so sure they are very very needy, like a bad women,. I love the styling in fact if features in our top 10 most beautiful bikes videos but when riding you also have to practical. Can I ride this thing 100 miles without needing surgery. For me in buy A rocket Goldstar every time given the cash, if you not on track is far and away a better bike and just as pretty If I wasn’t emotional about bikes Why would I make videos about them.it’s not like I make any real money from it Just a thought
About 50 years ago I had a 1952 Royal Enfield 500 Twin. My late father had rebuilt and tuned it (he was a competition mechanic) and the top speed had gone from about 70 mph to over 100! It had twin reverse cone megaphone exhausts and sounded gorgeous. Plenty of pulling power even at low revs, comfortable to ride even with two up and handled well - my footrest rubbers were chamfered away from fast cornering. Great memory.
Back in 1980, a fairly wealthy friend, a collector, was showing me over a dozen of his cherished bikes , as it was a beautiful late summer evening he suggested that I chose any of the bikes and he would select something else, we'd then ride from west London to the south coast and back. Without hesitating, (he might have changed his mind!), I opted for the BSA Clubman..Wow.. was that a mistake! The lowered bars, not the most comfortable position for a lengthy ride.. what felt like pulling away in 2nd gear at every stop.. By the time we arrived back I never wanted to go near it again.. except of course, to look at it. My personal all time favourite ? Sitting in a traffic jam in Park Lane, 1977, I looked left into the BMW showroom, usually displaying the latest offering from Bavaria.. instead of a super-car there was instead, for the first time ever, a motorcycle! It was stunning! I parked as soon as I could find a place, walked back to the showroom and tried to buy it! Metallic blue, R100RS, it just stunned me. They wouldn't let me have that one but two weeks later I had one, same colour, I loved it to death.. kept it inside my house, never in the garage.
You’re a brave man making these videos knowing that you are going to be treading on the toes of both those who lust after these bikes and those who forked out “too much” money for one already. Bottom line is that all these bikes are highly desirable and so their greatness is simply an established fact that pointing out their faults does nothing to diminish. I enjoyed both your videos on this subject just to see and hear these great machines. Market forces have already decided that they are not overrated, these bikes are valued as automotive art as much as anything so comparing them with alternatives that are “just as good” doesn’t necessarily make a compelling argument against their value.
I think people need to be honest and realistic Also it’s not about say their rubbish as some seem to think it’s about stopping people fixating on such a narrow field There’s are world of choice out there some bikes that are just as good if not better choices that simply get ignored. People can very sheep like sometimes. I find that when everyone wants the same thing is a massive turn off (GS) I’m not convinced people make informed choice but rather follow blindly. Biking is supposed to be about individuality Market forces mean bugger all ultimately and the modern obsession with how much bikes achieve at auction says nothing about the bike itself
@@bikerdood1100 I liked a lot of these bikes (I’m old, but not a Brough Superior old) before I knew they were or before they became iconic, this says to me that they are inherently desirable. A Spitfire is iconic but there are better planes, an E Type Jag is iconic but there are better cars. Where I agree is that many other bikes with similar qualities do exist that make great alternatives for us mere mortals at more reasonable prices. If a few people have the narrow focus you mention then all the better for the rest of us?
An old throw-back from the 60's & 70's, I have a passion for saving, and restoring some of these old vintage bikes, before they end up in the scrap heap, and lost to history ! I have to tell you that this video is without question, got a like, and subscription out of me ! Nice job on the video Sir !
@@bikerdood1100 I wish as a kid that I knew some of these great brands were going to fade away ! I would have put more $$$ into more of these older top quality bikes then ! Now, I'm just picking up the pieces of what no one else wants to mess with !
@@quadsman11 you find that what is regarded as junk has a very annoying habit of shifting. I got Deb the excelsior 150 you can see in some of our videos not so long ago for the princely sum of £124 Today they are worth 10 times that. The problem is that old bikes get pushed out the price range of most young riders which can only be a very bad thing. It’s difficult enough to attract young people on to bikes as it is. Once the people who have spent a fortune on older bikes die off, not so long away in reality well then what ?
The forks frames, chrome and paint finish is far far superior to today's machines I had a BSA A10 and the chrome on the exhaust , footrests etc never peeled or failed even if it had been abused and the frame was so well made, beautiful brazing too. Magneto ignition was great. I had many 1970s bikes from Japan after. Some were great like z650 Kawasaki and Suzuki gs850, 1000 and 750. Really solid engines . Yamaha XS750 triple was a disaster but xs650 was good and xt500 was a lot of fun but had flaws with top end oil feed.
Well I run both old and new bikes alongside each other, old bike Finnish is indeed very good, cost less of an object I suppose. Suspension and frame definitely not, well apart from the Harley sportster we had a few years ago, it’s suspension was very crashy Our SV Suzuki has cheap suspension but it’s very good compared to anything I felt on a classic. I have to say that the chassis design on some 60s Triumphs was ridiculously flimsy, especially the smaller bikes 350 and 500
Most Overrated Motorcycle in History? The original Honda 750. Every owner I knew back in the 70s died trying to keep up with their mates on British bikes on the corners. Whether it was the stodgy, wallowy handling, or just that the riders became reckless in their need to impress on over-crowded, twisty English roads, whereas a Bonnie could be ridden with abandon.
During testing on race tracks in America, Honda put the 750 up against the competition. Harleys were totally uncompetitive. The only British bike that could live with the Honda was the Norton Commando but unfortunately they shook themselves to death after a couple of days. Granted on backroad scratching the lighter and more agile British Iron probably had the advantage.
I had a 1974 CB750 and yes, cornering was not up to the British bikes but, while we may have lost seconds in the corners we gained minutes while they were topping up their oil and hours or days while they were replacing lost nuts, bolts, and other bits. I rode mine across Canada and back and only had to oil my chain.
The CB750 was a marvel. As a British bike rider in the 70-80’s we hated them , they were fast , incredibly reliable , stayed clean and could go just a fast and round the corners every time they went out on the road , for us it was hit or miss if we could manage to show up. And they had electric start. They did everything a bike should do , we hated them because they did everything we wanted to do! Cheers Warren
Another good video and I agree over the BMW I have had a few but found them "fussy" and hard to service and work on ,but my younger brother loves his .The Honda 4 was a pretty bike good for commuting or if your short in the leg ,but I have always been heavy & over 6 ft so hardly one for me , one serious annoying fault was the front mudguard sprayed water straight onto the camchain adjuster on the front of the cylinders being so small it was just made to snap or strip the threads ?. As for Brough ,I have ridden bikes since the early 6os and have only seen three on the road and one a old Guy had near me with a sidecar fitted . The pre unit Bonnie was fairly reliable and oil tight ,but the basic electrics were horrible ,it used to gobble bulbs with the vibration .Never got - on with the Goldie but loved the looks and handling ,I had a Rocket Gold Star and a 1960 Gold flash that I did 40 + thousand miles on solo & sidecar , only broke down twice ,mag . packed up and the old crappy caged ball clutch disintegrated in Derbyshire ?. Had 100s of bikes but the best I can count on one hand ,I now own 4 including a Kwak Z1000 and a Wildstar XVS 1600 ,in my 70s now but still ride thru the winters ,but kickstarts are now a no - no ! . Happy Riding Lads .
Most overrated British bike for me is the 750/850 Norton Commando. Great bike for sure but far too many basic engine and chassis faults to be deserving of its reputation compared even to other Norton models. Most overrated Italian bike, the Laverda Jota, not that powerful in reality and not brilliant handling. Most overrated Jap bike, Kawasaki Z1/900/ fantastic engine and looks but handled like a drunk camel on roller-skates. Owned all of the aforementioned. All great bikes but overrated. Conversely, most maligned bike, Triumph T160, smooth, comfortable, reliable and cornered like a dream, but I was lucky to have had a good one. BTW Honda produced the 500/4 and 550/4 before the 400/4, not after it. The 500/4 launched here in 1971 and the 550/4 in 1974.
Good point true about the Commando. The gearbox used was from AMC twins and the shafts did not line up brilliantly. Wasn’t a big problem on earlier machines but the power of the commando , especially the racers was pushing it really. The handling of a lot of early Kawasaki was poor weather they be two or four strokes. Was gunna include the z in a later video for that very reason. In standard trim the bars were too high and the suspension poor
@@stephenanderson4603 Sadly that was the majority experience. It could have been the bike that saved Triumph. They took the wrong bike away from Meriden. Look how well made the T140 was, the Meriden factory was a good workforce badly betrayed.
@@bikerdood1100 Yes, pity, the 900 was one of the greatest 4 cylinder engines ever, could be tuned to double power and still be 100 per cent reliable. It had the highest quality alloy metallurgy of any Jap engine ever made, virgin material, not recycled alloy. Kawasaki had a metals division so they allocated the best to heir flagship bike out of pride. That is why so many people fitted it into Harris, Sealey and Rickman chassis. .
Interesting comment, bit surprised about you thinking the z1, z900 was overated, nobody overrated its handling,(very few big jap bikes handled well at the time, particularly my triples.) However at launch it was simply awesome, due to its size and performance and looks as you say. Just my thoughts.
Hey I like to hear about the Ariel models. I had a twin in the late sexties . I am not shure if it was the Red Hunter or a Huntmaster. Back then I loved working with and driving this machine.
It may be a controversial view, but I think the later, oil-in-frame Bonnevilles are a more practical bike to own than the early pre-unit or even unit sixties models. OK, they're not as pretty, but they handle well, don't leak if they are put together properly, and have more modern features like disc brakes, indicators and halogen lighting. Virtually all the parts are readily available off the shelf, and the bikes are a much more sensible price than the early ones. I may be biased here, I've had a 1978 T140V for the last 30 years, and it has been very reliable and a pleasure to ride. It may not be suitable for regular, long distance commuting or continental touring, but I use it as daily transport, with the odd long run thrown in.
I would add the Honda VFR late models when they moved away from the gear driven cams. The early ones were a dream to ride and the noise from the gears was wonderful. I do miss my early one...I bought two later models with the chain driven cams and even a vtec model but they just could not cut it.
Bought a 2002 Honda vtec/ VFR In 2014 only 12000 kms on the clock and whistle Dixie everytime I'm out riding , beautiful bike build on a solid well balanced platform.Yes the enthusiasts love the gear driven motor and the particular sound it makes but their are those of us whom like the sound of that vtec cutting in and the surge of power it provides. As regards the vtec being unnecessary I can only say, not to many motorcycles can on basically the same platform boast top touring bike for so many years. One can think of Mitchell's Spitfire and the number of variations on that frame before it became obsolete.
I knew a guy who made a living stealing Triumph Tiger Cubs, He eventually got caught and his garage was stacked with bits of Cubs, He got sent to Borstal 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I ran a pair of Sunbeam S7's for 30yrs, very tidy, got them in magazines, alas the garage rent went up to £120 PCM. So sold them in my late 50's. I think one found its way to Cyprus. The 'post war dream machine', 'The Gentleman's mount'. Points distributor like on a car. With its wide wheels and solo seat a very stylish mount. In Black and then Mist Green For me it was love at first sight. My school teacher girlfriend became expert in handling all the questions whenever we parked up. I spent much of my earnings on those bikes. Stewart Engineering in Putney had available every last nut and bolt needed, much easier to source the parts for than newer Japanese bikes. Now underrated? Yes!
That's a shame. Totally agree in the looks department and love the unusual engineering. One day I may get rid of my top heavy overweight parts bin raided sports/tourer and get an S7. If you don't mind me asking, I read an article once that claimed they were a little on the wobbly side when cornering, since the frame isn't the most rigid. Would you say that is a fair assessment or, were they being a bit critical?
That was an unusual bike for Britain, but of course it was a BMW design that was seized after WW2. Have seen two in my hometown and they look like battle tanks. One in sand brown and the other in red. Shaft driven of course, and that longitudinal twin layout was perfect for it.
@@ManofMode Hi Paul, I've never ridden an S7 but I think part of the reason for seemingly-eccentric handling might be the layout. The cylinders being in-line, the crankshaft is too, and so too the shaft final drive. At high revs this might produce sufficient gyroscopics to require discriminatory handling by the rider.
I bought a 1975 CB400F red, brand new in the spring of 1977, our local Honda dealer bought a bunch of these when Honda was dumping the left over units. $1,100.00 out the door, it was a lot of fun and sounded great with a Kerker header. I rode mine on the twisties a lot and in May 1978, road trip from Kansas to Daytona. It served me well until 1980 when I thought I had to have a bigger bike. The only bike to this day I regret selling.
Just one comment on the Gold Star, (and I have never owned one!) How can a motorcycle with so many wins in so many different discipline's be Overrated? And I think if it was so overrated wouldn't people have sussed it out by now and the prices would be a lot lower. Just an alternative view! Very good video Off to watch the UNDERrated bikes video now thanks!
Race wins mean bugger all when you’ve got to use it on the road, and on the road it is plain hard work. We don’t live on race tracks do we. If you put lights on a Moto GP bike it would be a bag of crap of an actual road. The video isn’t about how good a track bike, I do describe as a great bike right at the beginning. But the fact is there are a lot of really great alternatives which are far better road bikes and don’t cost over twenty grand. As I point out in the video a twin such as the contemporary A10 shown would be a far better choice if you actually want to ride anywhere and be far less than half the price.overrating a machine and putting it on a pedestal musts makes it so expensive that the price is not justified. Big reputation leads to big price. And that might be good for collectors but very bad for we riders
Race wins mean bugger all when you’ve got to use it on the road, and on the road it is plain hard work. We don’t live on race tracks do we. If you put lights on a Moto GP bike it would be a bag of crap of an actual road. The video isn’t about how good a track bike, I do describe as a great bike right at the beginning. But the fact is there are a lot of really great alternatives which are far better road bikes and don’t cost over twenty grand. As I point out in the video a twin such as the contemporary A10 shown would be a far better choice if you actually want to ride anywhere and be far less than half the price.overrating a machine and putting it on a pedestal musts makes it so expensive that the price is not justified. Big reputation leads to big price. And that might be good for collectors but very bad for we riders
You are right it’s hard to beat a late 60s British vertical twin for the sheer joy of riding. Although they lack the ability to eat up miles on the interstate. I love riding my Velocette MSS but back to back with my Bsa thunderbolt I have to say the thunderbolt is better. The Harley Davidson shovel head super glide is a very nice bike for American roads. I would like to see One of them in your shootouts.
@@bikerdood1100 I had a friend, sadly no longer with us, who had a 72 shovelhead FLH. It looked and sounded lovely (straight through pipes, used to set off all the car alarms), but was very unreliable. It leaked like a sieve, ate up regulator/rectifiers and the vibration regularly loosened or fractured parts (several broken brackets, exhaust systems and a split fuel tank). I spent a lot of time patching things up as he had no real mechanical skills and I worked as a car mechanic. What it really needed was stripping right down and doing properly, but he never had the money to do that. Maybe that one was an exception, but I would be extremely wary of getting involved with a shovelhead again.
I owned a new shovel head "back in the day" yes I'm that old. Mine was completely reliable, never leaked oil, and only repair ever needed was a wire broke to the headlight but was easily fixed. Had it for six years, there's pictures of it on my wall still. I travelled all across the US on it putting thousands of miles on it. Like many designs routed in the past preventive maintenance was the key. Mine had both electric and an aftermarket kickstart. There was something about kick starting a bike like that that was so satisfying.
The Honda CB350F four has something of a cult following in the USA among classics, more so than the 400 which never sold well here. I got the chance to ride one at an event, and yes it's real darn smooth. It's also real darn slow, enough to make me wonder why they built something that complex to have such little power. But I imagine that's the main reason collectors enjoy it, as it's sort of a misfit.
Ditto to be honest Nearly brought myself a small capacity one a few years back, got an excelsior in the end instead. It’s that black and red paint job that does it for me I just think it looks far nicer than the more pricy Brough
Having owned a 400/4 in the mid 1970's I did 100's of miles, going on holidays and attending race meetings at Snetterton race circuit. Still miss it even after 40+ years, great little bike to progress on, as many riders did back then.
@@johnbrooks9151 well I do in fact remember the 70s. And in reality I don’t remember many people having the cash for too many bikes brand new. Most people brought second hand. I was riding for years before I owned a new bike. Don’t remember the price difference between the 5 and 400, be interesting to find out, but it didn’t mean a thing because no one I knew could afford either new anyway
@@johnbrooks9151 the price difference was not particularly large when new as a point of fact and on the classic market the 500 is often cheaper🙄 I was there 🙄 Don’t know how old people think I am, under 40 perhaps, I wish 😂😂😂😂
Very fair comment, John, on the 400/4. We must have been living similar biking lives back then. A great progression bike, as you say, coming off a 250. Years later i have revisited my Yamaha 650 XS, but the the 4 pot 400 Honda seems so small now and so revvy and busy, I wouldn't be able to live with it!
i think the mythology around some of these bikes is amazing in itself. Jay leno, the American comedian, has a huge motorcycle collections and possible one of the largest privately held collections of Brough Superiors in the world. To purchase these he had to donate enough money to pay for the building of a new hospital wing at a children's hospital in the UK. From what he says, I don't know him personally, he's not underwhelmed. But that's the type of money your up against if you want to own one.
I suppose there’s a couple of factors to consider really. If I’d spent that kind of cash on a machine then there isn’t a chance in hell I’d tell anyone if it wasn’t really as good as I’d hoped ( emperors new clothes and all that ) The other is even if it’s brilliant, which it likely is, does it justify the price ? There were a few really brilliant bikes in that period and I suspect a lot less money would leave you equally impressed and a bit less bankrupt. I personally love riding pretty much any bike to be honest so the kind of expenditure that some of the bikes in the video is for just incomprehensible. When my old Goldern flash cost a mere fraction and is absolutely joyous to ride
@@bikerdood1100 Not having that kind of cash I built an replica 1927 SS100 from scratch, making almost all of it myself apart from the engine and gearbox castings and internals, it took ten years but only cost around £10k and is a proper replica, not a vague lookalike. It handles beautifully and although I've only had it up to 95mph it was still pulling like a train, what a monstrous thing they must have seemed when they were new.
@@chrislaunders8283 I truth few people do have that kind of cash, nice work though. Don’t blame you for keeping the speed below a tone. My little Terrot runs out of steam just above 45 but given the suspension it feels more than quick enough
The ergonomics are the key to the GS. I've owned all the 1200 boxer versions and this is far more comfortable than any, especially for those of us with back or knee issues. Have barely ridden my RT since I bought mine, a few years ago as the RT gas a very cramped leg position. It is way too heavy and expensive now which is why I don't have the latest version. Wouldn't dream of taking it off road either.
the old air cooled boxers are better in that way. I have riden a lot of BMW ( still now but I hate GS very ugly and an everyone’s bike) but the riding position on a R 80 or 100 for me is better rhan on modern types. They are lighter too. Or you can take a Guzzi. More different and better looking, often underestimated in comparision with BMW. Great video’s you are making, thanks.
I guess everything is down to a point of view. One thing I would like to put right is the 500/4 came out before the 400/4 . The other is that folk lore plays an important part in how a motorcycle is viewed ,and perceived. The bonnie and Triumph in general being the absolute pinnacle of this . Movies ,land speed records ,and of course Steve McQueen . The Brough had Lawrence of Arabia and that mythical race with an aeroplane , The Goldy less so but had the cafe racer image straight out of the crate like no other .The BMW I can’t quite understand it being in your list ,it’s not exactly mythical but again it does have the folk lore with Ewan and Charlie,long way round,and I agree a obscured bike to go mud plugging in Mongolia with as demonstrated in the film. ! I would have replaced it with the Honda 750/4 WHAT!!!! Yes I know but bear with me . Why was/ is the original CB 750 Honda looked upon with such reverence? It was more for what it was as opposed to what it did. It was exotica for the masses . That engine was the real sensation on was otherwise an unremarkable machine as to what it DID. As a riders bike the Triumph trident ,and BSA rocket three were superior WHAT!!!. Well yes actually. The Trident / BSA had similar performance but would on a real riders road with two riders of equal ability a road with bends ,dips, imperfections in other words the real world the triples would run away ,I know I had a 750/4 ,handle it didn’t , and front brake wasn’t great either with the sheer weight it had to stop. . Ok the Honda didn’t leak, was totally reliable, and could be cruised at unheard f velocities,but a true enthusiast will never forgive bad handling and while I’m having a bit of a tantrum I’ll throw in a bike that was made in the 1950s that I believe would also give Honda a run for it’s money ,the Vincent Black Shadow, almost as fast ,good brakes ,good handling ,and in my opinion holds the title for the bike with the most iconic picture of all time ,that of one Rollie Free layer flat over the top of the machine in his swimming trunks breaking a land speed record at Bonneville salt flats ,now that’s what I call folk lore !!
I know about the 500 being earlier it was the twin that replaced it. The Bonnie was not in fact the mount of choice for Steve McQueen, both in the Great escape and in ISDT he of course rode a Trophy the twin carb Bonnie which was in no way an off roader, single carb is best as I always say. As for Brough nothing can justify the asking price today, TE Lawrence and all. If I was going for an expensive British Vtwin, is Vincent every time not the Bitsa Brough. I do love the Goldstar but not enough to drop 20 grand and for me the RGS 650 is a much better road bike. The only thing that really stuck in my mind about long way round was how often they were picking those tanks up off the deck, they broke 3 frames Crossing Russia not the one shown just too big and too common It’s the same as Japanese cars they offered more bells and whistles and that always sells, see how everyone wants a bike with an LCD screen today which has to be the most pointless thing ever fitted to a motorcycle. Would I personally buy a Honda or a T150 For me trident every time but I am strange that way . Always loved the look of a T160, but I’m more of a Tiger 750 man really because I’m tight
Not a question of opinion. Yes , we can all have different opinions but things are either true or false regardless of anyone s opinion wishing it so. I can have an opinion as to whether or not it will rain but whether it does or not is a question of fact. And so we my love this or that bike thats your opinion but whether it leaks oil or handles badly is a question of fact. Lawrence did frequently race aeroplanes from his airfield.
@@bikerdood1100 It never went down in a corner, though I do not push cornering generally. There are not many variables in bike handling except tires, and to a greatly lesser extent weight distribution. The brakes definitely sucked.
@@bikerdood1100 I had the 350 Avenger, the 500 H1 and the 750 H2. Before driving them I changed the tyres from Bridgestone to Dunlop and the bikes behaved much better after that. The 750 needed some strengtening of the frame also and both triples behaved much better with better swingarm. The 350 was faster than any of the Brittish bikes.
Are you in your seventies? I never knew anyone who had a H2 who didn't smash it fragments. Lethal handling, next to no brakes and an intractable engine. No good for anything at all except the long straight roads of America I suppose.
@@barrycooper9451 Got it when I was 19. I have cheated death so many times that I just assume I am immortal. Most of my friends who wore their helmets and leathers are dead.
I have lamented my decision on my bike choice since 1978 when I purchased a CB400 hawk twin In the states called the dream. You have now made be go to bed with a smile on my face knowing that I made the right choice. I love you
I had a CB400F and remember it fondly. The power band ran from 7000 to 9000 revs but it didn't matter as it had a 6 speed box. I owned the previous midweight Honda, the CB360 (G5) and that was under-powered and handled poorly. The 400F was a great package, it looked good, it handled well and (while not a competitor to the 2 strokes of the time) it went well. The 400 Dream which followed was short-lived in the UK and was quickly replaced by the Super Dream, a re-styled (more slab-sided) version. The Super Dream was faster, better braked and handled as well. I didn't own a Super Dream but my wife did and we went off on honeymoon with her on a 400 Super Dream and me on a CB400F. Happy days. Later we had (Meriden built) Triumph 750s, hers was the Tiger and mine the Bonneville. Neither were a lot faster than the Honda 400s but the Triumphs were "ride all day" effortless.
Interesting video, thanks for posting. I was expecting to see a particular Vincent model on this list, but it’s interesting you’ve not included it. I remember a sentence from a 1949 Motor Cycle road test (‘So far as the standards of engine performance, handling and braking are concerned - the chief features which can make or mar an otherwise perfect mount - the mighty Black Shadow must be awarded 99 out of 100 marks; 99 because nothing, it is said, is perfect.’) Clearly, it had made quite an impression! Unfortunately, I never aspired to anything quite as good as that, but back in the day I bought a nearly-new 1990 Yamaha RD350 YPVS F2, and had a lot of fun on it. It had great performance for such small capacity, producing a lot of power in a lightweight package (exactly what a bike should do) and it would be very interesting to see an appraisal of it.
The Vincent is like an expensive, beautiful women, high maintenance. Amazing bit of kit though and I would certainly place it above the Brough so much of it was there own work. In the long run perhaps too much
@@tobythehairlessdog8876 The secret is in "how" you start one, they are very easy if set up correctly, or if you are a real whimp, fit an electric starter.
In 1960 when i was 20 i had a 650 cc BSA Gold Flash twin .I weighed only 10 stone at that time (work out what 10 stone was yourself) and i could kick start it no problem!!
@@keithwickham8558 I think the problem with many people is that they jus kick away mindlessly, hoping it will start, stating with a kickstart requires a little bit of technique and thought, something a lot of people just do not have. Chris B.
One of the major reasons for the 400 fours success was the price,its compact size,not all motorcyclists wanted a massive ego booster,and it's inherent reliability, and it's user friendliness I knew lots of people that purchased them back then,often older riders in their 40s and 50s who wanted to travel without the oil leaks,the vibration,and the Sid Snott image of motorcycling in general,also very popular with women,and couriers who needed low running costs,and the ability to ride vast distances without being shaken to bits
It was a good bike as the video does say at the beginning, they can suffer problems long term of course simply because they were so revy. Having ridden some of the twin cylinder 350s from Europe I have to say they had much more torquey engines, at the time of course they would have been more expensive, but not so today.
I had a Honda 400 four as my first serious motorcycle when I was about 15 years old. I agree with everything you said except you left out that when you are in that disagreeable part of the power band the particular vibration frequency makes your wrists ache after a few hours of liberal doses of it. Overall great bike to grow up on. Can definitely go fast enough to get you in trouble with local law enforcement. One other thing...those tiny little valves are about a nightmare to adjust.
@@bikerdood1100 you would have to define better. in terms of difference, I tried a 400 super twin didn't like it at all the 250 was a more practical bike don't know about the 500 but the 550 was quite a bit heavier and far harsher to ride.
Your correct about the CB400F’s top speed. In 1976, during a WERA sanctioned 24-hour enduro road race at Charlotte Motor Speedway, I was a team rider among 25 other teams. During one of my rides at night, additional headlights had been added, positioned to illuminate corners while bike was leaned over. However, when not cornering, they projected upward, resembling glowing horns. Skilled in wet conditions, I quickly passed other teams when it started raining. While not exceptionally fast, the bike was stable and predictable. On the back straight, the speedometer registered 104MPH. I admit to sliding off the track in a tight turn, resulting in no significant damage, but understandably angering my team.
BMW r90s massively over rated, had a couple over the years and much prefer the later r80 /r100 models for a fraction of the price. Interesting video cheers 👍
@@bikerdood1100 I agree to a large extent with your comment, I owned both (second hand) a R90S and an early 1977 R100S. I’m not sure I could have told them apart when riding although some claimed that the smaller engine was smoother at low revs. At tickover the different carbs (the R90S having Dell’Ortos) gave a different intake sound. To me though, I don’t think that the TT silver smoke or Daytona smoke orange has ever been matched let alone bettered by BMW. The price difference now, around double I’d say for a R90S compared to a R100S, hard to justify, but that doesn’t mean that the bike is over rated. Now, if I could pick an air head to join my R nineT I’d go for a /5 with a toaster tank ! 🇬🇧
Maybe now overpriced and overrated, but I paid AUD $2100 in 1982 for a 1975 90s. God I loved it: 150kph all day on flat Oz roads and mechanically dead simple. Ifu want overrated (but gorgeous) the Duke ‘70s SS models 😂
I'm wondering what is your take on the Kawasaki GPZ? I had a little 305, I think it was the best handling bike I've ever owned, very forgiving in corners and very light weight, maybe not the fastest but fun to ride.
I had the scorpion 250 which I’m afraid a thrashed to death. The 305 is of course a development of the scorpion but obviously with a bit more mid range and top end shove. And there was the very handy belt drive too. By modern standards I suspect it would appear tiny, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing at all these days
I couldn't agree more about the 400/4, i had 3 in total. Slow, and I mean really slow even revving the nuts off em to keep up with 2 stroke 250's, fragile to when used like that! Reckon the people paying silly money for em today never rode one "in anger" back in the day! Agree that 60's/early 70's British parallel twins are the way to go, easy to live with, great handling and enough go and stop for mixing it with todays traffic on A & B roads!
Well I’m not a big bikes for everyone person but, effective 400 fours were a generation away and it wasn’t until the mid eighties that they became really competent. I had a humble Guzzi V 50 for many years and it was way faster than the cb. 70s Triumphs are much underrated by the biking snobs but they are actually very capable bikes
Honda did NOT replace it with a 500 and later a 550. Those came BEFORE the 400 and were a different machine. They replaced it with the 400 Hawk. And actually, the 350/400 was more of a scaled down 500/550 than a scaled down 750. The frame was similar to the CB350. I worked on all of them in a shop in that period, and had a GF with a 350 four, so am pretty familiar with them. She rode the 350 four across the US twice. It and the 400f were pretty capable machines. As for the GS, it's not a dirt bike. It's the best touring bike BMW makes. But it's clothed in people's dreams. When they buy it they discover it's the bike they really want, rather than the bike they thought they wanted. Very clever marketing. They did the same with the R90S. People bought it thinking they wanted a cafe racer, but when they rode it, they realized they really wanted a gentleman touring bike. And had it in the R90S.
Well really depends on the market but essentially yes the 400 twin replaced it, Hawk name is not one commonly used the Uk. The point here is that it was replaced by the apparently simpler twin.. In the video I do say that the engine is quite different than the 750. It was even wet sump which of course the 750 wasn’t. The 350 was never seen in the UK or indeed most of Europe where there was less of a 350 market. In fairness the ability to make a 400 truly capable was a decade away and would need 16valves and water cooling. I’ve ridden some of 5he European 350s of the period and believe me they make much better talk than the rather busy 400f. I think it’s pretty obvious the GS isn’t a dirt bike 🙄hence the Chelsie tractor comment. The point of the video is not to say that they aren’t great bikes is it, I say as much right at the beginning The point is that there are many capable bikes out there. And too rate any one way abov3 the others is just plain dumb. I think people hear what the want too in videos to be honest. We own 10 bikes including classics but we do not see bikes through rose tinted glasses like so many Ex bikers seem too. I’ve toured for thousands of miles despite not ever feeling the need to blow a tonne of cash on an overweight GS
The Honda CB 400 Super Four with VTEC and ABS and a Staintune exhaust absolutely howled great bike. My most over rated pick All American cruisers and I ride an Indian which I love. But the suspension and brakes are poor compared to my BMW R1200R. Aerial Square Four... gets hot... deadly rear end... look fantastic
The big difference between the late British bikes and the Japanese models that eventually wrote them off, was that you had to be a motorcycle enthusiast. Enthusiastic in getting your hands dirty, enthusiastic in pushing a bike home on a rainy day and all of those other annoying things we had to put up with. CB750 and Z1s had their issues, but you could ride them whenever you wanted and wherever you wanted to, without being an enthusiast.
Well let’s not forget the market had shifted to recreational rather than general use and the British engines were never designed for high power figures or motorway work
@@bikerdood1100 That's a rather assumptive statement and I'm not sure that it is based on fact. The period I refer to was one that motorcycles were still used as daily transport, in fact I used them for that for many years. However I was more comfortable on a little Yamaha getting me to where I was going than any BSA or Matchless I owned previously. The latter were more well suited to strapping on a sidecar than a Jap bike however.
Matt’s dad here. Had a 600cc Norton Dominator built with lots of racing parts and the featherbed frame. Used to tear up Bonnie’s. Beezers, Commandos etc consistently shutting them down.
@@bikerdood1100 Always had a streak of hooner/hooligan in me. My retirement bike is a lite Triumph triple from before fly by wire. Chosen in part because it’s quick off the line. Also handles better and not as nooner prone as the monster bikes. It should be enough to keep me entertained.
@@nickmarshall9192 Done by an American in the UK when new. Totally free breathing dual Amal concentrics no air filter. Dual straight exhaust with Snuff-R-Nots. Closed for low end torque, wide open for top end power. Vertical head from Norton racing program. Never used in production I believe. My mechanic agreed it must have had a cam too. You get the flavor. But the strangest was the 1.1 ::1 rocker arms. Put in backwards valve lift was about 89% of lobe height. Turned around it was 110% of lobe height. So I went from 88% to 110% of lobe height. Roughly a 25% increase in breathing. Had the head ports CB polished. I kept the fuel ratio and timing in spec. Ate up a 750 P11 in the Matchless frame. Could pull the Norton front end and install a chrome 49 HD Springer front end in about 15 minutes. I had no idea when I bought it what I had. But with the rocker arms lifting more it was pushing out some ponies. The 750 P-11 scrambler I ran was geared low but I could take him on the high end. Pretty much everything else showed up in my mirror not my windscreen. Wish I never sold it. It was a looker too. Candy Apple Metal flake Tangerine tank paint job. Shined in the subtropical sun. Whoever built the engine was very good. Wish I’d kept it. But it was so far from stock that it had to be a monster build.
You were spot on about the Honda 400/4 . I had one, and it would almost send me asleep with boredom! Goldie too.. with the RRT2 gearbox and TT Carb- so useless and impractical for riding in towns! Loved the video, thanks for sharing!
i had a 400/4 and you could really speed through the twisty lanes on it.... get the revs at 6000 and you could leave most bikes behind, weather was a problem the petrol tank used to direct the rain straight onto the coils, soon you would loose a cylinder as the coil became soaked, essential to carry wd 40 everywhere... it was a fun machine.... i regularly got the foot pegs down and sparking...
@@bikerdood1100 Different days then, different uses, used my 350 Gold Star for trials, scrambling, hill climbs sprints and road racing, just needed to change carb cams tyres seat and handle bars.
Yes, a lot of bull about those bikes nowadays, especially the Gold Star. However, a friend of mine has one that he, being over 80 years old, has changed to make it much more user friendly. The bike has indicators, electric start, normal handlebars, concentric Amal carb, realistic gearing. He knows a lot about Goldies as he had one new in the 1950s where he ended up doing about 150,000 miles on it, touring Europe every year etc.
@@chrisfournier6144 well of course power is relative, this was the 1950s, it was a very successful clubman racer but was expensive but of course with the arrival of the 650 twins which are much easier to ride on busy roads and death of the clubman race series it was aLl over for the Goldie in 62
Indicators,electric start,normal bars,concentric carb,realistic gearing - what else perhaps belt drive,double discs etc; etc; It's no longer a Gold Star then in my opinion.
I rode Triumph 650cc 6T motorcycles on Lancashire Traffic Department in the mid 1960's. As much as I enjoyed riding them they had one major fault, vibration. Hence the marriage by some of using the Norton featherbed frame with the Triumph twin preferably pre unit.
Triumph vibration was always an issue, made worse by the flimsy frame which if anything amplified the vibes We run. BSA A10/and I have to say it’s much smoother than any Triumph twin I’ve yet ridden
My 400/4 had huge camchain rattle and the adjuster bolt broke off...the exhaust had massive corrosion and cost more than the bike did...the frame was off the little cj250t and was tiny even for a a five foot 6 shorty like me......4 bloody carbs to clean and balance.....loved it...
My neighbour had a Goldstar. It was an amazing bike and very fast. It was every biker's dream to own one regardless of what ever this video would lead you to believe. What seems to be missingin the video is that back in the nineteen sixties the traffic and roads were entirely different than those of today. A Goldstar would indeed be a poor choice in the 2020s but by the same token an R1 Yamaha would have been totally unsuitable for the roads 60 odd years ago. I know as I was a biker back in the sixties and still ride today!
If you pay attention I’m not saying it isn’t a great bike But it’s not perfect nor more importantly is it ideal for everyone Incidentally I wouldn’t consider an R1 or any litre sports bikes they are all poor road bikes The prices of bikes such as Goldstars in unjustified and unsustainable and has turned the bike into an investment so you never see them on the road The fact is that most classic bike owners are older and as a rule use the bikes for a sunder potter A role for which the Goldstar is I’ll suited and younger riders who could get the use out of them can’t afford them, has this sadly made the bike something of an irrelevance, possibly
The Gold Star won many many races. It was a remarkable handler on the road or in the dirt, but you needed to understand the Girling Suspension. Other bikes could not keep up with the Gold Star in Scrambles races. You mentioned the Bonneville, I once came across a guy who worked locally who rode his 1956 Bonneville daily to work for 26years at the time I met him. The Gold Star was not over rated. The Brough Superior nor the Triumph were not over rated for their era, especially the Brough Superior. You are a very confused man.
You should pay more attention to the video. It’s about how those bikes command such high prices really. Their were other great bikes in this period too which were at least comparable. A Bonnie can be twice the price of its contemporaries today. Is it twice as good absolutely not. Ditto other bikes. All the bikes in the video are great, I say that from the start . But there are other bikes which are great too and don’t need to be seen through the same rose tinted specs. I own and love classics but I’m also realistic about them and not a fantasist
@@rickconstant6106 You may be correct. The bike I remember was a single carb In less than a minute of looking at it I remember it looked like a Bonneville T120 so this bike was a TR6 because I remember the single carb. I didn't meet the rider personally as I was there with a friend on a BSA 650 Thunderbolt, who had talked with the guy. This was back in the 1970s. So the TR6 was about 20 years old. I was really impressed. Eventually my bike out lasted all my cars to over 40 years. Still runs but I haven't been riding for a while.
Can take a bit of a kick to get going, big singles can be tougher though. Bloody Starfire 250 of all things could be a total bastard. Your right about the leaks. Those push rod tubes are a pain although many Triumph nuts argue with you if you say they do. We’ve owned them and they do. Loads of character though.
I've always thought the same re Bonneville and Goldie, but I'd add Vincent to the list even though I'd like a Brough (or Brow as Drew Prichard calls them). BSAs build quality at the time was better than Triumph - I'd happily pull a chair with A10, but Triumph twin is a little bit too delicate. My A10 has performed well in the 33 years since I rebuilt it, as has my air cooled BMW.👍
That’s the point really there are a great number of really good machines out there and it’s folly to put some on a pedestal. It just leads to inflated prices
I'm 71 and have had more than a few bikes. I rode them day and night, in all kinds of weather, all year around. I'm dangerous in a car when she lets me drive it. 🙂 I earned the BMW 500,000 mile award on 5 different BMW's. One of them was a GS1200 which I enjoyed for 130,000 miles , or so. I've also had Norton, Triumph and BSA, several of each. If a bike has a weakness, I'll find it and I'll fix it. What do I ride now ? I got off the BMW's and got a Harley Davidson Sportster. They think I'm doing animal sacrifice under a full moon. 🙂 I still do a 100 mile a day commute at my age. I like the Sportster (Bike #31) . It talks to me and I can feel everything. Very good video.
I think it’s important to have a ridden a good range of different machines, some only ever ride the one type of bike which I feel is not good for your riding. The idea of the video is for people to consider other machines because all too often riders seem to follow the herd l
I passed my Test on an MZ250 that I bought new, sold it for more than I paid for it and got a Honda CB 750 K7, Now that was a bike if you liked chrome and big pipes.
Precisely many people would be better served by a tourer twin of the same era, not quite as exciting, true but the Goldie like a bad women demands constant attention
Dood! You damage your credibility by impugning the Goldie. Your only criterion seems to be everyday use. By using this criterion alone, you deny the DBD 34 its place in its true environment, clubman racing in the UK in the 50s and 60s, where, in the right hands, it could do more than hold its own against pricier Norton Manxes and Italian multis. If you are yowling into Paddock bend at Brands Hatch, you are not going to be concerned with hard starting or clutch slipping in first gear.
Is not everyday use important? Unfortunately for the Goldie it’s true environment isn’t modern roads, you could level the same charge could levelled at modern litre sort bikes to some extent. As the video says it’s not saying it’s not a great bike but in all honesty a twin is a better road bike and we don’t live our lives on a race track do we
Calling the BSA Gold Star over-rated is just plain silly. It excelled at road racing, scrambles, enduros, flat track and just plain riding. Yes, I owned one and raced it for some 10 years. Over-rated? Hardly.
@@bikerdood1100 I paid $1,000 for my Gold Star in the Crate from England in 1957. I have no idea what the current models sell for. We are apparently talking about two different motorcycles. I'd have to say that the early Gold Star is the best single cylinder bike ever built in that era. I've owned street AJS, Matchless, Norton and Velocette as well. No accounting for taste.
Interesting video... the suzuki GS 550 is easily the best bike I've owned. The GsX1100ez was also a superb bike, great handling and bucket loads of power.
I know nothing about motorbikes but I saw one helluva bike many years ago. In the 70s I was driving up the M1 going on leave. My passenger; who knew something about bikes; told me to watch as we pulled back into the middle lane. Alongside for a few seconds was this large, long motorbike. My mate told me it was a Vincent 1000. It looked impressive but, I don't even know if my mate was having me on. I later worked for IMI Marston which had a small museum of Sunbeam pushbikes and motorbikes.
That would be a Vincent alright If you know nothing about then it’s easily remedied They have a fascinating history that started before the motor car And off course they are so much more enjoyable A classic bike is so much easier to live with than a classic car. No body work to rot I would also say I post a lot of stiff on various machines you can watch ( shameless plug ) 😂
I had a very modest Suzuki 250 GT, and I must confess when I blagged a ride or two on a Honda 400 four I thought " is that it ?" Even though it was a jewel of a motorcycle to I found it too small and no mid range unless you thrashed it.
That’s the area with an otherwise brilliant little bike falls down. Of course some love bikes they can ride hard like that. Personally I look to cover distance on my bikes and would have found it tiresome after a while
The 400/4 was an out & out oddity really, but a lovable one as you indicate. I never saw one racing about personally, like its owners wanted the more sophisticated way to cruise on motorways or reach 100 MPH or something. But for that matter i don't remember many 500 fours or other hondas getting involved against two stroke riders much.
The worst bike I ever owned was a CBX250, great expectations on paper, a proper dog in reality. I got through instrument brackets ever few months until I rubber mounted them. Close to it was a BSA Barracuda which wined loudly in third gear and was an absolute pig to start. A great bike was an Enfield clipper, it looked horrible but was comfortable, had a great cush drive and was generally reliable, only down side was the 6v electrics. It actually went airborne on the Canning Town flyover in the great storm of 1987.😂🇬🇧
The CBX was something of glop With the end of the 250 learner regs it had no market so a very rare site. Only ever seen a couple and not in the last 3 decades. Rode the the Cb250rs which was ok but has its own problems
I’ve always considered it sheer madness to put a poor Triumph Twin engine into a Norton frame. Bert Hopwood designed a twin for Norton which didn’t have the faults of the triumph engine. Edward Turner was a master stylist.of that there is no doubt.
Well in truth the Norton engine had faults of its own. Swapping an Engine into a different frame does cause it’s own problems. Each motor has its own resonances to which the frame is tuned by a good designer simply dropping an£ engine into a different frame can amplify the vibes quite considerably Still they do look cool 😎
My ex-boss used to sidecar race in the 50's and he said they picked up whatever wrecks were about to drop into a sidecar and at various times raced with engines out of Goldstars, Manx Nortons, Square Fours and even a Vincent Black Shadow.
The GS is certainly beautiful in the eye of the French beholder. Judging by what I have seen on both motorways and trunk roads, they seem to have about 50% of the sales. But, as you point out, my RT was probably a far better bet for touring.
I have restored many Gold Stars yes a pig to ride in traffic, just a small point they never fitted TT carbs but a huge 1 1/2 inch GP carb. Good vid well done. I would add the Velocette Thruxton which I also owned /
Yes similar in many respects, including that high price tag. The great shame about these bikes really is that their inflated prices make them too expensive for ordinary riders to afford and enjoy
Terrific video, I tend to feel the same, how the aura and reputation of these bikes far outweighs the practicalities of buying, riding and living with the things.
And that is precisely the point sir Had so many owners getting precious about their machines. Probably because the paid a tonne of cash for the things I expect
@@bikerdood1100 I'd like to drop a hand grenade in and vote for the entire output of Harley Davidson to be placed under the same consideration. I've never seen the appeal of them!
I had a Honda CB 400-4 as a kid in California and rode that bike through 15 years of military service. I did plenty of upgrades to mine, a Kirker 4 into 1 header, re-jetted carbs, and bored out cylinders and pistons, though tiny as there wasn't much room. I added a custom fairing that helped considerably, but being a surfer, I had experience with glassing. Rear pegs and controls too. Still, when Honda came out with the 500 Twin with much better power, I shoved my 400-4 into a storage unit and rode the Twin all of the time instead and did little tweaks to it. I began to prefer Twins over the 400-4 rather quickly. We can be so fickle, can't we? I wasn't ready to sell the 400-4 yet though. I kept it and saved it to ride on weekends after leaving the military. I finally traded it to a friend for a guitar and amp that I still have, an old Fender Stratocaster that has skyrocketed in value, though I killed the amp playing it at a concert when a rain storm came up from nowhere. Fortunately, no one was electrocuted. That old 400-4 was a smooth bike and when I removed the silencer out of the header it sounded like a Japanese Ferrari to me, LOL! Very good video, and spot-on assessments of the bikes that I've known at least. I recently made a post on Instagram about how we have a very strong tendency to emphasize our positive memories and negate our hurtful ones, e.g. falling out of a tree and breaking an arm is forgotten, and the pain is replaced by the memories of friends signing our cast and laughing at the bad jokes our friends made. Or when we wreck our parent's car and we get a tongue lashing from our father is replaced by the oohs and ahhs of seeing the new car delivered, and so on. My thesis is that this may go back to our ancient ancestors who had to daily hunt huge animals, much larger than anything alive currently, and those ancestors needed to forget their fears to return to the fields to hunt again for fresh meat. I would want to forget my fears too to gird my loins for a new round of hunting. Wouldn't you? Just thinking out loud. Again, very well-done video. Thank you for your thoughts.
@bikerdood1100 You're very welcome. I'm looking forward to seeing more videos you've produced. If you have any thoughts about the Gard Hollinger-designed Arch KRGT-1, that would be of great interest to me. I love that bike and the power cruiser idea overall, but maybe I'm one of the few. Stay safe out there.
Had a 1968 750 Norton in the 70's,great bike to ride but you learned to do the maintenance to keep it running smoothly, or shelling out $ at the cycle shop,extreme vibrations were the cause of many ills,any hard riding would loosen things up.Was on a tour with my friend thru New England when the pitch of the exhaust seem to change,thought it was the altitude,the screw holding the baffle in the Dunstalls worked loose sending the baffle down the highway.Should of used Locktite!!
Tue regular tightening of fasteners is a regular theme on many Brit bikes. Handy it you had too work on them. Go for a fast ride and everything is nicely loosed off. No sheered off nuts a classic Brit 😂
I think your comment about certain bikes being not a good ride on modern roads is the nail in the coffin of your argument. Most of the bikes had a reputation in their original day of production which was often pre war. The shiny versions you show were a eye candy for a generation of bikers who were reared on what their Father’s told them as to dream machines made pre war. Then roads and reality were different as were the roads of Britain post war due to lack of maintenance in the war years and immediately thereafter. The Gold Star famous for having lapped Brooklands at 100 mph. My Father rode at Brooklands and it was a terrifying experience the only benefit being most people were going the same way. The big V twins on that circuit hauled a side car you were fed into and you tore off a cloakroom ticket as you passed the pits so rider knew which lap he was on. With your head next to the exhaust you head nothing for the rest of the day! The Honda 400 four had a very real reason for being that size as a Japanese rider had to be able to lift his/her bike from lying flat on the ground. This extended the market to a lot of people who were lightly built. All the bikes you showed were good in their original day but so are athletes and 15 years later would Roger Bannister have managed a four minute mile? Probably not but there were a number of people who could better it. As to current value well it is a limited market and we are in the age of the affluent cheque book. In my lifetime the value of the Mona Lisa has probably multiplied by six or eight times but it is what it is! Part of the trouble is that too many definitive articles in magazines are written by people who have a limited understanding of the conditions at the time of introduction of a design. I can go to Norfolk roads where salesmen would take a customer to travel at a 100mph in large post war sports cars. You would be considered a lunatic to try 60 on them in a modern car because all they have had over the years is tar chipping from time to time, nothing else has changed in the road format. One of my Father’s unhealthy rides was on a 600 Panther keeping up with his brother on a two stroke Zenith over the Hogs Back when the oil pump fell apart and the only rectification was a twig cut from a hedge to slow the flow! It was a different work then and we should recognise it. With such stories circulating among motorcyclists and motorists of course the machines of the past have wonderful reputation enhanced by the beauty of youth of the machine and rider.
Well the bike that lapped Brooklands was a supercharged Empire star point of fact. The problem with mythical bikes is their mythical price tag. The fact is that most classic bikes are used for pottering around on rather than thrashing around like teens. A good standard bike wether single or twin that . People get seduced by those sporty looks but in the end it just makes the thing a bit of a chore to ride. The video is not comparing them to modern bikes and in fact compares the Goldstar to a contemporary twin. Not a CBR 500. The simple fact is that on the roads of 63 or 23 the less sporty bike makes a better choice. Incidentally I think everyone is very much aware of the Japanese laws Bikes are not pieces of art they are to be ridden an enjoyed not squirrelled away as an old farts investment. If young riders can’t afford em they won’t be interested in them and in the long term that’s what will matter.. and incidentally young riders do like classics. Bikes are for bikers not collectors
I think also fair, in context, to add the quality of fuel available then and post war. Octane, pre war was about 85 to 87 to average public. During the war there were two grades of pool petrol lorry at 68 known as prune juice and standard pool at just over 70. Post war these grades held and it is on Hansard the Minister refusing to raise the pool limit to 75. This could only enhance the pre war reputation of many designs! A Sunbeam 90 could tick over pre war on standard petrol with a threpenny bit standing on edge on its tank - a good way to earn a free pint! If you look at pictures of Nailsworth Ladder pre war the competition on a public road was to ascend it. Stones as big as a fist on a dirt public road and George Brough on one of his bikes chugging up it. Look at the bike, well used and Road worn! That was the dimension of public road available. Webb forks were wonderful only one spring to accommodate and that screwed down to steady the front. Nobody could successfully match two springs with available technology then and twin spring forks at best demanded massive wrists. The joy of Japanese engines was the quality of the aluminium casting finish inside and out. A 400 four I rebuilt was used by the purchaser for a year on courier runs from Norfolk to South Wales with only mileage service. After a year he replaced the wheels which were feeling their age. All things must be judged in their time but time passes and people with them and we have only current time and experience to judge them on. The Suzy 750 GS was a heck of a bike in its day and my wife still has the ticket somewhere for exceeding 120mph between Norfolk and Lincolnshire. Not a very magic figure now I do agree! However, good bad or indifferent it is an amusing look into the past but I do think the quality of that past should be recognised to allow people to understand judgements.
Thank you for a great video. Being an old Velocette owner, I was wondering if you could do a review on the mark. In the past I owned, from new a 1970 Thruxton, restored a 1953 MSS, and I also used to race a 60’s MSS motor and gearbox in a slider type short circuit frame, not very successfully mind you, but a lot of fun. Marriage and the need for cash, put an end to my Velocette ownership, but not my passion.
A brave video and well argued. I agree with all, apart from the BMW G/S section. I did quite a few miles in the mid-80s on a Monolever R80 G/S and it was a delight. Less grunt than you might want from an 800, but no gaps on the delivery and a ride that soaked up everything without being wishy-washy. I confess, I never took it off-road, but as a sit-up-high mile cruncher, it was wonderful. I find the more recent GS models slightly cartoonish and sad, but people do love them. I think your list is pretty good. I might put a Ducati on it, but I'm not sure which. As to underrated bikes, the V50 III and Monza. Solo, they were almost the perfect motorcycle on tarmac in any weather. And... Very entertaining where there was room to play.
An R80 is a million miles away from todays Chelsea tractor Too much bike too many toys for me and they fact the people don’t consider alternatives very proves the point for me
@@bikerdood1100 Absolutely, the current ones are almost a pastiche. But looking back, the old 800 seemed absurdly big and heavy at the time. The one I rode was standard, but you'd see them with those Gaston Rahier "elephant arse" P/D tanks and increased ride height. In Soho. The current ones (and the Harley version and more) are slightly silly; a sort of male Botox. But sillier.
For me the RD250LC is way over rated. Don't get me wrong, I would love to have one, but back in the day I looked at one to replace my X7 250 and was really disappointed in the way it had to be thrashed to get anywhere. The X7 was a V8 gunter by comparison. Nowadays you pay a fortune for one whereas I bought a mint X7 for 3K NZD a few years ago. With the LC's almost mythical reputation I just do not think it's justified,the 350 is a different story though!
One thing you didn't mention about the Honda was that undrilled stainless front disc which was useless in the wet. The Honda 500 four was actually introduced before the 400.
I no about the 500 Stainless discs were common on many Japanese bikes of the period and were diabolical in the way especially Modern pad materials help a biin my experience ventilated disc were also rubbish but managed to wear their pads faster. My old Guzzi used iron discs which we’re definitely better in the wet but not a trendy
An interesting selection, if I may add my 'two bob's worth'? The 650 Triumphs were an update of their 500 model, as I am sure is widely understood. Their problem with the cylinder head was not so much "cracking", as a leak of compression at the head gasket between the cylinders, once they had gone over to an aluminium head. Probably due to that gasket area being very narrow once the bore sizes were increased (with the same cylinder spacing). It was referred to at the time as 'swapping compression'. By the late '60s they added a ninth cylinder head bolt between the cylinders, but the issue remained. In the '70s they added another (tenth) bolt between the cylinders, with the bike then a 750, but - they still lost compression there. They always had that black carbon stain between the cylinders. I loved my two '69 650 models at the time, but they were a 'mechanic's bike'. Triumphs actually led me into 50 years of motorcycle mechanical work, although I moved on to Ducati twins in the '70s, and never looked back... The 'Goldie' had several problems (like the vibration both it and the twins of the time suffered from) but the Dell'Orto carburettor fitted to the Gold Star you showed highlights one of them. The original carbs were prone to distortion when hot, and never worked well after getting hot just once. Their vibration used to crack many steel brackets and chainguards, giving the lie to the obsession with steel rather than plastic at the time. The legendary Brough Superior was, as you say, an old 1930s model, and had the numerous shortcomings of the period. Much of the engine and transmission exposed to the dirt for one. Hard starting for another. A lovely contribution to motorcycling, but as you say - unaffordable for most of us, possibly related to their most famous owner, T C Lawrence. Funny you mention the rare Coventry Eagle of 1928 (their only year?) as a friend here in South Australia has one. The BMW R12 series also had such a 'celebrity endorsement', as you mention, and may not have captured the 'overweight adventure category' if not for that. Yes, expensive and overweight, and very rare to see them with anything other than full-road tyres on them. A huge following, but a huge bike. But the Honda CB400F? I had a maddening involvement with one of these, which belonged to a female friend. The camchain tensioner was a pivoting arrangement, with the pivot swinging UNDER the crankshaft. The result of not adjusting the camchain scrupulously was that the loose chain would burr over the pivot point, and jam the tensioner from working. Yes, the entire engine and crankcases had to be dismantled to repair this common problem. And for all that trouble, they made NO torque under about 8,000 RPM. I never understood their popularity. 'Thanks for the memories' - not all of them good!
Interesting thoughts Thinking of the 650 as an enlarged 500 is valid until the introduction of unit construction when the engines diverged As for the Ducati well temperamental top end and week cranks meant that it was greatly outsold by Guzzi’s Le Mans a big which a Ducati owner as a bike that did the same thing with half the moving parts For me the fact that people tended to club,an speck the Goldies was a big art of its issues as a road bike As for Brough simply put by the later 30s simply put smaller lighter machines offered similar performance for much less cost It’s worth remembering later Broughs had Matchless engines with inclosed valve gear
@@bikerdood1100 The 650 Triumphs always were too close together in the bores, pre-unit and unit construction, and if they have the aluminium head, and have done any miles, will always have that stain between the cylinders at the head gasket surface. Yes, the Guzzis were an alternative to the Ducatis, V-twin-wise, but never had the performance offered by the more sporting models of Ducati. From my '74 Sport (the first in this state) to my 1098S, now down to 162 kgs, complete but for fuel (and 160 RWHP) - the Guzzis never offered this. A very lightened Ducati. Yes, the bevel Ducatis needed some sorting, but were lighter, revved harder, handled better, and didn't suffer from having the engine in 'sideways', with the torque effect, clunky engine-speed gearbox, etc. of the Guzzis. I did 168,000 kms on my '78 900SS, and riding it back to back with Moto Guzzis was not favourable to the Guzzi. Any Guzzi. I worked on these bikes for decades. To each his own! Motorcyclists tend to be loyal to whichever brand they settled on. I was very 'staunch' about the Triumphs, and after 50 years of joy on Ducatis, I remain wedded to them. My work and my play all that time. At 71 I am now doing most of my miles on a Transalp 750 (which replaces my old Cagiva Elefant 750) now I live in a place with many dirt roads, but the Ducati still gets a rev occasionally, and I still have the Elefant registered. Thanks for your thoughts. Enjoy your ride! 😊
I have exactly the same F2 400/ 4 as the one in your video and would agree it's probably overrated as a motorcycle but it is such a well proportioned little bike and lovely to look at (through my pink tinged glasses anyway). On the road it's very taught - much more so than virtually anything else from that era - but the engine screaming away below you does wear you out mentally if you're going any distance. A friend and I were swapping between the 400/4 and my slightly earlier 250 Yamaha two stroke on a run last summer - comparing and contrasting. The Yamaha came out as more comfortable, easier to ride and more relaxed. That's a screaming sports two stroke! The Honda was marginally quicker, it felt far more sophisticated but more tiring. Fuel economy and handling were about the same. We were trying to decide which one to ride down to Morocco. After riding them back to back the decision went to the .... Yamaha, and that's what we used.
Well technically speaking the lack of torque for a two stroke is an urban myth. It’s much to do with how they’re tuned. We had a Honda Nsr 250 sometime ago it was much more flexible than my wife’s GSXR 400 because it was tuned to give 45hp so mid range was very respectable, much better than any four stroke 250 that’s for sure
@@bikerdood1100 Very true about two strokes, and especially the earlier stuff - 70's mainly. They may have seemed inflexible screamers compared to a similar era four stroke twin (eg my XS2 Yamaha) but compared to later stuff they were mildly tuned and easy to ride. You can very easily tour on an early Yamaha as they have enough mid range to keep up with the traffic. They're a bit lacking on hills and there you have to row them along on the gearbox but you have to on the 400/4 as well. Next two stroke tour for me is a trip to the US in April to ride a 1969 R3 350 Yamaha from near New York down to Virginia - an 800 mile round trip. Going with a friend on a KLR650. It'll be an interesting comparison.
Another range of bikes that I feel are overrated are all of the Kawasaki Triples. People get all gooey over them but they were really pretty bad overall. You should probably add the Suzuki 380 and 550 to that list too but I believe the GT750 Water Buffalo (Kettle to you) deserves some love.
@@guylr7390 Not sure whether it should be thumbs up or down as I've owned one of the early 500 triples for decades! The trouble with them is that they're a late 60's design - even the later stuff - and as such they're pretty crude. My 500 is uncomfortable to sit on, vibrates and rattles and drinks petrol like the oceans are full of the stuff. But ... get it up on the power band and it's an exciting ride even now. Compare it with anything else *from the era* and it stands out as as close to psychotic as you're going to get. A lot of people like that Dr Jeckyll and Mr Hyde character. Tour on it and you'll be seriously disappointed. Go from the lights when they turn green and you'll see why people bought them.
Regarding the GS, and their becoming the SUV of the riding world, I won't disagree, but no bike ever fell to hand- like it had been custom fit for me- than my '05 did right out of the box. An ergonomic coincidence, sure, but still one of the favorite bikes I've ever had, and I started riding in the mid '70s.
Well bikes are a personal thing in terms of ergo. Kit is very much the same, I’ve tried on pricy helmets that were bloody uncomfortable. Every head is different. I will nether understand BMW styling though symmetry is the path to beauty
@@bikerdood1100 and to be clear, I got the one with cast wheels - 'cause I knew it'd be a road bike for me, although due to the manner of my property, the bike got "off roadef" every single time I rode it (sloped lawn leading to unpaved approach road)
I also have a 05 GS and it's fun to tour on. I've had it on dirt and gravel roads with excellent handling characteristics. I'm in my 70's now so it's just for fun now and I keep it to the highway only. Best to you
The best 250 single four stroke ever built was the 1980 Honda CB 250 RSA , never let me down once ,only ever got the odd flat tyre due to punctures . It was good on fuel economy & see some bigger machines off from the lights & corner better than any Ducati . It was used everyday in all weathers ,& even when 10 years old ,with knackered cam & bearing surfaces plus pitted cam lobes ,it fired up fist time & ran as sweet as a nut ,with no noticeable drop in performance . If they still produced them today ,I would order one over any thing produced today .
Hindsight is an exact science! At the time of manufacture the Triumph, BSA, Brough and Honda had a real drop on their rivals. My experience of BMW ownership was of undiluted misery, though the GS is very much riding the wave of Ewan and Charlie. This was predominantly a subjective analysis, though I would be interested to see more.
Well really for me it’s about the inflated asking prices for some bikes today. The price of a Goldstar for example is totally unrealistic for most potential owners leaving them to be snatched up by wealthy collectors
@bikerdood1100 The ridiculous prices are a joke. When you examine these a little deeper, it reveals some more about the machines compared to their contemporaries. The Brough, as you rightly say, is a bitza. The critical point is that it was made up of the best kit the industry could offer. Even the later Matchless motors were upgraded to Brough Superior specification.
I think overrated is a bit strong bikerdood 1100, i bought a goldstar in 1961 from kings of Blackburn in clubmans trim with all the extras 5 gallon tank 190mm front brake ETC it seems like yesterday that i rolled it out of the shop on penny street hoping that i could kick start the bloody thing up, with half a dozen watchers hoping i could not, but thank the lord it fired up what a good feeling that was, it cost me on HP 350 pounds, what a bike (race bike on the road) that goldie taught me a lot start it from cold with n5 plug warm it up then change to n55R TO RUN IT or hole the piston (good fun eh) but totaly impractica,l with hindsite a triumph bonny or a Rocket goldstar would have been a more usable bike but hindsite was not available then, can you see that you have set me off on all our yesterdays, but thanks for the chance to reflect on when i was a lad, i could go on for ever about the 1960s but i will not, STAY SAFE.
I had a 1953 BB34 Gold Star with a standard gearbox and normal handlebars. I used it for everything from day to day, touring, and even semi-sporting trials both solo and sidecar. It was the first Gold Star with a pivoted rear fork. One of the great things was the quickly detachable wheels, which made punctures easy to repair. I had to replace the worn out TT Carb with a Monobloc, which was easier on my kick-start knee :) I still have a piston with a hole burnt in from the dodgy TT carb (weak mixture).
The big problem is the GP carb which is made worse by poor maintenance and the fact the almost everyone wants a close ratio box and clip ons just makes for an impractical combination on modern roads. People will argue is better for the track but the reality is that’s not where people rode them these days, well most
@@bikerdood1100 Quite. A few years back I met an old friend I hadn't seen for years and he'd got my old Goldie. He claimed it was literally the first Gold Star with that frame. He had been an artist with sheet metal and made many alloy tanks/farings etc. He used to trial Ariel sidecar outfits. I'm 84 now and a lot of things I enjoyed are no longer possible - mostly due to injury - but I've had a lot of bikes in my time. Of BMWs I much prefer the lighter, more manageable Earles fork models, R50, R60 and R69s, all of which I had at one time - I even rode my R69s in the Land's End trial! They have the benefit of a much lower saddle height. I knew an old chap in Nottingham (about my age now!) who knew George Brough quite well and agreed with your assessment of his salesmanship and flair. He used to passenger in a sidecar with Sturmey Archer gearbox designer Issy Cohen in the 1920s.
Possibly interesting supplement to the Honda 350 & 400 Fours in '74 I ambled around north central France for a few days on a CB350 K4 (twin) I think that was the first time I'd seen the 400 Fours and the French absolutely loved 'em - They (& Honda CD 175s) were everywhere, 'tho the 4000 Fours were incredibly rare back in the UK .
@@wideyxyz2271 I'd forgotten that name 'til you said it In fact I though for a bit 'Why's he bringing Benellis into this part of the discussion'? THEN I remembered *FUN FACT* Benly is the Anglisised version of the Japanese word Benry.
Cb400 was a real bike. Everything on the tin, affordable, reliable, easy to handle (my GF road it too) and all round beautiful ❤️ This guy's an idiot or biased against Asians to put it here. He's sounding racist to me 🤣
I'm with you on your views on "adventure" bikes, definitely the two-wheeled Chelsea tractor (or those appalling pick up trucks) I served my biking apprenticeship in the 80-90s. Where are the affordable hooligan sports bikes these days? It's all good looking 125s, that are probably much slower than my old RD125 from '87, or ugly overweight non-off-road bikes. (Maybe I'm just that old man shouting at clouds 😂)
I’ve had both a Honda CB350 twin and a 400F. Both great rides, but I found the 400 to be much more challenging and fun to ride in a technical sense. I’d also like to make note that one bike conspicuously missing from this list is the Kawasaki KH750, also known as the “H2” or the “widow maker”. Amazing motorcycle, explosively powerful, great exhaust note… and handled like a brick. Terrifying, yet more fun than than I’ve had on any pre-1980 machine. *currently my favorite is a 1999 Buell M2. More on road capabilities than most will ever utilize, none of the computer generated babysitters so easily found on “modern” motorcycles.
Just as a side note I've had my Commando over 40 years it has done over 100,000 miles and is still going strong. I agree it has its faults, but most have been long sorted now.🇬🇧
I suppose the big worry is those freshly imported from the US bikes , good condition outwardly but it may have sat for years without improvement or attention, ditto barn finds I expect
I officially hate you. 😁
But not out the factory they weren’t.
How much to make it reliable?
I expect better Carbs n ignition system would make a massive difference. Then there’s the most important part, a degree of mechanical sympathy. Some all too often lacking when they were new
@@bikerdood1100 The 73- 74 850's were good right off the showroom floor when compared to other British bikes of those years. If you run a Commando today you need the Boyer ignition and sleeved Concentrics. The single Mikuni conversion is sweet but has no top end. Plan on rebuilding the Isolastics. Anything older may need some serious sorting, especially the Combat models. They were never the "world beater" they were promised to be, just very sweet bikes if you maintained them meticulously and awful if you didn't.
Nothing bettter than having your customers be your field maintenance and updating staff.
9:35 The CB400F was not replaced by the 500/550. The 500 was produced before the 400. The 550 was an update to the 500.
In the UK those nightmares (2 cyl Dreams) came along after the 4/4.
Yea I no 🙄
It was the lighter cheaper and more powerful 400 dream which I do show so I not
The 400f was too darn expensive to build
Of course the twin came after
That’s what replacement means
@@bikerdood1100 Maybe listen to what you say at the timestamp.
@@elemar5 indeed clearly states the 400 was replaced by the 500 then the 550, which is not true
The 6 valve twins, 400 Dream and Super Dream were dull dogs to ride though. Really were. Might have been fractionally better on paper but that was all you could say for it. I worked in the trade back then and have ridden just about the whole late 70s/early 80s Honda range and most of the Yams and Suzukis too. In my opinion the CB400F was the standout bike of the era (well perhaps the Yam 350LC, but that was the next generation). Suffers in modern terms because its low powered to contemporary bikes, but back then it wasn't. One of my favourite 400F moments was when I did some gardening work for a chap a few years later, and turned up on my then rather elderly 400F with probably 40 or 50k on the clock and tatty with it. The chap I was doing the work for had a Kawasaki Z 400 four cylinder, which they made for a while (and admittedly wasn't a standout) . "Is", he asked me "the 400F as good as its reputation?" 'Are you insured for other bikes? Take it out and have a go' He came back about quarter of an hour later with a very glum look on his face. "Its better than my bike". One of the things about the 400F is that it was basically crammed into a 250 sized frame, whereas the earlier 500 and later 550 were more like small 750s. It was funny, because there were a lot of chassis parts in common with the G5 and CJ 250/350s, but in the 400F chassis they just worked better.
@@JimChamp for Honda as a company though they were a win win. The twin was more powerful, had better torque and most importantly for Mr Honda much cheaper to build. That’s why there are so many mid sized twins around today and very few mid sized 4s.
Had a DB34 Gold Star that I rode every day to work and back for 7 years. Initially in Touring trim I converted it to the full DBD34 Clubmans specification with 1 1/2" GP carburettor, close ratio gearbox, clip ons and rear set footrests etc. Only needed to slip the clutch for 2 to 3 seconds to get it away and I used to ride around town in top. The GP carburettor being a racing design had no idling provision hence the slow blipping technique whilst at traffic lights and roundabouts. Rode it through the centre of London a few times too. Top speed on mine 115 mph. It was an absolute credit to the BSA Development Engineers.
They were great bikes but at todays obscene prices don’t think anyone is commuting on one today
I also had a DBD34 with RR2T gearbox for years back in the 70's used it for work shopping just riding around every day bike, no way did I have to slip the clutch till it reached 30 or 40 mph, would reach 100 mph on the clock, great bike, also had a BSA A10 Road Rocket another great bike of the day, just two of many Made in England bikes.
The worst problems with British twins like the Bonneville were that they vibrated like paint-can shakers on the highway, and they leaked oil everywhere in spite of your best efforts. But lovely on 50 mph back-roads. And damn, they sure looked good and were a teenage boy's dream.
Well they were designed for a world before the Highway really, I do find my BSA A10 shakes a whole lot less than our Triumphs did
Most all of the Tr-6 models leaked which ushered in the smoother Honda’s,Yamaha twin 650,with more power and no leaks
Honda Twins, like my CB360 were as smooth as butter and. Revved to 11,000 rpm, almost 1hp for each 10cc and just over 100mph with its 6 speed box.......Honda were at the top of their game......the Poms didn’t stand a chance.
I got my bike liscense in 1970.
BSA went out of buisness and everyone I met with Bonnie or Commando were waiting on parts and doing them up.
They were all fantastic to ride when they went.
My 500 Norton is much smoother than any British 650 I have ridden. But not as fast. I have seen 90 mph on it, versus 110mph on the BSA Super Rocket I once owned. Otoh, the handlebar vibes on that got to your hands on a decent ride.
Buy a Honda Cub does everything perfect. Cheap affordable, economical and you’ll be utterly invisible at any bike meet
Well that used to be true but the Cub has become rather trendy in the UK. Second hand prices are going up an£ up
It’s a shame a lot of them are being trashed so called custom builds, I’ve had a c50 , c70 , c90, and loved them all 😊❤
@@colinrashleigh6488 I agree ghastly hipster builds. It is the most genius bike ever built if you want to get somewhere and actually get there. But that’s not what most want out of a bike these days. More look at my wad posturing.
@@stuartosborne3013 that goes w the “bike meat” comment.. 😃
From the people who brought you pearl harbour. Note the correct spelling of harbour.
The Commando required an hours maintenance for a days ride in some versions but I’d gladly own another if they didn’t require a mortgage to own. You’re dead right about the T160, they were fantastic to ride, and so was the BSA Rocket III. That’s a beautiful Bonnie at the start of the video! I have a 1982 T-140 and remember when they came out - strong motor but everything else was scraping the bottom of the barrel in fit and finish. It still rides with minimum fuss and maximum fun though!
There’s the problem classics are getting beyond the reach of the people who would actually ride the things
I loved my Commandos. Yeah, they required some maintenance, but it wasn't all that bad.
having my Norton Roadster turn 50 this year, seems like it has never let me down...My '69 P11 did, but the most fun I had was on my '76 CCM580... All these required that you know them intimately and be prepared to maintain them ...and the alloys didn't let you down., but never overrated.
I loved my 850 Commando Mk2a, which I bought new in 1974, but it needed a lot of maintenance, and I was 19 and using it for everyday transport, so it got neglected and I paid the price with all kinds of vibration-related issues. I gave up 2 years on and bought a car. My next British bike was a Triumph T140V, which I still use now, 30 years later. It is much more reliable, but it does get a lot better treatment than the Norton.
I bought a new Commando 750 Interstate 'Combat' in 1972, it was unreliable rubbish, sold on 'patriotism'. They were called unreliable in those days, now it's changed into 'maintenance intensive'.
Good video , I had two 400 4's when they first came out , put ace bars and faring and racing seat on it ,this greatly improved the handling and top speed , as it was very light on the front end as standard , I really thought this was the dogs nuts until one day while going flat out cranked right over on a dual carriageway roundabout one of the new 400 twins came sailing past round the outside , I knew then the 400 /4 had had it's day ! but I've always had fond memories of that bike !
Sometimes less is indeed more
with respect flat out, leaned over on dual carriageway is not what these bikes were about I had one 10 years from 1975. used everyday all year round it was a very capable bike lightweight low COG commuter that would do the coast run every weekend with the GF on the back.
the 4cyl sound from the 4 individual pipes was something else, completely lost when a 4 into one was fitted. later on I got the 550 for more power but it wasn't the same bike.
@@bananabrooks3836 good catch typo error bike was new 1975 comment edited. 1985 swapped it for a Kawasaki 305 belt drive also new regretted it after the first week of riding.
@@yorkiecol7973 The 400/4 never had 4 individual pipes, it had a 4 into 1 from the factory, It was a very distinctive looking 4 into 1, with all 4 header pipes angled to the right hand side...The 350/4 had 4 pipes...
@@MickH60 nope it was a 400 and did have 4 pipes it's one of the reasons I bought it they looked cool, besides I'm not sure the 350 was ever sold as a UK model some may been grey imports like the 500 and 650 models though.
Love this video!!
I started riding in the late 60's which was on small Honda's. Later I rode several Triumphs and I agree with what you said.
The CB 400 four had character, the 2 cylinder 350 did not. IMHO if you want a vintage 4 cylinder get a CB 750.
I now own a 05 GS 1200 and I agree, it will do anything but nothing perfectly. I do my own maintenance so that's not an issue. I got it at a reasonable price four years ago with less than 2000 miles on it so that's not an issue. If I had to buy new, no way! Too much money and they have to be serviced at the dealership and that's even more money.
Very well done video.
Thanks
I do my own maintenance which puts me off a lot of machines. Service charges can be a bit crazy
CB750K you could blag a good one in the late 80s for well under a grand.....Halcyon days!
Velocette Venom, Velocette Thruxton, Velocette Viper. they handled well and had a decent turn of speed, they also attracted a crowd with their retro looks.
Love that black paint job and a good match for the Goldstar
Oddly enough I’ve only ever ridden a cami 350, it was fab
Had A Venom Clubman , Viper clubman and a Thruxton all great bikes .
Velos looked mean.
However, my favourite was a pre unit Triumph Speed Twin ,ultra reliable and fun to ride.
The only Velo I owned (briefly) was a Valiant. I always fancied a Thruxton but the prices were like phone numbers.
In the 60s there used to be a guy ride over from the next town on his Thruxton and go for a burn with the other guys - they would visit the White Post transport cafe near Mansfield and on the way back to Newark would let rip down the Averham Flash. One of the guys had a T120 Bonny that he had spent a fortune on around at Johnny Duncan's shop, partly with dreams of beating Cowboy's Velo down the Flash. Initially the Velo would be eating the Bonny's dust but on the return to base (Cross Keys pub), the Bonny owner would be heard to say he had lost again, "I can't understand it" he would moan, "it never seems to go faster, it only bangs louder"...
Velocette venom was my bike sold it for £60 mad
My Venom was a delight. It was a machine made by engineers who knew their business, and handled superbly.
I had a BSA goldstar when I was young , biggest piece of shit i ever owned .
Love the honesty 😂
I bought a new 400 Four aged 19 in 1977 and I loved everything about it. Looking back, it had a combination of power and gearing that made for a really fun ride when you ragged it. I had no experience at the time of more powerful bikes, having come from a Yamaha RD200, but I enjoyed every second I rode it, and given how I used to ride in those days, I'd have probably seriously hurt myself or worse if I'd bought something bigger. It's the only bike from my past I would consider buying again,
As for the BSA Gold Star, I remember a lecturer while I was a student being totally unimpressed with the prices they were fetching in the late 70's. He owned one in the 60's, and it was so unreliable, he left it behind a hedge somewhere in North Wales because he couldn't be bothered with it anymore, and it was, in his words, the biggest pile of junk ever made.
As I say all good bikes but do the justify today’s asking prices when other bikes are passed over ?
Yes, I totally agree with your mate, the Goldie is useless junk!
Er‘m, just out of interest, I don’t suppose you remember exactly where that hedge was… 🤔
I had a CB 400 super four but much later model. Brilliant, solid, bike that was called pocket rocket at the time!
One the best EVER!
The guy with this channel just needed to put a jap bike in the list so he can feel good about his Brit self. A real wanker.
Not watching his content anymore! C.nt
I had a Kawasaki Z1B and due to a financial catastrophe had to downsize to a 400-4, got to say after hating it for the first month or so, I came to love that little thing.
400-4 was the best bike I ever owned, living on the isle of Mull with single track roads everywhere it was super nimble, just as well because I had 13 hairpins to negotiate in 7 miles!
I swapped the standard exhaust for one of Mr Yoshimuras as the standard one kept catching the road
Going to work every morning was an absolute pleasure
I look at motorcycles in a very different way than you do. To me a motorcycle is far more of an emotional thing than a functional thing. If you want a transportation appliance, get a modern car, or scooter. I owned a 1966 Triumph T120 Bonneville from 1983-1988. It was an absolutely wonderful motorcycle. Out of more than 50 motorcycles I have owned, it was my favorite. Yes it had it's issues as far as reliability and function goes, but its emotional appeal was off the scale. It was a beautiful bike, it made a beautiful sound, and it had a wonderful feel. Riding it gave you an almost euphoric feel. If there is one thing I hate, it is a smooth, quiet motorcycle. It was a simple machine, easy to work on, and it had absolutely NO electronic parts. Today's motorcycles are nothing but computers on wheels, and every single one of them are as ugly as it gets. Most of them are 99% flat black. I made a serious mistake in selling it, and cannot afford to replace it, or I would. In 2013, I bought a new Royal Enfield Classic 500. It was dirt cheap, and in stock form it was a horrible bike. It looked great, but it wheezed and hesitated like crazy. and it had a three foot long 50 pound exhaust that produced no sound. I trash canned the EFI, and replaced it with an Amal Concentric MK1 carburetor, and replaced that horrible exhaust with a shorter, lighter, much louder one. It now felt and sounded like a long stroke British single should. It's certainly not a replacement for the Triumph, but I have put 21,000 miles on it, and thoroughly enjoyed every one of them.
As for the Gold Star, it is also a beautiful bike, and while I would love to own one, I admit it would not get ridden much. It's just too high strung for my more relaxed type of riding.
I have only seen one Brough Superior, at a motorcycle show, I did not hear it run, but I love the way it sounds in your video. I had always heard about the super high quality, but the one I saw, while beautifully finished (obviously a very expensive restoration) I was not impressed with the manufacturing quality of its parts. It was rough. It looked like it had been hammered out by the village blacksmith. While it was an intriguing bike, it did not meet my expectations. That might have been different had I been able to ride it. As someone who has worked on Model T Fords, I do accept the fact that the finish was pretty much representative of the period in which it was built. It is much older than the Triumph or the Gold Star.
I don't even know what that BMW is doing here. It is 100% JUNK. Not only is it super ugly, but smooth, quiet, more computer than motorcycle, and as unreliable as it gets. Modern BMWs are less reliable than 1960s British bikes. I don't hate all BMWs, those made from around 1970 and back were actually quite desirable, and far more reliable than new ones.
The Honda CB400F is a bike I have conflicting feelings about. First, it's Japanese, which kind of puts me off to begin with. But there is a beauty to it, starting with those four chrome pipes that wrap around to a single exhaust. It would likely be a lot of fun on curvy mountain roads, but would take a lot more effort to ride. I think it would be fun for a short ride, on the right kind of roads. But I'm the type who prefers to just sit back and ride at a fairly steady speed, enjoying the sound and feel of the engine. An inline four would be a bit too smooth, and too well balanced to have much of a feel. Everything is relative, and if modern bikes were not so disgusting, I probably wouldn't give it a second look. But when comparing it to modern bikes, it looks a LOT better than it probably did back in it's day. If I were going to buy a Japanese bike, it would probably be a Yamaha XS650.
Besides the Royal Enfield, I also have a 1997 H-D Sportster 883, a 2002 H-D Sportster 1200, and a 2004 Suzuki DR400 dual sport bike for off road riding. Oh, and a 1979 Vespa P200E 2 stroke manual shift scooter.
If you think I don’t see motorcycles in an emotionally you would be very wrong. I’ve been passionate about all of. I love riding them, the history and everything about them. Nothing brings more joy than to ride my old BSA.
What makes me a green is the way that classic bikes are treated as a commodity and not something to be enjoyed. When bikes like a Brough are put on a pedestal it means that real riders never get to experience them and that can only be a very bad thing.
The Gold star is beautiful but look at the prices they sell for absolutely obscene. But ultimately we have to be realistic, I say right at the beginning of that video that they are all great bikes. I just want people to consider that are very worthwhile alternatives, would I like to be able to ride a Goldstar, yes but owning one I’m not so sure they are very very needy, like a bad women,. I love the styling in fact if features in our top 10 most beautiful bikes videos but when riding you also have to practical.
Can I ride this thing 100 miles without needing surgery. For me in buy A rocket Goldstar every time given the cash, if you not on track is far and away a better bike and just as pretty
If I wasn’t emotional about bikes
Why would I make videos about them.it’s not like I make any real money from it
Just a thought
Get yourself the XS650. You won't regret it.
About 50 years ago I had a 1952 Royal Enfield 500 Twin. My late father had rebuilt and tuned it (he was a competition mechanic) and the top speed had gone from about 70 mph to over 100! It had twin reverse cone megaphone exhausts and sounded gorgeous. Plenty of pulling power even at low revs, comfortable to ride even with two up and handled well - my footrest rubbers were chamfered away from fast cornering. Great memory.
You've clearly never ridden a modern BMW.
Ignorance is dangerous.
Back in 1980, a fairly wealthy friend, a collector, was showing me over a dozen of his cherished bikes , as it was a beautiful late summer evening he suggested that I chose any of the bikes and he would select something else, we'd then ride from west London to the south coast and back. Without hesitating, (he might have changed his mind!), I opted for the BSA Clubman..Wow.. was that a mistake! The lowered bars, not the most comfortable position for a lengthy ride.. what felt like pulling away in 2nd gear at every stop.. By the time we arrived back I never wanted to go near it again.. except of course, to look at it. My personal all time favourite ? Sitting in a traffic jam in Park Lane, 1977, I looked left into the BMW showroom, usually displaying the latest offering from Bavaria.. instead of a super-car there was instead, for the first time ever, a motorcycle! It was stunning! I parked as soon as I could find a place, walked back to the showroom and tried to buy it! Metallic blue, R100RS, it just stunned me. They wouldn't let me have that one but two weeks later I had one, same colour, I loved it to death.. kept it inside my house, never in the garage.
I must admit, while I’m not a big BMW fan I always loved 5he RS.
You’re a brave man making these videos knowing that you are going to be treading on the toes of both those who lust after these bikes and those who forked out “too much” money for one already. Bottom line is that all these bikes are highly desirable and so their greatness is simply an established fact that pointing out their faults does nothing to diminish. I enjoyed both your videos on this subject just to see and hear these great machines. Market forces have already decided that they are not overrated, these bikes are valued as automotive art as much as anything so comparing them with alternatives that are “just as good” doesn’t necessarily make a compelling argument against their value.
I think people need to be honest and realistic
Also it’s not about say their rubbish as some seem to think it’s about stopping people fixating on such a narrow field
There’s are world of choice out there some bikes that are just as good if not better choices that simply get ignored.
People can very sheep like sometimes. I find that when everyone wants the same thing is a massive turn off (GS)
I’m not convinced people make informed choice but rather follow blindly.
Biking is supposed to be about individuality
Market forces mean bugger all ultimately and the modern obsession with how much bikes achieve at auction says nothing about the bike itself
@@bikerdood1100 I liked a lot of these bikes (I’m old, but not a Brough Superior old) before I knew they were or before they became iconic, this says to me that they are inherently desirable. A Spitfire is iconic but there are better planes, an E Type Jag is iconic but there are better cars. Where I agree is that many other bikes with similar qualities do exist that make great alternatives for us mere mortals at more reasonable prices. If a few people have the narrow focus you mention then all the better for the rest of us?
It's just objectivity verses nostalgia. Too many people are too easily offended.
@bobroberts6155 An item is worth exactly what It will bring in the marketplace. (Roughly) John D Rockefeller
About the Bonnie's handling, that is why the Triton and Tribsa were built by bikers back in the day (Norton or BSA frames with the Trummie engine)
Exactly
Should hear the level denial
Fact is the frame was too flimsy particularly early on
An old throw-back from the 60's & 70's, I have a passion for saving, and restoring some of these old vintage bikes, before they end up in the scrap heap, and lost to history !
I have to tell you that this video is without question, got a like, and subscription out of me !
Nice job on the video Sir !
Thanks 🙏
@@bikerdood1100
I wish as a kid that I knew some of these great brands were going to fade away !
I would have put more $$$ into more of these older top quality bikes then !
Now, I'm just picking up the pieces of what no one else wants to mess with !
@@quadsman11 you find that what is regarded as junk has a very annoying habit of shifting. I got Deb the excelsior 150 you can see in some of our videos not so long ago for the princely sum of £124
Today they are worth 10 times that. The problem is that old bikes get pushed out the price range of most young riders which can only be a very bad thing. It’s difficult enough to attract young people on to bikes as it is.
Once the people who have spent a fortune on older bikes die off, not so long away in reality well then what ?
The forks frames, chrome and paint finish is far far superior to today's machines
I had a BSA A10 and the chrome on the exhaust , footrests etc never peeled or failed even if it had been abused and the frame was so well made, beautiful brazing too. Magneto ignition was great. I had many 1970s bikes from Japan after. Some were great like z650 Kawasaki and Suzuki gs850, 1000 and 750. Really solid engines . Yamaha XS750 triple was a disaster but xs650 was good and xt500 was a lot of fun but had flaws with top end oil feed.
Well I run both old and new bikes alongside each other, old bike Finnish is indeed very good, cost less of an object I suppose. Suspension and frame definitely not, well apart from the Harley sportster we had a few years ago, it’s suspension was very crashy
Our SV Suzuki has cheap suspension but it’s very good compared to anything I felt on a classic. I have to say that the chassis design on some 60s Triumphs was ridiculously flimsy, especially the smaller bikes 350 and 500
Almost exacty the same as what I have now. Flash and W650. Had loads of Jap bikes in the 80s.
Ya, I've read that the XS650 was nicknamed the 'Hamamatsu Bonneville' 😁
Most Overrated Motorcycle in History? The original Honda 750. Every owner I knew back in the 70s died trying to keep up with their mates on British bikes on the corners. Whether it was the stodgy, wallowy handling, or just that the riders became reckless in their need to impress on over-crowded, twisty English roads, whereas a Bonnie could be ridden with abandon.
I must admit I was sorely tempted to include it. Definitely a part 2 coming
During testing on race tracks in America, Honda put the 750 up against the competition. Harleys were totally uncompetitive. The only British bike that could live with the Honda was the Norton Commando but unfortunately they shook themselves to death after a couple of days. Granted on backroad scratching the lighter and more agile British Iron probably had the advantage.
I had a 1974 CB750 and yes, cornering was not up to the British bikes but, while we may have lost seconds in the corners we gained minutes while they were topping up their oil and hours or days while they were replacing lost nuts, bolts, and other bits. I rode mine across Canada and back and only had to oil my chain.
I bought a brand new CB750K6 1975 year my first multi, what joy that bike gave me in my later teens and still fondly remembered.
The CB750 was a marvel. As a British bike rider in the 70-80’s we hated them , they were fast , incredibly reliable , stayed clean and could go just a fast and round the corners every time they went out on the road , for us it was hit or miss if we could manage to show up.
And they had electric start.
They did everything a bike should do , we hated them because they did everything we wanted to do!
Cheers Warren
Another good video and I agree over the BMW I have had a few but found them "fussy" and hard to service and work on ,but my younger brother loves his .The Honda 4 was a pretty bike good for commuting or if your short in the leg ,but I have always been heavy & over 6 ft so hardly one for me , one serious annoying fault was the front mudguard sprayed water straight onto the camchain adjuster on the front of the cylinders being so small it was just made to snap or strip the threads ?. As for Brough ,I have ridden bikes since the early 6os and have only seen three on the road and one a old Guy had near me with a sidecar fitted . The pre unit Bonnie was fairly reliable and oil tight ,but the basic electrics were horrible ,it used to gobble bulbs with the vibration .Never got - on with the Goldie but loved the looks and handling ,I had a Rocket Gold Star and a 1960 Gold flash that I did 40 + thousand miles on solo & sidecar , only broke down twice ,mag . packed up and the old crappy caged ball clutch disintegrated in Derbyshire ?. Had 100s of bikes but the best I can count on one hand ,I now own 4 including a Kwak Z1000 and a Wildstar XVS 1600 ,in my 70s now but still ride thru the winters ,but kickstarts are now a no - no ! . Happy Riding Lads .
It’s really about getting people to think about considering alternatives. Rather than everyone wanting the same things.
I can't agree with your statement that the BMW boxer is hard to work on. It's the easiest bike to service I've ever owned...
@@gsmdo8836 Old air cooled Beemers are ,I am talking about the later fully faired offerings ,what take a afternoon to get at the battery ?.
Most overrated British bike for me is the 750/850 Norton Commando. Great bike for sure but far too many basic engine and chassis faults to be deserving of its reputation compared even to other Norton models. Most overrated Italian bike, the Laverda Jota, not that powerful in reality and not brilliant handling. Most overrated Jap bike, Kawasaki Z1/900/ fantastic engine and looks but handled like a drunk camel on roller-skates. Owned all of the aforementioned. All great bikes but overrated. Conversely, most maligned bike, Triumph T160, smooth, comfortable, reliable and cornered like a dream, but I was lucky to have had a good one. BTW Honda produced the 500/4 and 550/4 before the 400/4, not after it. The 500/4 launched here in 1971 and the 550/4 in 1974.
Good point true about the Commando. The gearbox used was from AMC twins and the shafts did not line up brilliantly. Wasn’t a big problem on earlier machines but the power of the commando , especially the racers was pushing it really.
The handling of a lot of early Kawasaki was poor weather they be two or four strokes.
Was gunna include the z in a later video for that very reason. In standard trim the bars were too high and the suspension poor
A mate of mine had a really good t160v and it was superb.! Unfortunately the one I had wasn’t.
@@stephenanderson4603 Sadly that was the majority experience. It could have been the bike that saved Triumph. They took the wrong bike away from Meriden. Look how well made the T140 was, the Meriden factory was a good workforce badly betrayed.
@@bikerdood1100 Yes, pity, the 900 was one of the greatest 4 cylinder engines ever, could be tuned to double power and still be 100 per cent reliable. It had the highest quality alloy metallurgy of any Jap engine ever made, virgin material, not recycled alloy. Kawasaki had a metals division so they allocated the best to heir flagship bike out of pride. That is why so many people fitted it into Harris, Sealey and Rickman chassis. .
Interesting comment, bit surprised about you thinking the z1, z900 was overated, nobody overrated its handling,(very few big jap bikes handled well at the time, particularly my triples.) However at launch it was simply awesome, due to its size and performance and looks as you say. Just my thoughts.
Hey I like to hear about the Ariel models. I had a twin in the late sexties . I am not shure if it was the Red Hunter or a Huntmaster. Back then I loved working with and driving this machine.
Ariel are probably the best value for money Classics. Far too often overlooked
It may be a controversial view, but I think the later, oil-in-frame Bonnevilles are a more practical bike to own than the early pre-unit or even unit sixties models. OK, they're not as pretty, but they handle well, don't leak if they are put together properly, and have more modern features like disc brakes, indicators and halogen lighting. Virtually all the parts are readily available off the shelf, and the bikes are a much more sensible price than the early ones.
I may be biased here, I've had a 1978 T140V for the last 30 years, and it has been very reliable and a pleasure to ride. It may not be suitable for regular, long distance commuting or continental touring, but I use it as daily transport, with the odd long run thrown in.
On Balance I’m inclined to agree
We had a Tr7rv and it was very good
No question the T140 was a much maligned bike that was and is actually a solid well built bike, at least the Meriden ones.
@@bikerdood1100 Tr7rv in green/white - my first 'proper' bike when I was 17
I would add the Honda VFR late models when they moved away from the gear driven cams. The early ones were a dream to ride and the noise from the gears was wonderful. I do miss my early one...I bought two later models with the chain driven cams and even a vtec model but they just could not cut it.
They did get heavy and thirsty later
VTEC was just unnecessary
Loved my Vtec!
Bought a 2002 Honda vtec/ VFR In
2014 only 12000 kms on the clock and whistle Dixie everytime
I'm out riding , beautiful bike build on a solid well balanced platform.Yes the enthusiasts love the gear driven motor and the particular sound it makes but their are those of us whom like the sound of that vtec cutting in and the surge of power it provides.
As regards the vtec being unnecessary I can only say, not to many motorcycles can on basically the same platform boast top touring bike for so many years.
One can think of Mitchell's Spitfire and the number of variations on that frame before it became obsolete.
When I was a kid in 1964 I had a Triumph cub. Ride it a mile and push it home. Loved that bike😂
Well wasn’t it so often the way with the Cub.
Still they did keep u fit
I knew a guy who made a living stealing Triumph Tiger Cubs, He eventually got caught and his garage was stacked with bits of Cubs, He got sent to Borstal 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I saw one in Reading catch fire, it took c100 yards to stop with the rider doing a Harry Worth. It then set fire to a tree.
I ran a pair of Sunbeam S7's for 30yrs, very tidy, got them in magazines, alas the garage rent went up to £120 PCM. So sold them in my late 50's. I think one found its way to Cyprus. The 'post war dream machine', 'The Gentleman's mount'. Points distributor like on a car. With its wide wheels and solo seat a very stylish mount. In Black and then Mist Green For me it was love at first sight. My school teacher girlfriend became expert in handling all the questions whenever we parked up. I spent much of my earnings on those bikes. Stewart Engineering in Putney had available every last nut and bolt needed, much easier to source the parts for than newer Japanese bikes. Now underrated? Yes!
Shame really, could , should have been more successful but BSA didn’t develop the bike at all
That's a shame. Totally agree in the looks department and love the unusual engineering. One day I may get rid of my top heavy overweight parts bin raided sports/tourer and get an S7.
If you don't mind me asking, I read an article once that claimed they were a little on the wobbly side when cornering, since the frame isn't the most rigid. Would you say that is a fair assessment or, were they being a bit critical?
That was an unusual bike for Britain, but of course it was a BMW design that was seized after WW2. Have seen two in my hometown and they look like battle tanks. One in sand brown and the other in red. Shaft driven of course, and that longitudinal twin layout was perfect for it.
@@ManofMode Hi Paul, I've never ridden an S7 but I think part of the reason for seemingly-eccentric handling might be the layout. The cylinders being in-line, the crankshaft is too, and so too the shaft final drive. At high revs this might produce sufficient gyroscopics to require discriminatory handling by the rider.
had an s8. looled nice, interesting, but. . . gutless, poor handling, an that appalling worm drive . @@ManofMode
I bought a 1975 CB400F red, brand new in the spring of 1977, our local Honda dealer bought a bunch of these when Honda was dumping the left over units. $1,100.00 out the door, it was a lot of fun and sounded great with a Kerker header. I rode mine on the twisties a lot and in May 1978, road trip from Kansas to Daytona. It served me well until 1980 when I thought I had to have a bigger bike. The only bike to this day I regret selling.
Nice
Just one comment on the Gold Star, (and I have never owned one!) How can a motorcycle with so many wins in so many different discipline's be Overrated? And I think if it was so overrated wouldn't people have sussed it out by now and the prices would be a lot lower. Just an alternative view! Very good video Off to watch the UNDERrated bikes video now thanks!
Race wins mean bugger all when you’ve got to use it on the road, and on the road it is plain hard work. We don’t live on race tracks do we.
If you put lights on a Moto GP bike it would be a bag of crap of an actual road.
The video isn’t about how good a track bike, I do describe as a great bike right at the beginning. But the fact is there are a lot of really great alternatives which are far better road bikes and don’t cost over twenty grand.
As I point out in the video a twin such as the contemporary A10 shown would be a far better choice if you actually want to ride anywhere and be far less than half the price.overrating a machine and putting it on a pedestal musts makes it so expensive that the price is not justified.
Big reputation leads to big price. And that might be good for collectors but very bad for we riders
Race wins mean bugger all when you’ve got to use it on the road, and on the road it is plain hard work. We don’t live on race tracks do we.
If you put lights on a Moto GP bike it would be a bag of crap of an actual road.
The video isn’t about how good a track bike, I do describe as a great bike right at the beginning. But the fact is there are a lot of really great alternatives which are far better road bikes and don’t cost over twenty grand.
As I point out in the video a twin such as the contemporary A10 shown would be a far better choice if you actually want to ride anywhere and be far less than half the price.overrating a machine and putting it on a pedestal musts makes it so expensive that the price is not justified.
Big reputation leads to big price. And that might be good for collectors but very bad for we riders
@@bikerdood1100 If you are classing it as a race bike maybe it should not then have been on the list? Just a thought.
You are right it’s hard to beat a late 60s British vertical twin for the sheer joy of riding. Although they lack the ability to eat up miles on the interstate. I love riding my Velocette MSS but back to back with my Bsa thunderbolt I have to say the thunderbolt is better. The Harley Davidson shovel head super glide is a very nice bike for American roads. I would like to see One of them in your shootouts.
Well time yet, need more research first to do a bike justice of course, the shovel head is a very uncommon site here
@@bikerdood1100 I had a friend, sadly no longer with us, who had a 72 shovelhead FLH. It looked and sounded lovely (straight through pipes, used to set off all the car alarms), but was very unreliable. It leaked like a sieve, ate up regulator/rectifiers and the vibration regularly loosened or fractured parts (several broken brackets, exhaust systems and a split fuel tank). I spent a lot of time patching things up as he had no real mechanical skills and I worked as a car mechanic. What it really needed was stripping right down and doing properly, but he never had the money to do that.
Maybe that one was an exception, but I would be extremely wary of getting involved with a shovelhead again.
I owned a new shovel head "back in the day" yes I'm that old. Mine was completely reliable, never leaked oil, and only repair ever needed was a wire broke to the headlight but was easily fixed. Had it for six years, there's pictures of it on my wall still. I travelled all across the US on it putting thousands of miles on it. Like many designs routed in the past preventive maintenance was the key. Mine had both electric and an aftermarket kickstart. There was something about kick starting a bike like that that was so satisfying.
My 1982 fxrs shovel is still great !
@@ralphtieleman4950 Keep on riding!
The Honda CB350F four has something of a cult following in the USA among classics, more so than the 400 which never sold well here. I got the chance to ride one at an event, and yes it's real darn smooth. It's also real darn slow, enough to make me wonder why they built something that complex to have such little power. But I imagine that's the main reason collectors enjoy it, as it's sort of a misfit.
The 350 class was not nearly as important in Britain so it was never sold here
400s became a thing for tax reasons
I actually rode one. It seemed out of breath at any rpm. Never got it past 50 mph and didn't feel like it wanted to go there. lol Nice try.
It's a commuter bike!!! CB is commuter, reliable, fun, daily transportation!!!
That's why this guy's is a wanker to put it here!
Wonder why all 350F`s were slow but n ot mine? Mine was an angry little machine that could do 106-7mph sitting upright if I gave it some straight road
@@64fairlane305 the dude with the channel is crazy, like a hard core redneck Brit or something
Reading the Classic Bike magazines when younger i always thought those Coventry Eagles where way tasty!
Ditto to be honest
Nearly brought myself a small capacity one a few years back, got an excelsior in the end instead. It’s that black and red paint job that does it for me I just think it looks far nicer than the more pricy Brough
Pretty much every Harley ever made
Oh I hear that a lot 😂
Hard to have a credible overrated list without a Harley (or several) in it.
Not really
They are not alone
I’m expecting to do a part 2 at the very least. The trouble is narrowing down to one model
Having owned a 400/4 in the mid 1970's I did 100's of miles, going on holidays and attending race meetings at Snetterton race circuit. Still miss it even after 40+ years, great little bike to progress on, as many riders did back then.
Nothing wrong with them just 5hat the 500 have the nicer motor.
@bikerdood1100 , 500/4 nice bike but was out of price range of up and coming bikers In the 70's,,,, I know,, I was there,,
@@johnbrooks9151 well I do in fact remember the 70s. And in reality I don’t remember many people having the cash for too many bikes brand new. Most people brought second hand. I was riding for years before I owned a new bike. Don’t remember the price difference between the 5 and 400, be interesting to find out, but it didn’t mean a thing because no one I knew could afford either new anyway
@@johnbrooks9151 the price difference was not particularly large when new as a point of fact and on the classic market the 500 is often cheaper🙄
I was there 🙄
Don’t know how old people think I am, under 40 perhaps, I wish 😂😂😂😂
Very fair comment, John, on the 400/4. We must have been living similar biking lives back then. A great progression bike, as you say, coming off a 250. Years later i have revisited my Yamaha 650 XS, but the the 4 pot 400 Honda seems so small now and so revvy and busy, I wouldn't be able to live with it!
i think the mythology around some of these bikes is amazing in itself. Jay leno, the American comedian, has a huge motorcycle collections and possible one of the largest privately held collections of Brough Superiors in the world. To purchase these he had to donate enough money to pay for the building of a new hospital wing at a children's hospital in the UK. From what he says, I don't know him personally, he's not underwhelmed. But that's the type of money your up against if you want to own one.
I suppose there’s a couple of factors to consider really. If I’d spent that kind of cash on a machine then there isn’t a chance in hell I’d tell anyone if it wasn’t really as good as I’d hoped ( emperors new clothes and all that )
The other is even if it’s brilliant, which it likely is, does it justify the price ?
There were a few really brilliant bikes in that period and I suspect a lot less money would leave you equally impressed and a bit less bankrupt.
I personally love riding pretty much any bike to be honest so the kind of expenditure that some of the bikes in the video is for just incomprehensible.
When my old Goldern flash cost a mere fraction and is absolutely joyous to ride
@@bikerdood1100 Not having that kind of cash I built an replica 1927 SS100 from scratch, making almost all of it myself apart from the engine and gearbox castings and internals, it took ten years but only cost around £10k and is a proper replica, not a vague lookalike. It handles beautifully and although I've only had it up to 95mph it was still pulling like a train, what a monstrous thing they must have seemed when they were new.
@@chrislaunders8283 I truth few people do have that kind of cash, nice work though. Don’t blame you for keeping the speed below a tone. My little Terrot runs out of steam just above 45 but given the suspension it feels more than quick enough
The ergonomics are the key to the GS. I've owned all the 1200 boxer versions and this is far more comfortable than any, especially for those of us with back or knee issues. Have barely ridden my RT since I bought mine, a few years ago as the RT gas a very cramped leg position. It is way too heavy and expensive now which is why I don't have the latest version. Wouldn't dream of taking it off road either.
Oh there is a lot of good comfortable bikes out their
But do people look
The phyiscs of the boxer itself has a lot to do with it as well imo
the old air cooled boxers are better in that way. I have riden a lot of BMW ( still now but I hate GS very ugly and an everyone’s bike) but the riding position on a R 80 or 100 for me is better rhan on modern types. They are lighter too. Or you can take a Guzzi. More different and better looking, often underestimated in comparision with BMW. Great video’s you are making, thanks.
I guess everything is down to a point of view. One thing I would like to put right is the 500/4 came out before the 400/4 . The other is that folk lore plays an important part in how a motorcycle is viewed ,and perceived. The bonnie and Triumph in general being the absolute pinnacle of this . Movies ,land speed records ,and of course Steve McQueen . The Brough had Lawrence of Arabia and that mythical race with an aeroplane , The Goldy less so but had the cafe racer image straight out of the crate like no other .The BMW I can’t quite understand it being in your list ,it’s not exactly mythical but again it does have the folk lore with Ewan and Charlie,long way round,and I agree a obscured bike to go mud plugging in Mongolia with as demonstrated in the film. ! I would have replaced it with the Honda 750/4 WHAT!!!! Yes I know but bear with me . Why was/ is the original CB 750 Honda looked upon with such reverence? It was more for what it was as opposed to what it did. It was exotica for the masses . That engine was the real sensation on was otherwise an unremarkable machine as to what it DID. As a riders bike the Triumph trident ,and BSA rocket three were superior WHAT!!!. Well yes actually. The Trident / BSA had similar performance but would on a real riders road with two riders of equal ability a road with bends ,dips, imperfections in other words the real world the triples would run away ,I know I had a 750/4 ,handle it didn’t , and front brake wasn’t great either with the sheer weight it had to stop. . Ok the Honda didn’t leak, was totally reliable, and could be cruised at unheard f velocities,but a true enthusiast will never forgive bad handling and while I’m having a bit of a tantrum I’ll throw in a bike that was made in the 1950s that I believe would also give Honda a run for it’s money ,the Vincent Black Shadow, almost as fast ,good brakes ,good handling ,and in my opinion holds the title for the bike with the most iconic picture of all time ,that of one Rollie Free layer flat over the top of the machine in his swimming trunks breaking a land speed record at Bonneville salt flats ,now that’s what I call folk lore !!
I know about the 500 being earlier it was the twin that replaced it.
The Bonnie was not in fact the mount of choice for Steve McQueen, both in the Great escape and in ISDT he of course rode a Trophy the twin carb Bonnie which was in no way an off roader, single carb is best as I always say.
As for Brough nothing can justify the asking price today, TE Lawrence and all. If I was going for an expensive British Vtwin, is Vincent every time not the Bitsa Brough.
I do love the Goldstar but not enough to drop 20 grand and for me the RGS 650 is a much better road bike.
The only thing that really stuck in my mind about long way round was how often they were picking those tanks up off the deck, they broke 3 frames Crossing Russia not the one shown just too big and too common
It’s the same as Japanese cars they offered more bells and whistles and that always sells, see how everyone wants a bike with an LCD screen today which has to be the most pointless thing ever fitted to a motorcycle. Would I personally buy a Honda or a T150 For me trident every time but I am strange that way . Always loved the look of a T160, but I’m more of a Tiger 750 man really because I’m tight
Not a question of opinion. Yes , we can all have different opinions but things are either true or false regardless of anyone s opinion wishing it so. I can have an opinion as to whether or not it will rain but whether it does or not is a question of fact. And so we my love this or that bike thats your opinion but whether it leaks oil or handles badly is a question of fact.
Lawrence did frequently race aeroplanes from his airfield.
Fantastic content. Really enjoyed watching.
Thank you for good feedback much appreciated
I had the 1972 Kawasaki H2. Not only was it faster than any of these bikes but it was also reliable.
And in a corner ?
@@bikerdood1100 It never went down in a corner, though I do not push cornering generally. There are not many variables in bike handling except tires, and to a greatly lesser extent weight distribution. The brakes definitely sucked.
@@bikerdood1100 I had the 350 Avenger, the 500 H1 and the 750 H2. Before driving them I changed the tyres from Bridgestone to Dunlop and the bikes behaved much better after that. The 750 needed some strengtening of the frame also and both triples behaved much better with better swingarm. The 350 was faster than any of the Brittish bikes.
Are you in your seventies?
I never knew anyone who had a H2 who didn't smash it fragments.
Lethal handling, next to no brakes and an intractable engine.
No good for anything at all except the long straight roads of America I suppose.
@@barrycooper9451 Got it when I was 19. I have cheated death so many times that I just assume I am immortal. Most of my friends who wore their helmets and leathers are dead.
I have lamented my decision on my bike choice since 1978 when I purchased a CB400 hawk twin In the states called the dream. You have now made be go to bed with a smile on my face knowing that I made the right choice. I love you
My pleasure
Remember there is no right choice just the right bike for you 😎
The twins after the 400f were called Hawks in the United States not Dreams.The 500 and 550 fours were sold at the same time as the 400 four.
An alternative title might be "Five Justifiably Famous Motorcycles ".
Possibly 🤔
Or 5 very expensive second hand bikes 😂
@@bikerdood1100 Fair point!
I had a CB400F and remember it fondly. The power band ran from 7000 to 9000 revs but it didn't matter as it had a 6 speed box. I owned the previous midweight Honda, the CB360 (G5) and that was under-powered and handled poorly. The 400F was a great package, it looked good, it handled well and (while not a competitor to the 2 strokes of the time) it went well.
The 400 Dream which followed was short-lived in the UK and was quickly replaced by the Super Dream, a re-styled (more slab-sided) version. The Super Dream was faster, better braked and handled as well. I didn't own a Super Dream but my wife did and we went off on honeymoon with her on a 400 Super Dream and me on a CB400F. Happy days.
Later we had (Meriden built) Triumph 750s, hers was the Tiger and mine the Bonneville. Neither were a lot faster than the Honda 400s but the Triumphs were "ride all day" effortless.
Some like the rev happy nature of a 400f some less so
Interesting video, thanks for posting.
I was expecting to see a particular Vincent model on this list, but it’s interesting you’ve not included it.
I remember a sentence from a 1949 Motor Cycle road test (‘So far as the standards of engine performance, handling and braking are concerned - the chief features which can make or mar an otherwise perfect mount - the mighty Black Shadow must be awarded 99 out of 100 marks; 99 because nothing, it is said, is perfect.’)
Clearly, it had made quite an impression!
Unfortunately, I never aspired to anything quite as good as that, but back in the day I bought a nearly-new 1990 Yamaha RD350 YPVS F2, and had a lot of fun on it.
It had great performance for such small capacity, producing a lot of power in a lightweight package (exactly what a bike should do) and it would be very interesting to see an appraisal of it.
The Vincent is like an expensive, beautiful women, high maintenance. Amazing bit of kit though and I would certainly place it above the Brough so much of it was there own work. In the long run perhaps too much
You could never start the bloody things if you weighed less than 12 stone, and even the hefters took 20 kicks - so what's the point?
@@tobythehairlessdog8876 The secret is in "how" you start one, they are very easy if set up correctly, or if you are a real whimp, fit an electric starter.
In 1960 when i was 20 i had a 650 cc BSA Gold Flash twin .I weighed only 10 stone at that time (work out what 10 stone was yourself) and i could kick start it no problem!!
@@keithwickham8558 I think the problem with many people is that they jus kick away mindlessly, hoping it will start, stating with a kickstart requires a little bit of technique and thought, something a lot of people just do not have. Chris B.
One of the major reasons for the 400 fours success was the price,its compact size,not all motorcyclists wanted a massive ego booster,and it's inherent reliability, and it's user friendliness
I knew lots of people that purchased them back then,often older riders in their 40s and 50s who wanted to travel without the oil leaks,the vibration,and the Sid Snott image of motorcycling in general,also very popular with women,and couriers who needed low running costs,and the ability to ride vast distances without being shaken to bits
It was a good bike as the video does say at the beginning, they can suffer problems long term of course simply because they were so revy. Having ridden some of the twin cylinder 350s from Europe I have to say they had much more torquey engines, at the time of course they would have been more expensive, but not so today.
I had a Honda 400 four as my first serious motorcycle when I was about 15 years old. I agree with everything you said except you left out that when you are in that disagreeable part of the power band the particular vibration frequency makes your wrists ache after a few hours of liberal doses of it. Overall great bike to grow up on. Can definitely go fast enough to get you in trouble with local law enforcement. One other thing...those tiny little valves are about a nightmare to adjust.
Well most fours have a period in the reverse range when they buz I suppose. Recently tried out a Honda Cbr650 and did find it quite buzzy at times
Excellent video. Some hard hitting myth-busting.
Thank you for the feedback
Had a 400four in those colours, everything you say is true, but it is light, smooth and easy to ride, a proper bike after the L plates
Nice usable bikes but a Little short on torque. The 500 is just better and the parallel twins are better too
@@bikerdood1100 you would have to define better. in terms of difference, I tried a 400 super twin didn't like it at all the 250 was a more practical bike don't know about the 500 but the 550 was quite a bit heavier and far harsher to ride.
Your correct about the CB400F’s top speed. In 1976, during a WERA sanctioned 24-hour enduro road race at Charlotte Motor Speedway, I was a team rider among 25 other teams. During one of my rides at night, additional headlights had been added, positioned to illuminate corners while bike was leaned over. However, when not cornering, they projected upward, resembling glowing horns. Skilled in wet conditions, I quickly passed other teams when it started raining. While not exceptionally fast, the bike was stable and predictable. On the back straight, the speedometer registered 104MPH. I admit to sliding off the track in a tight turn, resulting in no significant damage, but understandably angering my team.
Ouch !,
Hopefully no serious injuries
BMW r90s massively over rated, had a couple over the years and much prefer the later r80 /r100 models for a fraction of the price. Interesting video cheers 👍
Think it’s because it help change perceptions about BMWs to some degree rather than any real ability the bike has
@@bikerdood1100 I agree to a large extent with your comment, I owned both (second hand) a R90S and an early 1977 R100S. I’m not sure I could have told them apart when riding although some claimed that the smaller engine was smoother at low revs. At tickover the different carbs (the R90S having Dell’Ortos) gave a different intake sound. To me though, I don’t think that the TT silver smoke or Daytona smoke orange has ever been matched let alone bettered by BMW. The price difference now, around double I’d say for a R90S compared to a R100S, hard to justify, but that doesn’t mean that the bike is over rated. Now, if I could pick an air head to join my R nineT I’d go for a /5 with a toaster tank ! 🇬🇧
Maybe now overpriced and overrated, but I paid AUD $2100 in 1982 for a 1975 90s. God I loved it: 150kph all day on flat Oz roads and mechanically dead simple. Ifu want overrated (but gorgeous) the Duke ‘70s SS models 😂
I'm wondering what is your take on the Kawasaki GPZ? I had a little 305, I think it was the best handling bike I've ever owned, very forgiving in corners and very light weight, maybe not the fastest but fun to ride.
I had the scorpion 250 which I’m afraid a thrashed to death. The 305 is of course a development of the scorpion but obviously with a bit more mid range and top end shove. And there was the very handy belt drive too. By modern standards I suspect it would appear tiny, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing at all these days
I couldn't agree more about the 400/4, i had 3 in total. Slow, and I mean really slow even revving the nuts off em to keep up with 2 stroke 250's, fragile to when used like that! Reckon the people paying silly money for em today never rode one "in anger" back in the day! Agree that 60's/early 70's British parallel twins are the way to go, easy to live with, great handling and enough go and stop for mixing it with todays traffic on A & B roads!
Well I’m not a big bikes for everyone person but, effective 400 fours were a generation away and it wasn’t until the mid eighties that they became really competent. I had a humble Guzzi V 50 for many years and it was way faster than the cb.
70s Triumphs are much underrated by the biking snobs but they are actually very capable bikes
Had one too small had to drop down gear box to get anywhere. Terrible when carring a passenger. Glad to see it go.
Totally agree - so gutless and expensive, but looked good. My Suzuki Cobra was twice as fast, and my H1 out of sight.
Honda did NOT replace it with a 500 and later a 550. Those came BEFORE the 400 and were a different machine. They replaced it with the 400 Hawk.
And actually, the 350/400 was more of a scaled down 500/550 than a scaled down 750. The frame was similar to the CB350.
I worked on all of them in a shop in that period, and had a GF with a 350 four, so am pretty familiar with them. She rode the 350 four across the US twice. It and the 400f were pretty capable machines.
As for the GS, it's not a dirt bike. It's the best touring bike BMW makes. But it's clothed in people's dreams. When they buy it they discover it's the bike they really want, rather than the bike they thought they wanted. Very clever marketing. They did the same with the R90S. People bought it thinking they wanted a cafe racer, but when they rode it, they realized they really wanted a gentleman touring bike. And had it in the R90S.
Well really depends on the market but essentially yes the 400 twin replaced it, Hawk name is not one commonly used the Uk. The point here is that it was replaced by the apparently simpler twin..
In the video I do say that the engine is quite different than the 750. It was even wet sump which of course the 750 wasn’t. The 350 was never seen in the UK or indeed most of Europe where there was less of a 350 market. In fairness the ability to make a 400 truly capable was a decade away and would need 16valves and water cooling. I’ve ridden some of 5he European 350s of the period and believe me they make much better talk than the rather busy 400f.
I think it’s pretty obvious the GS isn’t a dirt bike 🙄hence the Chelsie tractor comment. The point of the video is not to say that they aren’t great bikes is it, I say as much right at the beginning
The point is that there are many capable bikes out there. And too rate any one way abov3 the others is just plain dumb.
I think people hear what the want too in videos to be honest.
We own 10 bikes including classics but we do not see bikes through rose tinted glasses like so many Ex bikers seem too. I’ve toured for thousands of miles despite not ever feeling the need to blow a tonne of cash on an overweight GS
The Honda CB 400 Super Four with VTEC and ABS and a Staintune exhaust absolutely howled great bike.
My most over rated pick
All American cruisers and I ride an Indian which I love. But the suspension and brakes are poor compared to my BMW R1200R.
Aerial Square Four... gets hot... deadly rear end... look fantastic
We owned a Harley for a few years, it was surprisingly crude in some areas
The big difference between the late British bikes and the Japanese models that eventually wrote them off, was that you had to be a motorcycle enthusiast. Enthusiastic in getting your hands dirty, enthusiastic in pushing a bike home on a rainy day and all of those other annoying things we had to put up with. CB750 and Z1s had their issues, but you could ride them whenever you wanted and wherever you wanted to, without being an enthusiast.
Well let’s not forget the market had shifted to recreational rather than general use and the British engines were never designed for high power figures or motorway work
@@bikerdood1100 That's a rather assumptive statement and I'm not sure that it is based on fact. The period I refer to was one that motorcycles were still used as daily transport, in fact I used them for that for many years. However I was more comfortable on a little Yamaha getting me to where I was going than any BSA or Matchless I owned previously. The latter were more well suited to strapping on a sidecar than a Jap bike however.
Matt’s dad here.
Had a 600cc Norton Dominator built with lots of racing parts and the featherbed frame. Used to tear up Bonnie’s. Beezers, Commandos etc consistently shutting them down.
I don’t know
The youth of yesterday 🙄
Hooligans the lot of em 😂
@@bikerdood1100
Always had a streak of hooner/hooligan in me. My retirement bike is a lite Triumph triple from before fly by wire. Chosen in part because it’s quick off the line. Also handles better and not as nooner prone as the monster bikes. It should be enough to keep me entertained.
Would love to know what you did with a 600 dommie to beat a commando?
@@nickmarshall9192
Done by an American in the UK when new. Totally free breathing dual Amal concentrics no air filter. Dual straight exhaust with Snuff-R-Nots. Closed for low end torque, wide open for top end power. Vertical head from Norton racing program. Never used in production I believe. My mechanic agreed it must have had a cam too.
You get the flavor. But the strangest was the 1.1 ::1 rocker arms. Put in backwards valve lift was about 89% of lobe height. Turned around it was 110% of lobe height. So I went from 88% to 110% of lobe height. Roughly a 25% increase in breathing. Had the head ports CB polished. I kept the fuel ratio and timing in spec. Ate up a 750 P11 in the Matchless frame. Could pull the Norton front end and install a chrome 49 HD Springer front end in about 15 minutes. I had no idea when I bought it what I had. But with the rocker arms lifting more it was pushing out some ponies.
The 750 P-11 scrambler I ran was geared low but I could take him on the high end. Pretty much everything else showed up in my mirror not my windscreen.
Wish I never sold it.
It was a looker too. Candy Apple Metal flake Tangerine tank paint job. Shined in the subtropical sun.
Whoever built the engine was very good. Wish I’d kept it. But it was so far from stock that it had to be a monster build.
You were spot on about the Honda 400/4 .
I had one, and it would almost send me asleep with boredom!
Goldie too.. with the RRT2 gearbox and TT Carb- so useless and impractical for riding in towns!
Loved the video, thanks for sharing!
My pleasure, thanks for feedback. Can not understand why they use the TT carb and close ratio gearbox, makes no sense at all to me
i had a 400/4 and you could really speed through the twisty lanes on it.... get the revs at 6000 and you could leave most bikes behind, weather was a problem the petrol tank used to direct the rain straight onto the coils, soon you would loose a cylinder as the coil became soaked, essential to carry wd 40 everywhere... it was a fun machine.... i regularly got the foot pegs down and sparking...
@@bikerdood1100 Different days then, different uses, used my 350 Gold Star for trials, scrambling, hill climbs sprints and road racing, just needed to change carb cams tyres seat and handle bars.
@@bikerdood1100 It was intended for Clubman racing. The TT carb has no pilot circuit, in order to improve flow, which is why they don't really idle.
Yes, a lot of bull about those bikes nowadays, especially the Gold Star. However, a friend of mine has one that he, being over 80 years old, has changed to make it much more user friendly. The bike has indicators, electric start, normal handlebars, concentric Amal carb, realistic gearing. He knows a lot about Goldies as he had one new in the 1950s where he ended up doing about 150,000 miles on it, touring Europe every year etc.
I think the main problem is everyone likes the bike in full on clubman spec which of course is most definitely not user friendly on modern roads
@@bikerdood1100 Agreed. My goldie was a stock standard bike and as such was a joy to own and ride.
Rode a Gold Star and it scared the day lights out of me. No power, less brakes. Good looks though.
@@chrisfournier6144 well of course power is relative, this was the 1950s, it was a very successful clubman racer but was expensive but of course with the arrival of the 650 twins which are much easier to ride on busy roads and death of the clubman race series it was aLl over for the Goldie in 62
Indicators,electric start,normal bars,concentric carb,realistic gearing - what else perhaps belt drive,double discs etc; etc; It's no longer a Gold Star then in my opinion.
I rode Triumph 650cc 6T motorcycles on Lancashire Traffic Department in the mid 1960's. As much as I enjoyed riding them they had one major fault, vibration. Hence the marriage by some of using the Norton featherbed frame with the Triumph twin preferably pre unit.
Triumph vibration was always an issue, made worse by the flimsy frame which if anything amplified the vibes
We run. BSA A10/and I have to say it’s much smoother than any Triumph twin I’ve yet ridden
My 400/4 had huge camchain rattle and the adjuster bolt broke off...the exhaust had massive corrosion and cost more than the bike did...the frame was off the little cj250t and was tiny even for a a five foot 6 shorty like me......4 bloody carbs to clean and balance.....loved it...
Sometimes the pain brings you closer. You can tell I’ve been married a long time 😂
And the 350LC arrived! 😳🙂😁
you forgot the pivoting front brake. I had to copper slip my girlfriends very 3 months. They used a horrendous aluminium.
My neighbour had a Goldstar. It was an amazing bike and very fast. It was every biker's dream to own one regardless of what ever this video would lead you to believe. What seems to be missingin the video is that back in the nineteen sixties the traffic and roads were entirely different than those of today. A Goldstar would indeed be a poor choice in the 2020s but by the same token an R1 Yamaha would have been totally unsuitable for the roads 60 odd years ago. I know as I was a biker back in the sixties and still ride today!
If you pay attention I’m not saying it isn’t a great bike
But it’s not perfect nor more importantly is it ideal for everyone
Incidentally I wouldn’t consider an R1 or any litre sports bikes they are all poor road bikes
The prices of bikes such as Goldstars in unjustified and unsustainable and has turned the bike into an investment so you never see them on the road
The fact is that most classic bike owners are older and as a rule use the bikes for a sunder potter
A role for which the Goldstar is I’ll suited and younger riders who could get the use out of them can’t afford them, has this sadly made the bike something of an irrelevance, possibly
The Gold Star won many many races. It was a remarkable handler on the road or in the dirt, but you needed to understand the Girling Suspension. Other bikes could not keep up with the Gold Star in Scrambles races.
You mentioned the Bonneville, I once came across a guy who worked locally who rode his 1956 Bonneville daily to work for 26years at the time I met him. The Gold Star was not over rated. The Brough Superior nor the Triumph were not over rated for their era, especially the Brough Superior. You are a very confused man.
You should pay more attention to the video. It’s about how those bikes command such high prices really. Their were other great bikes in this period too which were at least comparable. A Bonnie can be twice the price of its contemporaries today. Is it twice as good absolutely not. Ditto other bikes. All the bikes in the video are great, I say that from the start . But there are other bikes which are great too and don’t need to be seen through the same rose tinted specs. I own and love classics but I’m also realistic about them and not a fantasist
Bonneville came out in 1959. I think you are confused.
@@rickconstant6106 You may be correct. The bike I remember was a single carb In less than a minute of looking at it I remember it looked like a Bonneville T120 so this bike was a TR6 because I remember the single carb. I didn't meet the rider personally as I was there with a friend on a BSA 650 Thunderbolt, who had talked with the guy. This was back in the 1970s. So the TR6 was about 20 years old. I was really impressed. Eventually my bike out lasted all my cars to over 40 years. Still runs but I haven't been riding for a while.
triumph t100ss 1967...so hard to start and the oil came out quicker than you could put it in....loved the effing thing...
Can take a bit of a kick to get going, big singles can be tougher though. Bloody Starfire 250 of all things could be a total bastard. Your right about the leaks. Those push rod tubes are a pain although many Triumph nuts argue with you if you say they do. We’ve owned them and they do.
Loads of character though.
I've always thought the same re Bonneville and Goldie, but I'd add Vincent to the list even though I'd like a Brough (or Brow as Drew Prichard calls them). BSAs build quality at the time was better than Triumph - I'd happily pull a chair with A10, but Triumph twin is a little bit too delicate. My A10 has performed well in the 33 years since I rebuilt it, as has my air cooled BMW.👍
That’s the point really there are a great number of really good machines out there and it’s folly to put some on a pedestal. It just leads to inflated prices
Wow I have same bikes love em 👍
I'm 71 and have had more than a few bikes. I rode them day and night, in all kinds of weather, all year around. I'm dangerous in a car when she lets me drive it. 🙂 I earned the BMW 500,000 mile award on 5 different BMW's. One of them was a GS1200 which I enjoyed for 130,000 miles , or so. I've also had Norton, Triumph and BSA, several of each. If a bike has a weakness, I'll find it and I'll fix it. What do I ride now ? I got off the BMW's and got a Harley Davidson Sportster. They think I'm doing animal sacrifice under a full moon. 🙂 I still do a 100 mile a day commute at my age. I like the Sportster (Bike #31) . It talks to me and I can feel everything. Very good video.
I think it’s important to have a ridden a good range of different machines, some only ever ride the one type of bike which I feel is not good for your riding. The idea of the video is for people to consider other machines because all too often riders seem to follow the herd l
MZ are brilliant bikes. Great engine. 100.00 mi
Were indeed
I passed my Test on an MZ250 that I bought new, sold it for more than I paid for it and got a Honda CB 750 K7, Now that was a bike if you liked chrome and big pipes.
My Dad loves his Goldstar but TBH it is endless hard work looking after it and riding it!! :)
Precisely many people would be better served by a tourer twin of the same era, not quite as exciting, true but the Goldie like a bad women demands constant attention
Dood! You damage your credibility by impugning the Goldie. Your only criterion seems to be everyday use. By using this criterion alone, you deny the DBD 34 its place in its true environment, clubman racing in the UK in the 50s and 60s, where, in the right hands, it could do more than hold its own against pricier Norton Manxes and Italian multis. If you are yowling into Paddock bend at Brands Hatch, you are not going to be concerned with hard starting or clutch slipping in first gear.
Is not everyday use important?
Unfortunately for the Goldie it’s true environment isn’t modern roads, you could level the same charge could levelled at modern litre sort bikes to some extent. As the video says it’s not saying it’s not a great bike but in all honesty a twin is a better road bike and we don’t live our lives on a race track do we
Calling the BSA Gold Star over-rated is just plain silly. It excelled at road racing, scrambles, enduros, flat track and just plain riding. Yes, I owned one and raced it for some 10 years. Over-rated? Hardly.
It’s a great bike but the cost is obscene and it’s practically on the road then and now poor. Silly I think not
@@bikerdood1100 I paid $1,000 for my Gold Star in the Crate from England in 1957. I have no idea what the current models sell for. We are apparently talking about two different motorcycles. I'd have to say that the early Gold Star is the best single cylinder bike ever built in that era. I've owned street AJS, Matchless, Norton and Velocette as well. No accounting for taste.
That superior bike is the most beautiful motorcycle I've ever seen. Not seen it before. Thanks for another great production.
I love the red and black paint of the Coventry Eagle myself
Lawrrence of Arabia rode one. Jay Leno has one in his collection.
@@bobmarlowe3390 Didnt Laurence die on one too...
@@mackenzie77777, he died 6 days after a crash on one, but yeah, close enough.
Interesting video... the suzuki GS 550 is easily the best bike I've owned. The GsX1100ez was also a superb bike, great handling and bucket loads of power.
🤫am intending the feature the 550 soon
I absolutely agree with you on the GS 550, easy maintenance too. I never owned a GsX though so I can't comment on that but I've read good things.
I know nothing about motorbikes but I saw one helluva bike many years ago. In the 70s I was driving up the M1 going on leave. My passenger; who knew something about bikes; told me to watch as we pulled back into the middle lane. Alongside for a few seconds was this large, long motorbike. My mate told me it was a Vincent 1000. It looked impressive but, I don't even know if my mate was having me on. I later worked for IMI Marston which had a small museum of Sunbeam pushbikes and motorbikes.
That would be a Vincent alright
If you know nothing about then it’s easily remedied
They have a fascinating history that started before the motor car
And off course they are so much more enjoyable
A classic bike is so much easier to live with than a classic car. No body work to rot
I would also say I post a lot of stiff on various machines you can watch
( shameless plug ) 😂
Still got mine, bought it in 71 , won't part with it.
I had a very modest Suzuki 250 GT, and I must confess when I blagged a ride or two on a Honda 400 four I thought " is that it ?" Even though it was a jewel of a motorcycle to I found it too small and no mid range unless you thrashed it.
That’s the area with an otherwise brilliant little bike falls down. Of course some love bikes they can ride hard like that. Personally I look to cover distance on my bikes and would have found it tiresome after a while
The 400/4 was an out & out oddity really, but a lovable one as you indicate. I never saw one racing about personally, like its owners wanted the more sophisticated way to cruise on motorways or reach 100 MPH or something. But for that matter i don't remember many 500 fours or other hondas getting involved against two stroke riders much.
The Suzuki T500 was easily the best Jap 2-stroke. And lasted for ever.
The worst bike I ever owned was a CBX250, great expectations on paper, a proper dog in reality. I got through instrument brackets ever few months until I rubber mounted them. Close to it was a BSA Barracuda which wined loudly in third gear and was an absolute pig to start. A great bike was an Enfield clipper, it looked horrible but was comfortable, had a great cush drive and was generally reliable, only down side was the 6v electrics. It actually went airborne on the Canning Town flyover in the great storm of 1987.😂🇬🇧
The CBX was something of glop
With the end of the 250 learner regs it had no market so a very rare site. Only ever seen a couple and not in the last 3 decades.
Rode the the Cb250rs which was ok but has its own problems
I’ve always considered it sheer madness to put a poor Triumph Twin engine into a Norton frame. Bert Hopwood designed a twin for Norton which didn’t have the faults of the triumph engine. Edward Turner was a master stylist.of that there is no doubt.
Well in truth the Norton engine had faults of its own.
Swapping an Engine into a different frame does cause it’s own problems. Each motor has its own resonances to which the frame is tuned by a good designer simply dropping an£ engine into a different frame can amplify the vibes quite considerably
Still they do look cool 😎
The 60s Norton Dom's were wonderful machines. Beautifully designed.
My ex-boss used to sidecar race in the 50's and he said they picked up whatever wrecks were about to drop into a sidecar and at various times raced with engines out of Goldstars, Manx Nortons, Square Fours and even a Vincent Black Shadow.
Well I suppose you just wanted the most powerful unit you could find
The GS is certainly beautiful in the eye of the French beholder. Judging by what I have seen on both motorways and trunk roads, they seem to have about 50% of the sales. But, as you point out, my RT was probably a far better bet for touring.
So I’ve seen
No accounting for taste 😂
I wonder if KTM are still kicking themselves on a weekly basis for not coming up with two bikes when Boorman asked for them.
I have restored many Gold Stars yes a pig to ride in traffic, just a small point they never fitted TT carbs but a huge 1 1/2 inch GP carb. Good vid well done. I would add the Velocette Thruxton which I also owned
/
Yes similar in many respects, including that high price tag. The great shame about these bikes really is that their inflated prices make them too expensive for ordinary riders to afford and enjoy
Terrific video, I tend to feel the same, how the aura and reputation of these bikes far outweighs the practicalities of buying, riding and living with the things.
And that is precisely the point sir
Had so many owners getting precious about their machines. Probably because the paid a tonne of cash for the things I expect
@@bikerdood1100 I'd like to drop a hand grenade in and vote for the entire output of Harley Davidson to be placed under the same consideration. I've never seen the appeal of them!
1. Any Harley Davidson;
2. Any Harley Davidson;
3. Any Harley Davidson;
4. Any Harley Davidson;
5. Any Harley Davidson.
Yes
Yes
Not a fan
Not a fan
I had a Honda CB 400-4 as a kid in California and rode that bike through 15 years of military service.
I did plenty of upgrades to mine, a Kirker 4 into 1 header, re-jetted carbs, and bored out cylinders and pistons, though tiny as there wasn't much room.
I added a custom fairing that helped considerably, but being a surfer, I had experience with glassing. Rear pegs and controls too. Still, when Honda came out with the 500 Twin with much better power, I shoved my 400-4 into a storage unit and rode the Twin all of the time instead and did little tweaks to it. I began to prefer Twins over the 400-4 rather quickly. We can be so fickle, can't we? I wasn't ready to sell the 400-4 yet though. I kept it and saved it to ride on weekends after leaving the military.
I finally traded it to a friend for a guitar and amp that I still have, an old Fender Stratocaster that has skyrocketed in value, though I killed the amp playing it at a concert when a rain storm came up from nowhere. Fortunately, no one was electrocuted.
That old 400-4 was a smooth bike and when I removed the silencer out of the header it sounded like a Japanese Ferrari to me, LOL!
Very good video, and spot-on assessments of the bikes that I've known at least.
I recently made a post on Instagram about how we have a very strong tendency to emphasize our positive memories and negate our hurtful ones, e.g. falling out of a tree and breaking an arm is forgotten, and the pain is replaced by the memories of friends signing our cast and laughing at the bad jokes our friends made. Or when we wreck our parent's car and we get a tongue lashing from our father is replaced by the oohs and ahhs of seeing the new car delivered, and so on.
My thesis is that this may go back to our ancient ancestors who had to daily hunt huge animals, much larger than anything alive currently, and those ancestors needed to forget their fears to return to the fields to hunt again for fresh meat. I would want to forget my fears too to gird my loins for a new round of hunting. Wouldn't you?
Just thinking out loud.
Again, very well-done video. Thank you for your thoughts.
Thanks for your thoughts also
@bikerdood1100 You're very welcome. I'm looking forward to seeing more videos you've produced.
If you have any thoughts about the Gard Hollinger-designed Arch KRGT-1, that would be of great interest to me. I love that bike and the power cruiser idea overall, but maybe I'm one of the few. Stay safe out there.
Had a 1968 750 Norton in the 70's,great bike to ride but you learned to do the maintenance to keep it running smoothly, or shelling out $ at the cycle shop,extreme vibrations were the cause of many ills,any hard riding would loosen things up.Was on a tour with my friend thru New England when the pitch of the exhaust seem to change,thought it was the altitude,the screw holding the baffle in the Dunstalls worked loose sending the baffle down the highway.Should of used Locktite!!
Tue regular tightening of fasteners is a regular theme on many Brit bikes.
Handy it you had too work on them. Go for a fast ride and everything is nicely loosed off.
No sheered off nuts a classic Brit 😂
Every Harley and Ducati ever made should be on this video.
Not all
Some
I'd add an exception. The Harley FXR with the Evo motor. Hugely underrated, even now (after all, it doesn't look right with tasselled saddle bags!!)
I think your comment about certain bikes being not a good ride on modern roads is the nail in the coffin of your argument. Most of the bikes had a reputation in their original day of production which was often pre war. The shiny versions you show were a eye candy for a generation of bikers who were reared on what their Father’s told them as to dream machines made pre war. Then roads and reality were different as were the roads of Britain post war due to lack of maintenance in the war years and immediately thereafter. The Gold Star famous for having lapped Brooklands at 100 mph. My Father rode at Brooklands and it was a terrifying experience the only benefit being most people were going the same way. The big V twins on that circuit hauled a side car you were fed into and you tore off a cloakroom ticket as you passed the pits so rider knew which lap he was on. With your head next to the exhaust you head nothing for the rest of the day! The Honda 400 four had a very real reason for being that size as a Japanese rider had to be able to lift his/her bike from lying flat on the ground. This extended the market to a lot of people who were lightly built. All the bikes you showed were good in their original day but so are athletes and 15 years later would Roger Bannister have managed a four minute mile? Probably not but there were a number of people who could better it. As to current value well it is a limited market and we are in the age of the affluent cheque book. In my lifetime the value of the Mona Lisa has probably multiplied by six or eight times but it is what it is! Part of the trouble is that too many definitive articles in magazines are written by people who have a limited understanding of the conditions at the time of introduction of a design. I can go to Norfolk roads where salesmen would take a customer to travel at a 100mph in large post war sports cars. You would be considered a lunatic to try 60 on them in a modern car because all they have had over the years is tar chipping from time to time, nothing else has changed in the road format. One of my Father’s unhealthy rides was on a 600 Panther keeping up with his brother on a two stroke Zenith over the Hogs Back when the oil pump fell apart and the only rectification was a twig cut from a hedge to slow the flow! It was a different work then and we should recognise it. With such stories circulating among motorcyclists and motorists of course the machines of the past have wonderful reputation enhanced by the beauty of youth of the machine and rider.
Well the bike that lapped Brooklands was a supercharged Empire star point of fact. The problem with mythical bikes is their mythical price tag. The fact is that most classic bikes are used for pottering around on rather than thrashing around like teens. A good standard bike wether single or twin that . People get seduced by those sporty looks but in the end it just makes the thing a bit of a chore to ride. The video is not comparing them to modern bikes and in fact compares the Goldstar to a contemporary twin. Not a CBR 500. The simple fact is that on the roads of 63 or 23 the less sporty bike makes a better choice.
Incidentally I think everyone is very much aware of the Japanese laws
Bikes are not pieces of art they are to be ridden an enjoyed not squirrelled away as an old farts investment. If young riders can’t afford em they won’t be interested in them and in the long term that’s what will matter.. and incidentally young riders do like classics. Bikes are for bikers not collectors
I think also fair, in context, to add the quality of fuel available then and post war. Octane, pre war was about 85 to 87 to average public. During the war there were two grades of pool petrol lorry at 68 known as prune juice and standard pool at just over 70. Post war these grades held and it is on Hansard the Minister refusing to raise the pool limit to 75. This could only enhance the pre war reputation of many designs! A Sunbeam 90 could tick over pre war on standard petrol with a threpenny bit standing on edge on its tank - a good way to earn a free pint! If you look at pictures of Nailsworth Ladder pre war the competition on a public road was to ascend it. Stones as big as a fist on a dirt public road and George Brough on one of his bikes chugging up it. Look at the bike, well used and Road worn! That was the dimension of public road available. Webb forks were wonderful only one spring to accommodate and that screwed down to steady the front. Nobody could successfully match two springs with available technology then and twin spring forks at best demanded massive wrists.
The joy of Japanese engines was the quality of the aluminium casting finish inside and out. A 400 four I rebuilt was used by the purchaser for a year on courier runs from Norfolk to South Wales with only mileage service. After a year he replaced the wheels which were feeling their age. All things must be judged in their time but time passes and people with them and we have only current time and experience to judge them on. The Suzy 750 GS was a heck of a bike in its day and my wife still has the ticket somewhere for exceeding 120mph between Norfolk and Lincolnshire. Not a very magic figure now I do agree! However, good bad or indifferent it is an amusing look into the past but I do think the quality of that past should be recognised to allow people to understand judgements.
Thank you for a great video. Being an old Velocette owner, I was wondering if you could do a review on the mark.
In the past I owned, from new a 1970 Thruxton, restored a 1953 MSS, and I also used to race a 60’s MSS motor and gearbox in a slider type short circuit frame, not very successfully mind you, but a lot of fun.
Marriage and the need for cash, put an end to my Velocette ownership, but not my passion.
Oddly enough the only Velo I’ve ever ridden was a pre war Cammy
It was a fabulous machine
A brave video and well argued.
I agree with all, apart from the BMW G/S section. I did quite a few miles in the mid-80s on a Monolever R80 G/S and it was a delight. Less grunt than you might want from an 800, but no gaps on the delivery and a ride that soaked up everything without being wishy-washy. I confess, I never took it off-road, but as a sit-up-high mile cruncher, it was wonderful.
I find the more recent GS models slightly cartoonish and sad, but people do love them.
I think your list is pretty good.
I might put a Ducati on it, but I'm not sure which.
As to underrated bikes, the V50 III and Monza. Solo, they were almost the perfect motorcycle on tarmac in any weather. And... Very entertaining where there was room to play.
An R80 is a million miles away from todays Chelsea tractor
Too much bike too many toys for me and they fact the people don’t consider alternatives very proves the point for me
@@bikerdood1100 Absolutely, the current ones are almost a pastiche. But looking back, the old 800 seemed absurdly big and heavy at the time. The one I rode was standard, but you'd see them with those Gaston Rahier "elephant arse" P/D tanks and increased ride height. In Soho. The current ones (and the Harley version and more) are slightly silly; a sort of male Botox. But sillier.
For me the RD250LC is way over rated.
Don't get me wrong, I would love to have one, but back in the day I looked at one to replace my X7 250 and was really disappointed in the way it had to be thrashed to get anywhere.
The X7 was a V8 gunter by comparison.
Nowadays you pay a fortune for one whereas I bought a mint X7 for 3K NZD a few years ago.
With the LC's almost mythical reputation I just do not think it's justified,the 350 is a different story though!
Well it was all about getting a 250 over a 100mph what ever the cost to drive ability I think. Only time I rode one I thought it was guide buzxy too
One thing you didn't mention about the Honda was that undrilled stainless front disc which was useless in the wet. The Honda 500 four was actually introduced before the 400.
I no about the 500
Stainless discs were common on many Japanese bikes of the period and were diabolical in the way especially
Modern pad materials help a biin my experience ventilated disc were also rubbish but managed to wear their pads faster.
My old Guzzi used iron discs which we’re definitely better in the wet but not a trendy
An interesting selection, if I may add my 'two bob's worth'? The 650 Triumphs were an update of their 500 model, as I am sure is widely understood. Their problem with the cylinder head was not so much "cracking", as a leak of compression at the head gasket between the cylinders, once they had gone over to an aluminium head. Probably due to that gasket area being very narrow once the bore sizes were increased (with the same cylinder spacing). It was referred to at the time as 'swapping compression'.
By the late '60s they added a ninth cylinder head bolt between the cylinders, but the issue remained. In the '70s they added another (tenth) bolt between the cylinders, with the bike then a 750, but - they still lost compression there. They always had that black carbon stain between the cylinders. I loved my two '69 650 models at the time, but they were a 'mechanic's bike'. Triumphs actually led me into 50 years of motorcycle mechanical work, although I moved on to Ducati twins in the '70s, and never looked back...
The 'Goldie' had several problems (like the vibration both it and the twins of the time suffered from) but the Dell'Orto carburettor fitted to the Gold Star you showed highlights one of them. The original carbs were prone to distortion when hot, and never worked well after getting hot just once. Their vibration used to crack many steel brackets and chainguards, giving the lie to the obsession with steel rather than plastic at the time.
The legendary Brough Superior was, as you say, an old 1930s model, and had the numerous shortcomings of the period. Much of the engine and transmission exposed to the dirt for one. Hard starting for another. A lovely contribution to motorcycling, but as you say - unaffordable for most of us, possibly related to their most famous owner, T C Lawrence. Funny you mention the rare Coventry Eagle of 1928 (their only year?) as a friend here in South Australia has one.
The BMW R12 series also had such a 'celebrity endorsement', as you mention, and may not have captured the 'overweight adventure category' if not for that. Yes, expensive and overweight, and very rare to see them with anything other than full-road tyres on them. A huge following, but a huge bike.
But the Honda CB400F? I had a maddening involvement with one of these, which belonged to a female friend. The camchain tensioner was a pivoting arrangement, with the pivot swinging UNDER the crankshaft. The result of not adjusting the camchain scrupulously was that the loose chain would burr over the pivot point, and jam the tensioner from working. Yes, the entire engine and crankcases had to be dismantled to repair this common problem. And for all that trouble, they made NO torque under about 8,000 RPM. I never understood their popularity. 'Thanks for the memories' - not all of them good!
Interesting thoughts
Thinking of the 650 as an enlarged 500 is valid until the introduction of unit construction when the engines diverged
As for the Ducati well temperamental top end and week cranks meant that it was greatly outsold by Guzzi’s Le Mans a big which a Ducati owner as a bike that did the same thing with half the moving parts
For me the fact that people tended to club,an speck the Goldies was a big art of its issues as a road bike
As for Brough simply put by the later 30s simply put smaller lighter machines offered similar performance for much less cost
It’s worth remembering later Broughs had Matchless engines with inclosed valve gear
@@bikerdood1100 The 650 Triumphs always were too close together in the bores, pre-unit and unit construction, and if they have the aluminium head, and have done any miles, will always have that stain between the cylinders at the head gasket surface. Yes, the Guzzis were an alternative to the Ducatis, V-twin-wise, but never had the performance offered by the more sporting models of Ducati. From my '74 Sport (the first in this state) to my 1098S, now down to 162 kgs, complete but for fuel (and 160 RWHP) - the Guzzis never offered this. A very lightened Ducati.
Yes, the bevel Ducatis needed some sorting, but were lighter, revved harder, handled better, and didn't suffer from having the engine in 'sideways', with the torque effect, clunky engine-speed gearbox, etc. of the Guzzis. I did 168,000 kms on my '78 900SS, and riding it back to back with Moto Guzzis was not favourable to the Guzzi. Any Guzzi. I worked on these bikes for decades.
To each his own! Motorcyclists tend to be loyal to whichever brand they settled on. I was very 'staunch' about the Triumphs, and after 50 years of joy on Ducatis, I remain wedded to them. My work and my play all that time. At 71 I am now doing most of my miles on a Transalp 750 (which replaces my old Cagiva Elefant 750) now I live in a place with many dirt roads, but the Ducati still gets a rev occasionally, and I still have the Elefant registered.
Thanks for your thoughts. Enjoy your ride! 😊
3:03 Stay on These Roads 😍
Got to love the English countryside
I have exactly the same F2 400/ 4 as the one in your video and would agree it's probably overrated as a motorcycle but it is such a well proportioned little bike and lovely to look at (through my pink tinged glasses anyway). On the road it's very taught - much more so than virtually anything else from that era - but the engine screaming away below you does wear you out mentally if you're going any distance. A friend and I were swapping between the 400/4 and my slightly earlier 250 Yamaha two stroke on a run last summer - comparing and contrasting. The Yamaha came out as more comfortable, easier to ride and more relaxed. That's a screaming sports two stroke! The Honda was marginally quicker, it felt far more sophisticated but more tiring. Fuel economy and handling were about the same. We were trying to decide which one to ride down to Morocco. After riding them back to back the decision went to the .... Yamaha, and that's what we used.
Well technically speaking the lack of torque for a two stroke is an urban myth. It’s much to do with how they’re tuned. We had a Honda Nsr 250 sometime ago it was much more flexible than my wife’s GSXR 400 because it was tuned to give 45hp so mid range was very respectable, much better than any four stroke 250 that’s for sure
@@bikerdood1100 Very true about two strokes, and especially the earlier stuff - 70's mainly. They may have seemed inflexible screamers compared to a similar era four stroke twin (eg my XS2 Yamaha) but compared to later stuff they were mildly tuned and easy to ride. You can very easily tour on an early Yamaha as they have enough mid range to keep up with the traffic. They're a bit lacking on hills and there you have to row them along on the gearbox but you have to on the 400/4 as well. Next two stroke tour for me is a trip to the US in April to ride a 1969 R3 350 Yamaha from near New York down to Virginia - an 800 mile round trip. Going with a friend on a KLR650. It'll be an interesting comparison.
Another range of bikes that I feel are overrated are all of the Kawasaki Triples. People get all gooey over them but they were really pretty bad overall. You should probably add the Suzuki 380 and 550 to that list too but I believe the GT750 Water Buffalo (Kettle to you) deserves some love.
@@guylr7390 Not sure whether it should be thumbs up or down as I've owned one of the early 500 triples for decades! The trouble with them is that they're a late 60's design - even the later stuff - and as such they're pretty crude. My 500 is uncomfortable to sit on, vibrates and rattles and drinks petrol like the oceans are full of the stuff. But ... get it up on the power band and it's an exciting ride even now. Compare it with anything else *from the era* and it stands out as as close to psychotic as you're going to get. A lot of people like that Dr Jeckyll and Mr Hyde character. Tour on it and you'll be seriously disappointed. Go from the lights when they turn green and you'll see why people bought them.
Regarding the GS, and their becoming the SUV of the riding world, I won't disagree, but no bike ever fell to hand- like it had been custom fit for me- than my '05 did right out of the box. An ergonomic coincidence, sure, but still one of the favorite bikes I've ever had, and I started riding in the mid '70s.
Well bikes are a personal thing in terms of ergo. Kit is very much the same, I’ve tried on pricy helmets that were bloody uncomfortable. Every head is different. I will nether understand BMW styling though symmetry is the path to beauty
@@bikerdood1100 and to be clear, I got the one with cast wheels - 'cause I knew it'd be a road bike for me, although due to the manner of my property, the bike got "off roadef" every single time I rode it (sloped lawn leading to unpaved approach road)
I also have a 05 GS and it's fun to tour on. I've had it on dirt and gravel roads with excellent handling characteristics. I'm in my 70's now so it's just for fun now and I keep it to the highway only.
Best to you
The best 250 single four stroke ever built was the 1980 Honda CB 250 RSA , never let me down once ,only ever got the odd flat tyre due to punctures . It was good on fuel economy & see some bigger machines off from the lights & corner better than any Ducati . It was used everyday in all weathers ,& even when 10 years old ,with knackered cam & bearing surfaces plus pitted cam lobes ,it fired up fist time & ran as sweet as a nut ,with no noticeable drop in performance . If they still produced them today ,I would order one over any thing produced today .
Hindsight is an exact science! At the time of manufacture the Triumph, BSA, Brough and Honda had a real drop on their rivals. My experience of BMW ownership was of undiluted misery, though the GS is very much riding the wave of Ewan and Charlie. This was predominantly a subjective analysis, though I would be interested to see more.
Well really for me it’s about the inflated asking prices for some bikes today. The price of a Goldstar for example is totally unrealistic for most potential owners leaving them to be snatched up by wealthy collectors
@bikerdood1100 The ridiculous prices are a joke.
When you examine these a little deeper, it reveals some more about the machines compared to their contemporaries. The Brough, as you rightly say, is a bitza. The critical point is that it was made up of the best kit the industry could offer. Even the later Matchless motors were upgraded to Brough Superior specification.
A great video. A well informed and unbiased opinion on the "superbikes" of the day.
Thanks for the feedback
...loved your comments about the Beemer! ;)
Well we try to please 😂
I think overrated is a bit strong bikerdood 1100, i bought a goldstar in 1961 from kings of Blackburn in clubmans trim with all the extras 5 gallon tank 190mm front brake ETC it seems like yesterday that i rolled it out of the shop on penny street hoping that i could kick start the bloody thing up, with half a dozen watchers hoping i could not, but thank the lord it fired up what a good feeling that was, it cost me on HP 350 pounds, what a bike (race bike on the road) that goldie taught me a lot start it from cold with n5 plug warm it up then change to n55R TO RUN IT or hole the piston (good fun eh) but totaly impractica,l with hindsite a triumph bonny or a Rocket goldstar would have been a more usable bike but hindsite was not available then,
can you see that you have set me off on all our yesterdays, but thanks for the chance to reflect on when i was a lad, i could go on for ever about the 1960s but i will not, STAY SAFE.
Not at over 20 grand it ain’t
I had a 1953 BB34 Gold Star with a standard gearbox and normal handlebars. I used it for everything from day to day, touring, and even semi-sporting trials both solo and sidecar. It was the first Gold Star with a pivoted rear fork. One of the great things was the quickly detachable wheels, which made punctures easy to repair. I had to replace the worn out TT Carb with a Monobloc, which was easier on my kick-start knee :) I still have a piston with a hole burnt in from the dodgy TT carb (weak mixture).
The big problem is the GP carb which is made worse by poor maintenance and the fact the almost everyone wants a close ratio box and clip ons just makes for an impractical combination on modern roads. People will argue is better for the track but the reality is that’s not where people rode them these days, well most
@@bikerdood1100 Quite. A few years back I met an old friend I hadn't seen for years and he'd got my old Goldie. He claimed it was literally the first Gold Star with that frame. He had been an artist with sheet metal and made many alloy tanks/farings etc. He used to trial Ariel sidecar outfits.
I'm 84 now and a lot of things I enjoyed are no longer possible - mostly due to injury - but I've had a lot of bikes in my time. Of BMWs I much prefer the lighter, more manageable Earles fork models, R50, R60 and R69s, all of which I had at one time - I even rode my R69s in the Land's End trial! They have the benefit of a much lower saddle height.
I knew an old chap in Nottingham (about my age now!) who knew George Brough quite well and agreed with your assessment of his salesmanship and flair. He used to passenger in a sidecar with Sturmey Archer gearbox designer Issy Cohen in the 1920s.
Possibly interesting supplement to the Honda 350 & 400 Fours
in '74 I ambled around north central France for a few days on a CB350 K4 (twin)
I think that was the first time I'd seen the 400 Fours and the French absolutely loved 'em -
They (& Honda CD 175s) were everywhere, 'tho the 4000 Fours were incredibly rare back in the UK .
Remember those cd 175s, absolutely massive for a small capacity bike looked like a 500 to us back then. If I saw one now it would probably seem small
Benlies!!
@@wideyxyz2271 I'd forgotten that name 'til you said it
In fact I though for a bit 'Why's he bringing Benellis into this part of the discussion'?
THEN I remembered
*FUN FACT* Benly is the Anglisised version of the Japanese word Benry.
Cb400 was a real bike. Everything on the tin, affordable, reliable, easy to handle (my GF road it too) and all round beautiful ❤️
This guy's an idiot or biased against Asians to put it here. He's sounding racist to me 🤣
I wouldn't trade my 1969 Triumph Bonneville for any other bike period.
Ditto my 54 BSA
I'm with you on your views on "adventure" bikes, definitely the two-wheeled Chelsea tractor (or those appalling pick up trucks)
I served my biking apprenticeship in the 80-90s. Where are the affordable hooligan sports bikes these days? It's all good looking 125s, that are probably much slower than my old RD125 from '87, or ugly overweight non-off-road bikes.
(Maybe I'm just that old man shouting at clouds 😂)
They ain’t bad touring bikes but far to. Oh and expensive to be used off road
Just subscribed..great channel just my cup of tea.
Thanks for the feedback and subscribing of course
I’ve had both a Honda CB350 twin and a 400F. Both great rides, but I found the 400 to be much more challenging and fun to ride in a technical sense.
I’d also like to make note that one bike conspicuously missing from this list is the Kawasaki KH750, also known as the “H2” or the “widow maker”. Amazing motorcycle, explosively powerful, great exhaust note… and handled like a brick. Terrifying, yet more fun than than I’ve had on any pre-1980 machine.
*currently my favorite is a 1999 Buell M2. More on road capabilities than most will ever utilize, none of the computer generated babysitters so easily found on “modern” motorcycles.
Well you like. Good variety. Good to know a Buel is still getting good use
I found the H2 a fabulous bike to ride. Raced mine in Production Bike (Stock Road) races and unlimited, riding it to work the next day 😊