My '74 H2 triple would run heads up with my Honda CBX no problem. Had that bike from age 19 to age 60! My best bud has it now because his back is not junk like mine is now. Still have the CBX though, it's turbocharged.
I had an old water buffalo GT 750 in the early 80s. What was crazy is the smoke screen out the back on full throttle. The drum brakes faded after one pull. The whole frame flexed going around corners any harder than a snail's pace. It just sat in our car port for years until I pulled it apart and took it to the tip. You would be a pretty nutty collector to want one.
I have owned both. The 76 GT750 was like an outboard motor. Solid and good running and sounding. Had many electrical issues. Heavy but ran well. The 74 H2 was slow then hold my beer at higher RPMs. Much lighter feeling and the front wheel would rise. Barely controllable. Many smiles per mile.
I went from a DT 125 to an 74' H2 back in 1979. The power band was, out of nowhere and then here comes the front end up. Passed some friends in a pickup on the back wheel, they thought it was cool, but it scarred the crap out of me. I sold the H2 and went with a CB 360T.
I own a 73H2 and have had many bikes since 1981. Just something about two strokes and the power delivery and noise. Fast in 1973 the H2 was, but nowadays pretty average, but still such a fun and obnoxious bike to ride. Love it! Noisey, Smelly and must agitate the Mayor of London, so everyone should go and buy one or something similar!
@@tompetry8589A friend of mine also has a GT550J with the air-cooled double drum front brake, which is rarer than hen's teeth. It's covered up in his shed and has rarely seen the light of day in 5+ years.
I owned a H2 and a friend had the GT750. We would switch off on day trips. The GT 750 was a lot heavier and didn’t have the acceleration of my H2 but was very comfortable to ride. Plush suspension and fat seat made for an easy days riding. Felt more planted in the twisty stuff. Guess the steering geometry was more dialed in straight from the factory. The brakes felt more progressive at first application and more powerful when you needed to slow down quickly. Now don’t get me wrong, the GT 750 was quick and would roll down the road with a twist of the wrist, lots of torque down low compared to the H2 but the H2 just had a huge acceleration edge over the GT 750 at higher rpm, it loved to rev. The H2 had a quicker more sporty handling feel than the GT 750 and in a side by side drag race the H2 would pull away and stay away. The H2 was a rocket compared to the GT 750 with the GT 750 being a nicer, friendlier riding and handling motorcycle. Sure wish I still had that green H2, it was a blast to ride.
I had both and went to the tail of the dragon each summer month. This was back in the early seventies. The Kawasaki pulled unexpected wheelies and you had lay down on the tank most of the run. The Suzuki was very strong but more controllable in the curves. I could push it harder thru the curves. The Kawasaki was scary and super fast. It was so fast the blood in your head had a hard time keeping up with bike.
Always wanted the 750 h2. Had the Kawasaki 500 triple. Nothing under 5,000 revs. Then when it hit the power band it was like letting a King Cobra out of a box and hitting it on the head with a mallet . It went ballistic 👀👀👀
I had the 500 too,went from a TS 185 to this,felt insane and the cops got to know me unfortunately. Lined up against at GT750 from a standing start , super close but after 160ks it was game over,a rolling start was even worse. After a couple of years I got at GT38O and was a turd compared to the kwaka 5
I was there, riding these types of bikes. When these bikes were current, this is not a head-to-head comparison. The Kawasaki was a hastily thrown together, rather crude by today’s standards motorcycle. It was air cooled ..you could hear the fins ringing, and the Pistons slapping up and down in the bores.. The Kawasaki was a horrible wiggler if you tried to go fast. I was roadracing motorcycles, and this time, and I can still see the 500 & 750 Kawasaki two-stroke triples, going into tank, slappers, and exactly the same points on the different race tracks. To top that off, they didn’t survive, crashes, because of how wide the engine was. The crankshaft would get damaged. I bought one that the owner ran the bike without oil. I had the cylinders bored to First over, I put it back together, but I did not want to ride it on the street or on the race track. I ended up selling it to a guy that wanted to go road racing. He took it to the track, crashed and broke his arm because of a tank slapper.. Skinny frame tubes, skinny, fork, tubes, skinny, swingarm tubes, over sprung, and under dampened shocks, wire wheels, all combined to make this one of the worst handling motorcycles of that era this suzuki 750 water buffalo on the other hand, that was a machine that could actually go 100,000 miles. The engine was quiet because it was water cooled and you could not hear what the Pistons were doing. There were no fins on the cylinder so the fins did not ring the way air cooled cylinders do.. this suzuki was not tuned for going fast in the quarter-mile the way the Kawasaki was. The suzuki was actually a motorcyclists motorcycle. It was a motorcycle you could commute on, you could tour on, it was a solid mount. It was not the fastest, it did not have the ground clearance to go to the racetrack, but it was a very well-made motorcycle… The suzuki also was tuned for a low end torque.. everybody thinks they want lots of horsepower. But what you really want is torque.. The Suzuki 750 2stroke had it all.. today, collectors are lusting after the Kawasaki, 500 & 750 two stroke triples. It’s another law of supply and demand. The reason they are paying stupid prices for them is, there are so few survivors. Most of them have been crashed or blown up by now… They were also difficult to start. I can still hear that CDI box emitting that hi pitch hum when you turn the key on… then, when you get it started, it poured out clouds of two-stroke oil because the oil pumps were set so horribly Rich at the factory. a film of oil is only so thick. Back in those days you carried spare, spark plugs, and tools to change the spark plugs.. The 500 was considered A tossup in a drag race against the king of the streets at that time, the Honda, CB 750. The Honda was a much more pleasant motorcycle to own. If you want to go for a cross-country ride on a two stroke, you have to get used to the piston, port engine of the Kawasaki at cruising speed doing a surge. It’s just about to come on the cam. ( so to speak) If you know what I mean, and all of the port tuning and the ignition timing, we’re all about to reach the maximum torque output at 65 miles an hour. For that reason, the engine felt nervous, it would go into harmonics, it simply would not hold a steady speed. that’s because it was just at the verge of hitting its sweet spot, and it’s like a racehorse, it wants to go now. Whereas on the 750 Honda, you could go cross country at any RPM from idle up to. 7000 RPM, and the engine was perfectly civilized, nice, flat, torque curve, no surgiing.. Kawasaki 500 triple made 59 hp. I don’t know the exact number for the 750 Kawasaki power output, but I think it was around 71. That happens to be the output of the famous 1973 Kawasaki Z1903. I had one of those. It was a quick for its day motorcycle. It did do the Kawasaki watoosee tank slapper if you tried to go fast on those skinny frame and swing arm tubes, skinny fork tubes, and wire wheels. The two strokes, and the big Kawasaki, 903, Kawasaki tried to circumvent the tank slappers by putting steering dampers on. The four stroke four-cylinder 903 wasn’t as bad. It held the quarter-mile top spot for a while. With a 71 hp. But keep in mind, any 600 Japanese. 600 cc Sport bike has more than double that power output. And they don’t wiggle, and they actually have everything better today… So don’t cry in your beer because you missed those good old days. I was there, they were not the good old days, they were just the old days, these are the good old days. And a bit of irony, motorcycles have never been more reliable, they’ve never been faster, they’ve never been better, yet, the numbers of motorcyclists getting into motorcycling is dropping like a rock.. That’s because of the Harley Davidson 1985 tariff that the CEO of Harley got president Ronald Reagan to apply to Japanese imported motorcycles. Motorcycles became too expensive to buy for most people, so they never became enthusiasts..And all those people that never got started riding cheap Japanese motorcycles, never wanted to share their enthusiasm for motorcycling with their kids when they got married, and had kids, and then those kids grew up, not riding motorcycles, and they are now old enough to have kids, and they are not introducing their kids to riding mini bikes and little dirt bikes. so that Harley Davidson inspired tariff has gone full circle to bite Harley in the ass. All those people that never got started riding cheap Japanese motorcycles back in the 80s and 90s and 2000s because of the tariff, they never became experienced motorcyclists that would have switched over to Harley Davidson‘s maybe someday. I realize not all of them would have switched over to Harleys. probably only a few hundred thousand of them would have.. that’s why Harleys core customers, became enthusiast before the tariff when people could afford to buy cheap motorcycles.. here we are 40 years after the tariff, prices never came back down, and there are fewer motorcycle shops now than at any time over the past 40 years. That tariff has gone full circle to bite Harley in the ass today. That’s why their cereals are down nearly 50%. Because they stopped generations of new riders from becoming new riders…
Hi jodyrisdes, first off, congratulations 🎊 your comment was the lengthiest comment I have ever received on my video. Thank you for blessing us with your stories. I'm a young lad and it always feels great to listen to the stories of people and their motorcycles. The Kawasakis were not very refined, I agree, but there's an attitude that we love. They make us feel alive. And maybe that's why people are spending absurd amounts of money on them. I wish they become affordable again but very unlikely
Thanks for that summary of how the old bikes were fun but at the same time would turn around & bite you or kill you! I own 2 bikes that I love to compare, my older '77 KZ1000 Kawi with my newer '06 FJR1300 Yamaha. The FJR is much faster (it will scare the hell out of you in 1st & 2nd gear) & more refined. I like to jump on the Kawi just to take me back to the early days when we rode & didn't care about a few minor complaints. Had CDI ignition put on the KZ in '02, same year I had engine rebuilt. Best move I ever made. It starts instantly & runs beautifully. Love 'em both!!!
The 500 Kaw was rated 60hp, and the 750 was rated at 74hp. The Z1 was rated at 82hp. The 903 was about as quick as the 750 triple. So it HAD to make more power to drag around the extra weight as fast as the H2. I owned 3 Z1s, a 750 Honda (Trivia-The 1969 and 1970 CB 750s had more power than the 1971 models, which made more power than the 1972 K2). Worked at a Honda shop then. One of our mechanics got a heads up from a rep at American Honda that the K2s were detuned, and slower than the 1971 K1. My friend the mechanic abruptly canceled his order for a K2 and ordered one of the last K1 models available, a gold and black model.....
Back in the 80s, my friend had a an H2 750 triple and I got to ride it once and thought the handling was totally terrible and realized that it didn't steer very well because the front wheel was mostly in the air! That bike scared me in the best way possible.
I used to own a GT750 in 1972 and I would take that over the Kawa 750 any time! We used to call the Suzuki the "Water Bus"! Steady and solid, comfortable and fast enough! The Kawa scared me and I did not like it at all! Went on many tours with the Suzuki and smiled all the way. It did not like going 30 MPH by the way. 😄
H2 of course. I had a 72 with expansion exhaust system, who gave it ca 10 hp moore. It was a beast. No other bikes could compete, and after mounting a steeringdamper it was ok i high speed too.
I used to drag race an H1 500,was a passenger on a H2,very impressive,however when I purchased a 2008 Suzuki B-King the 2 strokes took a back seat! I still love the old bikes for what they were and had a number of smaller cc 2 strokes,RDs,Kawasaki KH400s etc.
I had one of the original Blue H2's. Paid $1,050 for it back in 72. My friend had a Honda 750. Night and day difference. Like comparing the a fuel dragster to a Cadillac. The acceleration on the Kawasaki was frightenly fast. It was a very dangerous bike that did one thing very well and that was acceleration. It accelerated so quickly that the back wheel would run right underneath the bike .It didn't turn well and it didn't stop well. Kawasaki later learned that the frame also flexed during hard turning to the point where it was spitting Riders off of the bike. I have scars from that thing. It also had another dangerous feature and that was a chain oiler . Little did you realize that while you were oiling your chain you were also oiling your back tire . I did hear that Kawasaki considered making a 900 2-stroke prior to them coming out with their 900 four-stroke. Yikes
Kwack 500 was a better bike than the 750 - lighter, although still too heavy for my liking, and the only bike I ever rode that accelerated faster than it braked. For light and fast I had to wait for the RD350LC... The Suzuki RG500 was much quicker than all of them, but that was way too heavy as well, which was a shame... Woof!
I had a 72 GT750 that was made into a cafe racer. Great bike and very dependable. Stock ones are good touring bikes and didn't handle any worse than any othet bike from that era. I now own and ride a 73 H-2 which is a completely different beast. Worth much more than the GT and is a lot more fun to ride
They were actually good for about 115 on average and the speedo was a bit optimistic, but also with 2-strokes they go faster in damp air ( I'm not making that up), so on a foggy day my piped and ported GT500 was about 15mph faster and accelerated quicker too. One wet day I got 65mph out of my Suzuki A50 which was normally only good for 50mph - not sure how that happened, and it exploded the spark plug doing it... Woof!
First bike was an S2, 350 triple Kaw. Wheelie machine with 45 hp. Can only imagine H2. Sold a GT 750 in excellent condition two years ago. Smooth power through out RPM's, not much of a mid or high end hit. Not a wheelie machine. Bulky and overweight. Easy riding though, but rear drum brake was almost useless being cable operated. Didn't like to sit, if it did the oil tank would drain into the crankcase. Had to manually drain it and then it would smoke like a train for the first few miles. Would cruise highway speeds all day and was much more relaxed than my CB 750 over 60 mph rpm wise.
Both very fast bikes, lots of respect. I raced them both on the street in the day with my new '73 750 Norton Commando with the Combat engine, another 750 superbike. The H2 was the only bike then faster than mine. I did beat a GT750, but just barely. I also raced Sportsters, Honda 4's, Tridents, H1's, and built Superglides. When you had a hot bike, everybody wanted to race, even cars!
I always wanted the Kawasaki 750 H2 but got a 1976 Kawasaki KZ 900 that I was able to top out at about the same speed as the H2 on a long straight run in the Florida everglades. My bike had a much broader power band than the H2's but was heavier.
I didn't own either, but rode both. The GT750 was smooth and torquey. The H2 was quick, but handled like it had a hinge in the middle. I preferred four strokes.
The Water Buffalo was such a nice bike on the open road no comparison on an actual trip. H2 fast powerful lighter and vibrated I’ve had both through my store in the day and prefer the Suzuki
In the 70s I owned a GT750 with double disk brakes up front . It was my daily driver ( didn't have a car license then ) . I once drove from Scotland to the south of France on my three week summer vacation . I never had any problems . It was fast ( once you got the revs up ) and comfortable . Great bike. In my part of Scotland it was called " The kettle " .
I had a 76 GT750 as a 16 year old kid in 1980, dumped everything I made into it, Lester wheels, Konis, aluminum swingarm, 3 34mm mikuni straight pull carbs, chambers, motor built by the racer who raced his at Daytona, etc. Sold it for next to nothing while in the army, sad......
I had a dead mint 72 H2 for a long time (even crashed it once!); never owned the GT750 but I did have a GT550 for a while. They were totally different philosophically- the H2 was a straight line terror, super fun in a death- defying way, until you let off the throttle, and the head shake was death defying in a not super fun way. I sold the Kawi to buy a Triumph TR3. I miss the H2, but I'm not sure I'd really like to ride one much now; I'm older and wiser. The Suzuki was smooth and comfortable; I'd ride that anywhere. And three cylinder two strokes just sound magical.
I learned on an S2(which was pretty zippy), and then moved up to the 750 a year later. That thing was downright raw and scary. I had that for a few months, then sold it and bought an RD400. Not only was the RD pretty quick, but had razor sharp handling, especially after riding the “widow maker”! I bought a TL1000 years later, and some of its handling traits reminded me of the Kawasaki.
I still own (and ride) the GT750. Rock solid bike, apart from emissions still a very good bike. The Kawa is a complete different concept of bike. It's like compare a GSXR with a Goldwing. Both good bikes in their way.
The H2 “power band” went from 3000 to 7000 rpm. A broad torquey delivery without any sudden transition from low to high power. The smaller triple certainly exhibited that problem but the 750 had a great spread of power. In my opinion the only widowmaker aspect was its terrible brakes.
This is spot on. H2 handling wasn't brilliant and the frame would flex a bit two up in tighter stuff but it wasn't a bad handling bike per se. Perhaps not the best machine to back off halfway through a corner, in my experience it handled better under power, than off it.
Yes apparently they were originally going to make it a four-cylinder with three exhaust pipes but it was going to be too expensive so they went the other way and made a triple with four pipes
The GT 550 was just as good had two people on the bike and still ran easily over 100 mph the Kawasaki 750 the wind would blow you off the road junk and rattled and hot as hell the heat would kill you . Suzuki was the king .
I owned an H2 750 - such a fun bike but it required high maintenance. I always wonder why Yamaha didn't make a road version of the TZ 750 4 cylinder 2 stroke?
I friend of mine dies on the GT 750 , before that I rode his bike a lot, it was a police model. very soft , smooth, and fast tobe a 2 stokes, nice finishing quality material compare to H2 thats was fast bat look like was made out of a cocacola can or sprite to me more precise , cheap finish . How ever impresive probably I would buy the GT in answer to thequestion, Ill stay with CB750 no doubt.
The Zuke was boat anchor reliable, and about as fast. The H2 would run away and hide from the Zuke. I had a 1972 Honda CB 500 Four that was geared for the 1/4 mile. A fellow H.S. graduate had a '73 Zuke. I could run dead even with it in a 1/4 mile. HOWEVER-On a racetrack like Daytona, the factory modded Zuke was a force to be reckoned with. VERY fast.....
had 71 H1 scary but fun until some guy came oit of his driveway and run me into a telephone pole and just drove away, funny thing is cops could not find the 1967 pink mustang and old man in the house says he did not know anyone with a pink mustang, like pink mustangs were everywhere in 1975
The 76’ version of the TR750 Suzuki (GT750 based) reportedly was making 130 HP… And was clocked at180MPH…frighteningly fast for basically a hot rod cruiser motor…
The triple kawasakis all suffered from the middle piston overheating and would seize up not a good bike at all and a vicious pow band Suzuki seemed to have it all worked out I had the gt250 with ram air nice quick bike later I had the yam rd350 lc and hey were awesome pure wheeley machine but drank the juice 2t oil nice memories
Yup got most of them road ready. The Daytona's a bit harder to kick, has XS400 stuff handed down. Still all stock with the flapper valves. The 400C is more fun with more top end with its higher porting. Still fun to get on the R5/RD hybrid though with its shorter stroke and light wheels. Nothing though compares acoustically to a triple thought. On the hunt for a turn key pedigreed S2 350.
H2 was not a widow maker compared to the H1and H1A wich were quite more hard to ride,in terms of handling,braking and power controlling.. It was as much performing than the H2 in acceleration and top speed, around 185 kmh for both. Never an H2 reached 200kmh nor a Z1,considering the 72 H2 and 73 H2A,both next models B and C being heavier and less powerful with 71 hps instead of 74..
Love the bikes. Video was a let down. AI woman (preeesious, for cryin out loud). All she did was read the specs. I expected some drag racing, exhaust note comparisons. Ride observations. Got none of that.
Pour ma part je préfère la SUZUKI , certes moins performante , mais surement plus facile à dompter et surement plus fiable et plus économique en carburant , de plus son moteur à refroidissement liquide est plus valorisant que celui de la kawasaki , la Suzuki est plus apte à faire du duo également , donc je préfère la Suzuki à la faiseuse de veuves je roule actuellement en Suzuki GSX 1100 G à cardan , si vous pouvez faire une vidéo car cette moto à été très peu diffusé , merci
If you ever owned the widow maker or the water buffalo do tell us about your experience and stories.
I own I yamaha 100cc air cooled bike
But it is 24 years old so it lost its power now
My '74 H2 triple would run heads up with my Honda CBX no problem. Had that bike from age 19 to age 60! My best bud has it now because his back is not junk like mine is now. Still have the CBX though, it's turbocharged.
I had an old water buffalo GT 750 in the early 80s. What was crazy is the smoke screen out the back on full throttle. The drum brakes faded after one pull. The whole frame flexed going around corners any harder than a snail's pace. It just sat in our car port for years until I pulled it apart and took it to the tip. You would be a pretty nutty collector to want one.
@@originalmianos Speachless, ( and a bit teary).
Had a GT750K, why oh why did I sell her. PFU630M where are you?.
I have owned both. The 76 GT750 was like an outboard motor. Solid and good running and sounding. Had many electrical issues. Heavy but ran well. The 74 H2 was slow then hold my beer at higher RPMs. Much lighter feeling and the front wheel would rise. Barely controllable. Many smiles per mile.
I went from a DT 125 to an 74' H2 back in 1979. The power band was, out of nowhere and then here comes the front end up. Passed some friends in a pickup on the back wheel, they thought it was cool, but it scarred the crap out of me. I sold the H2 and went with a CB 360T.
b@@Veltro1960vu😢😢😢😢vu. J nö😢😢
I own a 73H2 and have had many bikes since 1981. Just something about two strokes and the power delivery and noise. Fast in 1973 the H2 was, but nowadays pretty average, but still such a fun and obnoxious bike to ride. Love it! Noisey, Smelly and must agitate the Mayor of London, so everyone should go and buy one or something similar!
In 1974 I bought a Suzuki 750 and I still have it
Wow!, that's cool. I Had a 1975 GT 550. My friend bought a 900 cow and so I had to have the new '77 GS750.
@@tompetry8589A friend of mine also has a GT550J with the air-cooled double drum front brake, which is rarer than hen's teeth. It's covered up in his shed and has rarely seen the light of day in 5+ years.
I owned a H2 and a friend had the GT750. We would switch off on day trips. The GT 750 was a lot heavier and didn’t have the acceleration of my H2 but was very comfortable to ride. Plush suspension and fat seat made for an easy days riding. Felt more planted in the twisty stuff. Guess the steering geometry was more dialed in straight from the factory. The brakes felt more progressive at first application and more powerful when you needed to slow down quickly.
Now don’t get me wrong, the GT 750 was quick and would roll down the road with a twist of the wrist, lots of torque down low compared to the H2 but the H2 just had a huge acceleration edge over the GT 750 at higher rpm, it loved to rev.
The H2 had a quicker more sporty handling feel than the GT 750 and in a side by side drag race the H2 would pull away and stay away.
The H2 was a rocket compared to the GT 750 with the GT 750 being a nicer, friendlier riding and handling motorcycle.
Sure wish I still had that green H2, it was a blast to ride.
The sound of a two stroke triple is intoxicating and takes me back to my youth 👍
I had both and went to the tail of the dragon each summer month. This was back in the early seventies. The Kawasaki pulled unexpected wheelies and you had lay down on the tank most of the run. The Suzuki was very strong but more controllable in the curves. I could push it harder thru the curves. The Kawasaki was scary and super fast. It was so fast the blood in your head had a hard time keeping up with bike.
Always wanted the 750 h2. Had the Kawasaki 500 triple. Nothing under 5,000 revs. Then when it hit the power band it was like letting a King Cobra out of a box and hitting it on the head with a mallet . It went ballistic 👀👀👀
I had the 500 too,went from a TS 185 to this,felt insane and the cops got to know me unfortunately.
Lined up against at GT750 from a standing start , super close but after 160ks it was game over,a rolling start was even worse. After a couple of years I got at GT38O and was a turd compared to the kwaka 5
I was there, riding these types of bikes. When these bikes were current, this is not a head-to-head comparison. The Kawasaki was a hastily thrown together, rather crude by today’s standards motorcycle. It was air cooled ..you could hear the fins ringing, and the Pistons slapping up and down in the bores.. The Kawasaki was a horrible wiggler if you tried to go fast. I was roadracing motorcycles, and this time, and I can still see the 500 & 750 Kawasaki two-stroke triples, going into tank, slappers, and exactly the same points on the different race tracks. To top that off, they didn’t survive, crashes, because of how wide the engine was. The crankshaft would get damaged.
I bought one that the owner ran the bike without oil. I had the cylinders bored to First over, I put it back together, but I did not want to ride it on the street or on the race track. I ended up selling it to a guy that wanted to go road racing. He took it to the track, crashed and broke his arm because of a tank slapper.. Skinny frame tubes, skinny, fork, tubes, skinny, swingarm tubes, over sprung, and under dampened shocks, wire wheels, all combined to make this one of the worst handling motorcycles of that era
this suzuki 750 water buffalo on the other hand, that was a machine that could actually go 100,000 miles. The engine was quiet because it was water cooled and you could not hear what the Pistons were doing. There were no fins on the cylinder so the fins did not ring the way air cooled cylinders do.. this suzuki was not tuned for going fast in the quarter-mile the way the Kawasaki was. The suzuki was actually a motorcyclists motorcycle. It was a motorcycle you could commute on, you could tour on, it was a solid mount. It was not the fastest, it did not have the ground clearance to go to the racetrack, but it was a very well-made motorcycle… The suzuki also was tuned for a low end torque.. everybody thinks they want lots of horsepower. But what you really want is torque.. The Suzuki 750 2stroke had it all..
today, collectors are lusting after the Kawasaki, 500 & 750 two stroke triples. It’s another law of supply and demand. The reason they are paying stupid prices for them is, there are so few survivors. Most of them have been crashed or blown up by now… They were also difficult to start. I can still hear that CDI box emitting that hi pitch hum when you turn the key on… then, when you get it started, it poured out clouds of two-stroke oil because the oil pumps were set so horribly Rich at the factory. a film of oil is only so thick. Back in those days you carried spare, spark plugs, and tools to change the spark plugs..
The 500 was considered A tossup in a drag race against the king of the streets at that time, the Honda, CB 750. The Honda was a much more pleasant motorcycle to own. If you want to go for a cross-country ride on a two stroke, you have to get used to the piston, port engine of the Kawasaki at cruising speed doing a surge. It’s just about to come on the cam. ( so to speak) If you know what I mean, and all of the port tuning and the ignition timing, we’re all about to reach the maximum torque output at 65 miles an hour. For that reason, the engine felt nervous, it would go into harmonics, it simply would not hold a steady speed. that’s because it was just at the verge of hitting its sweet spot, and it’s like a racehorse, it wants to go now. Whereas on the 750 Honda, you could go cross country at any RPM from idle up to. 7000 RPM, and the engine was perfectly civilized, nice, flat, torque curve, no surgiing.. Kawasaki 500 triple made 59 hp. I don’t know the exact number for the 750 Kawasaki power output, but I think it was around 71. That happens to be the output of the famous 1973 Kawasaki Z1903. I had one of those. It was a quick for its day motorcycle. It did do the Kawasaki watoosee tank slapper if you tried to go fast on those skinny frame and swing arm tubes, skinny fork tubes, and wire wheels. The two strokes, and the big Kawasaki, 903, Kawasaki tried to circumvent the tank slappers by putting steering dampers on. The four stroke four-cylinder 903 wasn’t as bad. It held the quarter-mile top spot for a while. With a 71 hp. But keep in mind, any 600 Japanese. 600 cc Sport bike has more than double that power output. And they don’t wiggle, and they actually have everything better today…
So don’t cry in your beer because you missed those good old days. I was there, they were not the good old days, they were just the old days, these are the good old days. And a bit of irony, motorcycles have never been more reliable, they’ve never been faster, they’ve never been better, yet, the numbers of motorcyclists getting into motorcycling is dropping like a rock..
That’s because of the Harley Davidson 1985 tariff that the CEO of Harley got president Ronald Reagan to apply to Japanese imported motorcycles. Motorcycles became too expensive to buy for most people, so they never became enthusiasts..And all those people that never got started riding cheap Japanese motorcycles, never wanted to share their enthusiasm for motorcycling with their kids when they got married, and had kids, and then those kids grew up, not riding motorcycles, and they are now old enough to have kids, and they are not introducing their kids to riding mini bikes and little dirt bikes.
so that Harley Davidson inspired tariff has gone full circle to bite Harley in the ass. All those people that never got started riding cheap Japanese motorcycles back in the 80s and 90s and 2000s because of the tariff, they never became experienced motorcyclists that would have switched over to Harley Davidson‘s maybe someday. I realize not all of them would have switched over to Harleys. probably only a few hundred thousand of them would have..
that’s why Harleys core customers, became enthusiast before the tariff when people could afford to buy cheap motorcycles..
here we are 40 years after the tariff, prices never came back down, and there are fewer motorcycle shops now than at any time over the past 40 years. That tariff has gone full circle to bite Harley in the ass today. That’s why their cereals are down nearly 50%. Because they stopped generations of new riders from becoming new riders…
Hi jodyrisdes, first off, congratulations 🎊 your comment was the lengthiest comment I have ever received on my video. Thank you for blessing us with your stories. I'm a young lad and it always feels great to listen to the stories of people and their motorcycles. The Kawasakis were not very refined, I agree, but there's an attitude that we love. They make us feel alive. And maybe that's why people are spending absurd amounts of money on them. I wish they become affordable again but very unlikely
Thanks for that summary of how the old bikes were fun but at the same time would turn around & bite you or kill you! I own 2 bikes that I love to compare, my older '77 KZ1000 Kawi with my newer '06 FJR1300 Yamaha. The FJR is much faster (it will scare the hell out of you in 1st & 2nd gear) & more refined. I like to jump on the Kawi just to take me back to the early days when we rode & didn't care about a few minor complaints. Had CDI ignition put on the KZ in '02, same year I had engine rebuilt. Best move I ever made. It starts instantly & runs beautifully. Love 'em both!!!
The 500 Kaw was rated 60hp, and the 750 was rated at 74hp. The Z1 was rated at 82hp. The 903 was about as quick as the 750 triple. So it HAD to make more power to drag around the extra weight as fast as the H2. I owned 3 Z1s, a 750 Honda (Trivia-The 1969 and 1970 CB 750s had more power than the 1971 models, which made more power than the 1972 K2). Worked at a Honda shop then. One of our mechanics got a heads up from a rep at American Honda that the K2s were detuned, and slower than the 1971 K1. My friend the mechanic abruptly canceled his order for a K2 and ordered one of the last K1 models available, a gold and black model.....
Back in the 80s, my friend had a an H2 750 triple and I got to ride it once and thought the handling was totally terrible and realized that it didn't steer very well because the front wheel was mostly in the air! That bike scared me in the best way possible.
bet you forgot all your problems
I used to own a GT750 in 1972 and I would take that over the Kawa 750 any time! We used to call the Suzuki the "Water Bus"! Steady and solid, comfortable and fast enough! The Kawa scared me and I did not like it at all! Went on many tours with the Suzuki and smiled all the way. It did not like going 30 MPH by the way. 😄
H2 of course. I had a 72 with expansion exhaust system, who gave it ca 10 hp moore. It was a beast. No other bikes could compete, and after mounting a steeringdamper it was ok i high speed too.
I used to drag race an H1 500,was a passenger on a H2,very impressive,however when I purchased a 2008 Suzuki B-King the 2 strokes took a back seat! I still love the old bikes for what they were and had a number of smaller cc 2 strokes,RDs,Kawasaki KH400s etc.
I had one of the original Blue H2's. Paid $1,050 for it back in 72. My friend had a Honda 750. Night and day difference. Like comparing the a fuel dragster to a Cadillac. The acceleration on the Kawasaki was frightenly fast. It was a very dangerous bike that did one thing very well and that was acceleration. It accelerated so quickly that the back wheel would run right underneath the bike .It didn't turn well and it didn't stop well. Kawasaki later learned that the frame also flexed during hard turning to the point where it was spitting Riders off of the bike. I have scars from that thing. It also had another dangerous feature and that was a chain oiler . Little did you realize that while you were oiling your chain you were also oiling your back tire . I did hear that Kawasaki considered making a 900 2-stroke prior to them coming out with their 900 four-stroke. Yikes
I had a H 1 500 1971. A Super 500 back then acceleration was all that was needed.
Kwack 500 was a better bike than the 750 - lighter, although still too heavy for my liking, and the only bike I ever rode that accelerated faster than it braked. For light and fast I had to wait for the RD350LC... The Suzuki RG500 was much quicker than all of them, but that was way too heavy as well, which was a shame... Woof!
I had a 72 GT750 that was made into a cafe racer. Great bike and very dependable. Stock ones are good touring bikes and didn't handle any worse than any othet bike from that era. I now own and ride a 73 H-2 which is a completely different beast. Worth much more than the GT and is a lot more fun to ride
Was 106mph for the old gt750 because my brother had a brand new gt750a in may 76 and it easily did 125 mph it went like a rocket.
They were actually good for about 115 on average and the speedo was a bit optimistic, but also with 2-strokes they go faster in damp air ( I'm not making that up), so on a foggy day my piped and ported GT500 was about 15mph faster and accelerated quicker too. One wet day I got 65mph out of my Suzuki A50 which was normally only good for 50mph - not sure how that happened, and it exploded the spark plug doing it... Woof!
First bike was an S2, 350 triple Kaw. Wheelie machine with 45 hp. Can only imagine H2.
Sold a GT 750 in excellent condition two years ago. Smooth power through out RPM's, not much of a mid or high end hit. Not a wheelie machine. Bulky and overweight. Easy riding though, but rear drum brake was almost useless being cable operated. Didn't like to sit, if it did the oil tank would drain into the crankcase. Had to manually drain it and then it would smoke like a train for the first few miles. Would cruise highway speeds all day and was much more relaxed than my CB 750 over 60 mph rpm wise.
Both very fast bikes, lots of respect. I raced them both on the street in the day with my new '73 750 Norton Commando with the Combat engine, another 750 superbike. The H2 was the only bike then faster than mine. I did beat a GT750, but just barely. I also raced Sportsters, Honda 4's, Tridents, H1's, and built Superglides. When you had a hot bike, everybody wanted to race, even cars!
It's interesting that two bikes that to many may seem similar but were actually aimed at totally different customers.
I always wanted the Kawasaki 750 H2 but got a 1976 Kawasaki KZ 900 that I was able to top out at about the same speed as the H2 on a long straight run in the Florida everglades. My bike had a much broader power band than the H2's but was heavier.
I didn't own either, but rode both. The GT750 was smooth and torquey. The H2 was quick, but handled like it had a hinge in the middle. I preferred four strokes.
Just an incredible 2-stroke sound…like nothing else.
The Water Buffalo was such a nice bike on the open road no comparison on an actual trip. H2 fast powerful lighter and vibrated I’ve had both through my store in the day and prefer the Suzuki
I’ve owned both,the kettle was a touring bike and comfortable for long rides,the h2 was lighter and more sporty and quicker.
In the 70s I owned a GT750 with double disk brakes up front . It was my daily driver ( didn't have a car license then ) . I once drove from Scotland to the south of France on my three week summer vacation . I never had any problems . It was fast ( once you got the revs up ) and comfortable . Great bike. In my part of Scotland it was called " The kettle " .
I had a 76 GT750 as a 16 year old kid in 1980, dumped everything I made into it, Lester wheels, Konis, aluminum swingarm, 3 34mm mikuni straight pull carbs, chambers, motor built by the racer who raced his at Daytona, etc. Sold it for next to nothing while in the army, sad......
I had a dead mint 72 H2 for a long time (even crashed it once!); never owned the GT750 but I did have a GT550 for a while. They were totally different philosophically- the H2 was a straight line terror, super fun in a death- defying way, until you let off the throttle, and the head shake was death defying in a not super fun way. I sold the Kawi to buy a Triumph TR3. I miss the H2, but I'm not sure I'd really like to ride one much now; I'm older and wiser. The Suzuki was smooth and comfortable; I'd ride that anywhere. And three cylinder two strokes just sound magical.
I learned on an S2(which was pretty zippy), and then moved up to the 750 a year later. That thing was downright raw and scary. I had that for a few months, then sold it and bought an RD400. Not only was the RD pretty quick, but had razor sharp handling, especially after riding the “widow maker”! I bought a TL1000 years later, and some of its handling traits reminded me of the Kawasaki.
I had a H2. Fun but scary at times. Had it for a few years. I miss it and wish i had kept it.
The buffalo were slow and had a short powerband. The H2's were a whole different story.
The water buffalo will never dethrone the widowmaker. Ever.
I still own (and ride) the GT750.
Rock solid bike, apart from emissions still a very good bike.
The Kawa is a complete different concept of bike. It's like compare a GSXR with a Goldwing.
Both good bikes in their way.
Water buffalo all day long❤❤❤❤
The H2 “power band” went from 3000 to 7000 rpm. A broad torquey delivery without any sudden transition from low to high power. The smaller triple certainly exhibited that problem but the 750 had a great spread of power. In my opinion the only widowmaker aspect was its terrible brakes.
This is spot on. H2 handling wasn't brilliant and the frame would flex a bit two up in tighter stuff but it wasn't a bad handling bike per se. Perhaps not the best machine to back off halfway through a corner, in my experience it handled better under power, than off it.
Getting to hop a leg on the widow maker is a dream
I had a H1 for over 40 years. Never had a problem passing a Gt750.
I always thought it was weird that the Suzuki was a triple, yet it had four exhaust pipes.
The middle exhaust pipe actually splits into two
just for aesthetics
Yes apparently they were originally going to make it a four-cylinder with three exhaust pipes but it was going to be too expensive so they went the other way and made a triple with four pipes
The GT 550 was just as good had two people on the bike and still ran easily over 100 mph the Kawasaki 750 the wind would blow you off the road junk and rattled and hot as hell the heat would kill you . Suzuki was the king .
I owned an H2 750 - such a fun bike but it required high maintenance.
I always wonder why Yamaha didn't make a road version of the TZ 750 4 cylinder 2 stroke?
h2 will win
I friend of mine dies on the GT 750 , before that I rode his bike a lot, it was a police model. very soft , smooth, and fast tobe a 2 stokes, nice finishing quality material compare to H2 thats was fast bat look like was made out of a cocacola can or sprite to me more precise , cheap finish . How ever impresive probably I would buy the GT in answer to thequestion, Ill stay with CB750 no doubt.
Had the Suzuki Rick had Kawasaki he did the wheelies and I cruised on trips he paid hands back n butt. I hung with him 99% and enjoyed the ride.
They called the water cooled one the water buffalo.
waterbus here in NZ
The kettle in England
Bouillotte en France
The Zuke was boat anchor reliable, and about as fast. The H2 would run away and hide from the Zuke. I had a 1972 Honda CB 500 Four that was geared for the 1/4 mile. A fellow H.S. graduate had a '73 Zuke. I could run dead even with it in a 1/4 mile. HOWEVER-On a racetrack like Daytona, the factory modded Zuke was a force to be reckoned with. VERY fast.....
Good information 3:10
My H2 is a peach 🍑 to ride. 😊the H1-500 is a different story
It sure is!
had 71 H1 scary but fun until some guy came
oit of his driveway and run me into a telephone pole and just drove away, funny thing is cops could not find the 1967 pink mustang and old man in the house says he did not know anyone with a pink mustang, like pink mustangs were everywhere in 1975
The 76’ version of the TR750 Suzuki (GT750 based) reportedly was making 130 HP…
And was clocked at180MPH…frighteningly fast for basically a hot rod cruiser motor…
Are the clips from 1:15 on from a film?
I’ve never heard of the term water buffalo here in the uk it was called the kettle
So, you didn't actually organise getting the bikes together?
You haven't ridden either?
You just read off stats from period magazines?
Did she say the Suzuki top speed was 105. Surely faster than that.
The last ones were ported and tuned to do mid 12s in the quarter. They topped out at 126.
67 horsepower for the water buffalo? The CB 750 Honda had 68 hp., and was a whole lot more reliable!🏍
I rode my dad’s H2 when I was 16, I was like ‘no, thanks’ mom’s Hawk 400 was a better choice.
The triple kawasakis all suffered from the middle piston overheating and would seize up not a good bike at all and a vicious pow band Suzuki seemed to have it all worked out I had the gt250 with ram air nice quick bike later I had the yam rd350 lc and hey were awesome pure wheeley machine but drank the juice 2t oil nice memories
What's with the police edition ? At least point it out it while narrating.
Id pick yam rd 400 over both.
Yup got most of them road ready. The Daytona's a bit harder to kick, has XS400 stuff handed down. Still all stock with the flapper valves. The 400C is more fun with more top end with its higher porting. Still fun to get on the R5/RD hybrid though with its shorter stroke and light wheels. Nothing though compares acoustically to a triple thought. On the hunt for a turn key pedigreed S2 350.
LOL..the water buffalo was a two ton POS..the H-2 was a powerhouse..Change the pipes and tyres and it would still be plenty good today.
Kawa!
H2 was not a widow maker compared to the H1and H1A wich were quite more hard to ride,in terms of handling,braking and power controlling..
It was as much performing than the H2 in acceleration and top speed, around 185 kmh for both.
Never an H2 reached 200kmh nor a Z1,considering the 72 H2 and 73 H2A,both next models B and C being heavier and less powerful with 71 hps instead of 74..
Zlatno doba dvotaktaša. Cvajtaka.
suzuki buffalo weight a ton
Looks like before it was parked they drained the fluids.
🏍👍👍
Love the bikes. Video was a let down. AI woman (preeesious, for cryin out loud). All she did was read the specs. I expected some drag racing, exhaust note comparisons. Ride observations. Got none of that.
h2...
I would pick the Kawasaki
Who here would like to see Kawasaki bring a 2 stroke 750 back?
With catalytic converters, no reason not to.
Pour ma part je préfère la SUZUKI , certes moins performante , mais surement plus facile à dompter et surement plus fiable et plus économique en carburant , de plus son moteur à refroidissement liquide est plus valorisant que celui de la kawasaki , la Suzuki est plus apte à faire du duo également , donc je préfère la Suzuki à la faiseuse de veuves je roule actuellement en Suzuki GSX 1100 G à cardan , si vous pouvez faire une vidéo car cette moto à été très peu diffusé , merci