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.
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
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'.
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
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
I rode a Triumph T110 back in the day , magneto ignition and a breathed on engine with a few extra bhp and 5 star petrol , faster than my friends Bonnie .Keep the damper screwed down and keep the power on when negotiating fast bends , also no speed limit on main roads when I was 18 . Those were good days back in the 50's .
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 😂
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.
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 🤣
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!
The Honda CB500/4 and Honda CB550/4 were produced before the CB400/4. My first 'big' bike was a 1972 Honda CB500/4 which I bought second hand in 1974. The Honda CB400/4 first came out (in Australia any way) in 1975. The CB550/4 was a update of the CB500/4 and was released in 1974. By the way, the Honda CB450 'Black Bomber' sounded the death knell to the British motorcycling industry. Honda's CB750/4 buried it. I used to ride my BMW R65LS the 100klms to university in the mid/late 1980s. I'd often park my Beemer next to a R80GS. At that time I just couldn't work it out what it was and thought it the ugliest bike on the planet. This was before adventure bikes became 'fashionable'. I never met the owner.
Well you several months too late in the 400 thing The black Bomber the dell nail ? Not so sure you time line is accurate there I’m afraid. Also a bike with a reputation for rapid top end wear, crappy top end oil supply Why don’t BMW understand the importance of symmetry I wonder
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
Before the 70s bikes were all about getting to work. As British bikes became classics it was all about looks. For me if a bikes looks right it performs right. I don't need to get on my Velocette Thruxton to get to work. I can spend hours looking at it and admiring the engineering right down to the beautiful nuts and bolts. Certain bikes are works of art. The Triumph T120 was and is now with Bloor's interpretation the ultimate in looks. When you ride any classic British bike there is a feeling you can't describe. Men our age (70's) know that feeling. I recently bought a beautiful Fat Boy and now i get that feeling for HD too. It's the feeling and the looks Baby, never mind the admiration from bystanders. If it was all about getting to work a step through 90 would suffice or even a Raleigh moped
I owned a brand new CB 400F in 1975. Worst handling bike I ever owned, it tended to get giggle headed on less than perfect roads and spat me off at 80 K'S an hour. LOT'S of pain, enough said.😠
Actually BSA metallurgy was quite advanced by the standards of the time Recently read an article detailing the materials used in the Gold Star Way ahead of other British factories The machinary was old but that true of all the British factories Especially AMC who’s factory was decades behind small heath The small Heath assembly line was updated in the early 70s and was actually the most modern in Europe at the time FYI
I have rode them all From Triumph to Ariel,all were as good as their owner maintained them,but none as far as handling,lighting and braking were anywhere near as good as bikes of the modern era or perhaps for the last 45 + years,but we enjoyed all the old British built bikes and of course the "Bitsers" we used to build ourselves from parts we found on the cheap,we were practical then and home mechanics was our thing
I would still own the CB 400 four as a second bike based upon sound and looks alone. Additionally, they vibrated less, leaked WAY less and were more trouble free than the British twins. I still remember listening to them drive by in the states as a kid. There was no other sound like it in a production bike. Here in Japan, I'm sure I would miss the midrange of my other bikes, but 400cc is more than enough for these roads. Great bike for a short day trip. Oh, and I'm so glad the GS made the list. What an ungainly monstrosity.
Great video, interesting details. I've ridden many bikes over the past 30 years, currently riding a 2015 GSA, and I agree with your assessment. However... I'm tall, and a tall bike with decent weather protection is a necessity for long distance riding. If Honda made a Goldwing with a seat 10cm taller, I'd have one. The issue is not with the passionate riders, it's with greedy PR people, fanboys and fashionistas... I can't think of many bikes that can be ridden for over 1000 miles in 24 hours without causing pain in back, knees, neck or wrists... And if you like Tonka toys, it's actually rather pretty!
BTW my dad had a had a DBD 34 and so I notice that the bike in the video is: 1. ticking over. 2. Not fitted with a standard carb :) I admit they were great after a lot of careful fettling though!
Well I expect it’s ticking over largely because of that non standard carb, GPs can be made to idle but not well. The problem is that everyone tends to fit all the clubman bits then wonder why it’s less than ideal on modern roads🤷🏼 Remember also over does not mean bad, the Gold Star is a great bike but it is placed on a totally unrealistic pedestal
That’s a wide selection As it should be we own a varied selection of bikes. Never understood people who like just one brand or model. Riding a variety makes you a better rider no doubt
At the learner end, the CB/CM125 twin. It cost a flipping GRAND in 1986 and was slower, more gutless and less fun than a whole host of 2 stroke 100s costing just £600.
A 1975 Honda 400F replaced my 1974 Rickman Bonneville which was a piece of junk. The 400F was great for twisty Cheshire back roads and would leave a Z900 in its wake. My Z900 was okay in a straight line. The 400F was more practical and just as much fun. My 50's and 60's British bikes were unreliable but easy to work on and cheap to fix.
@@bikerdood1100 It just did not want to lean over in the corners and wanted to stay upright. It was sold after a year and a 1973 CB750 replaced it. I now ride a Yamaha V Twin 1300 in Ontario.
friend of mine went from a 4 yr owned zx10r to a gs 1250....whilst it is a tall bike with those heads poking all the way out..he could dust a lot of us out on a run.it handles very well...and he was usually 2 up on it.!!!
The most over rated and in the mean time over priced motorcycles on the market are the Kawasaki 2-stroke triples from the 70s. Horrible machines. Dodgy handling, not particularly well made, bad fuel consumption….BUT, they are still the (motorcycling) one true love of my life! ❤😅Like the stunning but rather dim girlfriend your parents didn‘t like - but you just couldn‘t resist her! And the sound! A motor should scream like a wild big cat! And not „plop plop“ like an constipated elephant. But the prices they are fetching are bizzare! I still love them. 😊
If you look at motorcycles from a non emotional pov you’re right. But bikes aren’t that. The 400/4 looked amazing for it’s day. Everyone wanted it and it went ok, if not the best. It was the image, as was the Brough, the Gold Star, the Bonneville. They created their own status. They hit the right spot at the time. The older GS’s earned their reputation. Solid, reliable and relatively simple. They were (and probably still are) so ugly they’ve passed through that and back into a thing of beauty. The newer ones sold well because ‘you’ became Charlie or Ewan off around the world, even if you were just popping down to Tesco. You can’t take emotion out of motorcycles, just think how it feels when the sun is shining, you bank into that bend, at the right speed and have that ‘perfect moment’. They’re all about emotion.
I love the Honda 400F, but I don't quite understand all the hype about it's handling and road-holding. The frame was essentially the same as on the 360 twins, and the swingarm, forks, shocks, wheels, tires and brakes were the same. I guess if it looks and sounds cool it must handle better?
The CB350F and 400F both hit the market after the CB500 and 550 models not before. I endurance raced a Yamaha DS7 in the mid 70s against a well ridden CB400F and my little 250 would stay right with the 400. It sounded nice but without extensive mods was a bit of a slug.
I enjoyed and agree with your analyses. Worst bike, for me; Ducati 900SS, for the wandering front-end. Next from that was my 1981 XJ-750 Yamaha that would go to 130 with excellent brakes but would head-shake in shallow turns and scare hell out of me. Best was my Honda CX-500. It was a real sleeper with: the CDI ignition; four-valve head, tubeless tires. It revved, necessarily, to 11,000RPM with Power from 6K. Problems were a very long-and-stretchy cam-chain and a poorly designed, faulti ignition RPM-sensor that broke due to its being molded into the generator stator. I never expected it to be a handler(I was a roadracer) but, while on a ride, one afternoon, on Glendora Cyn, in So Cal, I came to a not-too-familiar hairpin turn at the end of a downhill straight. I thought, "This might be the end!" As I executed the turn, though I was expecting the frame to lift the wheels off the ground, nothing happened! I thought, "What??!!" I parked and got off to find out why I still existed on level ground. I found, to my surprise, incredible ground-clearance to the side. I got back on and repeated the performance four more times...just to verify my findings; each event more aggressive than the previous. Wow! A rider once commented, "Nice bike! for a generator!" It was a great handler. In the middle, for me, were my 1977 Honda Goldwing and my 1989 BMW K-100RS. Except for its weight, The Beemer would rate as superior; I did 130 on it and no shaking. Thanks.
Had a Goldie Clubman some 50 years ago. Luckily got rid of it after 2 months. Beast to start. Wobbly in high speed bends. Still misses the featherbed twin Norton I had before. Now have a Vincent for touring, a Manx for track, a Venom for twisties and two Victors for green lane and dirt. Plus two Norton twins under restoration.
People miss the point about Brit bikes. They were fairly lousy in a lot of respects, but they had a timeless, cult following and a sound and presence on the road that is totally unique - I love mine, but have a modern in the garage as well for when it breaks - again.
Lousy ? When I first rode a British bike it was the competence that surprised me After years of very negative comments I surprised how well it just worked and how engaging it was Ok the breaks are relatively week but a sensible rider adapts accordingly I find my old BSA to be one of the most down right enjoyable machines that I’ve ever owned. We have a few bikes of varying ages which helps keep mileage down Old bikes can be unreliable simply because they are old I must admit I often wonder how well some modern bikes will be running in 60 years time
@@bikerdood1100 Poor brakes, poor design, oil leaks, questionable electrics, interesting handling, reliability issues, etc, etc. Japanese bikes blew the socks off the Brit bike industry simply because they weren't like Brit bikes - and worked. I have a 1961 BSA A10, brilliant bike but requires ten times the amount of looking after than my Kwaka W650.
@@worty historical over simplification I have a 54 A10 and a 35 Terrot as well as modern bikes I need to do a detailed video about what happened to rather British industry most people only seem to grasp the Very edited and much over simplified highlights, or low lights. For the record my BSA doesn’t leak and 60s and 70s Japanese bikes were poor handlers with disc brakes that were bloody awful in the wet. And of course the japs do measure the power in the wrong place. Do some reading around the collapse of AMC They hit trouble years before anyone had even heard of Honda in the UK. It’s a complex and interesting bit of history the failure of the bike industry and it’s foolish to say British Bad Japanese Good
@@bikerdood1100 I'm detecting a misunderstanding of what I'm saying. I'm not over simplifying anything, just making commonsense statements. The Jap bikes did have their issues but, unlike the British bike industry, they learnt from their mistakes and improved the product. Your tone seems very partronising, almost as if you feel a need to 'educate' - don't trouble yourself! If you want to read about a more comprehensive history of British motorcycles, and maybe learn something yourself, why not try the A7/A10 Forum or other, similar classic bike websites.
With respect to the Honda 400 four. This bike performed better than you described compared to the 350. I owned a 350, and my brother the 400. With only 50cc difference between them, it is very difficult to put a figure on why his used to leave me for dead on long up hill gradients, except to say l weighed several stone heavier than he, and his had a 6 speed gear bo, mine 5. And l think that's what made the difference in the end. I can't tell you if his and my bike had the same final ratio, or whether his sprockets had the same number of teeth, but while he was in top gear, l was constantly changing from 5th to fourth to keep the revs in the power zone.
Still 37hp from 4 cylinders means hard work. We have a 350 Guzzi that makes 35hp from 2 cylinders and OHV. The Guzzi makes way better mid range too so is far more engaging on a twisty road. And that bike is a contemporary. The big problem isn’t so much how it performed it’s about the value attached to it today 400s go for a fair chunk of cash more than Honda’s 550 which makes absolutely no sense. The video is not saying it’s a bad bike, y the opening words of the video say just that. The reason it’s overrated is the inflated value it has on the market today
In my opinion an inline triple is the best sounding engine in motorcycling. I would love to see the development of Triumphs' Trident from the late 60s' to present day. I plan on buying my ''last'' motorcycle = a 1050 Tiger Sport soon, and would like some development history.
Triples are great engines sitting in the half way between fours and twins. As a person who does his own service work the modern triples are rather off putting. Brilliant bikes but pricey to run { I’m tight }
The cx 500 c was a great allrounder not super fast but for a six foot like myself very comfortable on long rides ,it had that summer feel all year round ,I went from a us custom bonny to the cx 500 c an it out classed the bonny in ever way easy to maintain basically just oil changes an tyres /brake pads ,where as the bonny was a pig to start on cold mornings forever rattling something loose the lights were not good in the wet intermittent electrical issues , sure they look good but for every mile ridden you could look forward to a minutes preventive maintenance prior to next outing , give me the cx 500 c every time not everyone's cup of tea but it was certainly one of mine , PS if your after one of the best bikes ever built the Honda cub for all-round simplicity reliability and work horse factor must surely be at the top of the tree .
Owned a CX myself for a couple of years and was very fond of it Had a cub too, well two actually As for the CX in my experience it was not without its shortcomings I had a top end leak and the cam chain stretched at just over 30 thousand miles. This was a later Eurosport model too. I did a video specifically about the CX because it’s such a great bike but not flawless. One of my Cubs set itself on fire 🔥? but great bikes no doubt
@@bikerdood1100 the cx 500 custom ,was a slightly different model in terms of shape an riding position as opposed to the standard maggot rd bike ,more of a sit up an beg riding style i think the mill was the same ,standard 500 ,my friend brought the turbo 650 sport cx model had it for two weeks an traded in for a kwaka 900 z ,big difference ,I tried several race models myself rd350 fire blade gpz750 but just could not trust myself that's the trouble if your a poser like me and not an edge craver other than Milwaukie cost to much or wing cruiser mills ,there has been very few models of bikes marketed for the mid range poser other than the 500 c . imo
Oh I’m family with the C, twin shocks and smaller rear wheel. Unfortunately they are gotta little scarce because they are getting converted to Catholicism racers. I don’t mind this because it’s made the bikes popular again but hopefully won’t mean that the standard models disappear
The SK1 1200 (faired) Bandit was overrated. Mine might have been the first on Scotland's roads, and - it burnt oil! Plus its quality of finish - paint and bright work - was the worst of any bike I've owned, ever. Its screen needed to be replaced with a flip top to get rid of the hellish turbulence experienced with that standard thing. Sure it went quite well, but so did most bikes of that swept capacity. I heard of some of these oil burners being recalled and the engine rebuilt with new block and piston group but never met an owner who had succeeded with that claim on Suzuki. Its quality of finish was nowhere near my old GS850n (1979), with none of the above issues. Buying that new bike was my worst bike purchase ever.
I owned one of the early model bandit 600s for a while It was very nimble and very easy to ride. I do agree about built quality however. It was definitely lacking. Engine was very solid
I ride a Kawasaki W 800 it does vibrate slightly but no oil leaks and starts on the button this bike rides very similar to my 1979 T140D special without the need to use the tool kit so often.
@@bikerdood1100 I am 76 now and my Bikes were 1956 T100 ,1961 BSA Super Rocket, 1960 Triumph bathtub T110, 1960 BSA Golden Flash, then a break And the T140D Special , GPZ 900R ZZR 600 , ZZR 1100 Z650 , Honda VFR Fi and now in my dotage the W800 I had most fun with the 1956 T100 which I fitted a Myers twin carb setup and 10.5 h pistons with E3134 cams this 500 could outpace a 1964 Bonnie, I also had a Lyco Triton 500 with a Slimline Norton frame Borrani times Amal GP carbs this bike was a 6 page feature in Classic Bike magazine now all gone but not my memories.
I have to say I absolutely adored my Honda 400F, I did well over 120,000 miles on the thing the only where the brakes needed a fair amount of attention but the 400 dream was one of the ugliest bikes ever made, the VFR400 was its true replacement another great bike that I also did well over 100,000 miles
yes it was not that powerful but it was my first bike after passing my test so was ideal as a learning more deal with more power than my learner bike also it just looked wonderful @@bikerdood1100
Hmm 🤔 That’s not what happened ktm turned them down because they thought they fail and thus damage the brand Dumbest decision since that guy didn’t sign the Beatles in 62 😂
The BMW GS is also responsible for the godawful "adventure" styling with the beak-like protrusion sticking out the front and the nightmarish chaotic mass of stuff where the tank goes... Oh and those big-ass Aluminium boxes that probably remain empty for the life of the bike. Now we've got bikes sprouting adventure beaks and crash bars from almost every manufacturer. Yick. Enjoyed your video, I think you were spot on. The CB400 four is a nifty bike but not worth the goofy money. A CB 500 would do just fine for me and has a prettier tank. I'll have to check out more of your videos now.
Well the styling is, let ps just say an acquired state. I’m glad you get the point of the video. I did think it was obvious. Apparently not. That’s the thing it’s not about saying that the cb400 isn’t good or any of the other bikes to that matter. But some bikes get put on a pedestal and then attract crazy prices. Why does a 400 cost more than it’s bigger brothers ?
Well not so sure about that Early bikes had some cam chain problems and it was very hard to replace, much easy on the later bikes thankfully, alternators can go but that’s common to just about every bike on the planet.
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.
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.
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.
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"...
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.
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.
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.
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 .
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.
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
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.
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
What an ugly bike ! that BMW is, designed by Stevie Wonder? BMW be it car or bike, is a brand, and the owners of these machines are buying into brand, like others do with the Trainers, most real bikers or even cars, will venture out and try other makes, i have owned BSA, Triumph, Suzuki, Honda, and my by Far favorite was an 850 Interstate Mk11 Commando, Unreliable, but by far the best handling bike out of ay of the others, when it started! change it to mk2 Amal carbs, and electronic ignition, and not much could keep up with me,
I really don’t understand why people go out n buy the plug ugly BMW. Lack of soul I suspect Carbs n electrics the things that actually do could the biggest problems on British bikes
@@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 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.
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 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
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.
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?
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.
@@paulsmith2960 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 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 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.
@@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.
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 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
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.
Is this video made from a young man’s point of view ? To make any comparison you needed to go back to the time these machines were built. One of the greatest machines I have owned and ridden is a Lambretta SX200, far better than any motorcycle....ask people who originally owned and rode them for the REAL answer. It’s all a matter of opinion.
I ride old bikes the A10in the film is me 🙄 Keep calling me young if u like though I’ll take the compliment Patronising BS or not You don’t have to have been born in 40s to ride old bike My oldest bike is almost certainly much older than yourself sir
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.
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.
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
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'.
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' 😁
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.
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
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
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
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.
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
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.
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
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
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.
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
I rode a Triumph T110 back in the day , magneto ignition and a breathed on engine with a few extra bhp and 5 star petrol , faster than my friends Bonnie .Keep the damper screwed down and keep the power on when negotiating fast bends , also no speed limit on main roads when I was 18 . Those were good days back in the 50's .
Probably just says that the Bonnies twin carbs were out of tune as much as anything else
Or you were simply faster
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 😂
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
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 🤣
Holly cow, I had 5 Harley Davidsons on my list! I had to say that on the 5th, my dad's lawn mower was in tight competition ....
I’ll refer you to part 2
I wouldn't trade my 1969 Triumph Bonneville for any other bike period.
Ditto my 54 BSA
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
The Honda CB500/4 and Honda CB550/4 were produced before the CB400/4. My first 'big' bike was a 1972 Honda CB500/4 which I bought second hand in 1974. The Honda CB400/4 first came out (in Australia any way) in 1975. The CB550/4 was a update of the CB500/4 and was released in 1974.
By the way, the Honda CB450 'Black Bomber' sounded the death knell to the British motorcycling industry. Honda's CB750/4 buried it.
I used to ride my BMW R65LS the 100klms to university in the mid/late 1980s. I'd often park my Beemer next to a R80GS. At that time I just couldn't work it out what it was and thought it the ugliest bike on the planet. This was before adventure bikes became 'fashionable'. I never met the owner.
Well you several months too late in the 400 thing
The black Bomber the dell nail ?
Not so sure you time line is accurate there I’m afraid. Also a bike with a reputation for rapid top end wear, crappy top end oil supply
Why don’t BMW understand the importance of symmetry I wonder
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
Before the 70s bikes were all about getting to work. As British bikes became classics it was all about looks. For me if a bikes looks right it performs right. I don't need to get on my Velocette Thruxton to get to work. I can spend hours looking at it and admiring the engineering right down to the beautiful nuts and bolts. Certain bikes are works of art. The Triumph T120 was and is now with Bloor's interpretation the ultimate in looks. When you ride any classic British bike there is a feeling you can't describe. Men our age (70's) know that feeling. I recently bought a beautiful Fat Boy and now i get that feeling for HD too. It's the feeling and the looks Baby, never mind the admiration from bystanders. If it was all about getting to work a step through 90 would suffice or even a Raleigh moped
Well as someone under 70 I still understand what you mean
There is nothing like riding my old BSA
My son is only 21 and loves riding older stuff
I owned a brand new CB 400F in 1975. Worst handling bike I ever owned, it tended to get giggle headed on less than perfect roads and spat me off at 80 K'S an hour. LOT'S of pain, enough said.😠
Well crude suspension poor roads
Took a while for the Japanese to get their chasis act together
Many of the problems of BSA stem from their designing bikes for the fifties, metallurgy from the forties, and tooling from the twenties.
Actually BSA metallurgy was quite advanced by the standards of the time
Recently read an article detailing the materials used in the Gold Star
Way ahead of other British factories
The machinary was old but that true of all the British factories
Especially AMC who’s factory was decades behind small heath
The small Heath assembly line was updated in the early 70s and was actually the most modern in Europe at the time
FYI
I have rode them all From Triumph to Ariel,all were as good as their owner maintained them,but none as far as handling,lighting and braking were anywhere near as good as bikes of the modern era or perhaps for the last 45 + years,but we enjoyed all the old British built bikes and of course the "Bitsers" we used to build ourselves from parts we found on the cheap,we were practical then and home mechanics was our thing
I do find the prices asked now just plain crazy
It’s not what biking is about for me
I would still own the CB 400 four as a second bike based upon sound and looks alone. Additionally, they vibrated less, leaked WAY less and were more trouble free than the British twins. I still remember listening to them drive by in the states as a kid. There was no other sound like it in a production bike. Here in Japan, I'm sure I would miss the midrange of my other bikes, but 400cc is more than enough for these roads. Great bike for a short day trip. Oh, and I'm so glad the GS made the list. What an ungainly monstrosity.
Id go cb550 every time
I’m not a hp nut but the 400 is frankly gutless
1982 Yamaha Maxim 650 was my first bike. I wish I never would've sold it. Great great machine.ncan you find one to comment on? Thanks!!
Good question
Great video, interesting details.
I've ridden many bikes over the past 30 years, currently riding a 2015 GSA, and I agree with your assessment.
However...
I'm tall, and a tall bike with decent weather protection is a necessity for long distance riding. If Honda made a Goldwing with a seat 10cm taller, I'd have one. The issue is not with the passionate riders, it's with greedy PR people, fanboys and fashionistas...
I can't think of many bikes that can be ridden for over 1000 miles in 24 hours without causing pain in back, knees, neck or wrists...
And if you like Tonka toys, it's actually rather pretty!
Plenty of tall bikes around
Which is kind of the point of the video
BTW my dad had a had a DBD 34 and so I notice that the bike in the video is: 1. ticking over. 2. Not fitted with a standard carb :) I admit they were great after a lot of careful fettling though!
Well I expect it’s ticking over largely because of that non standard carb, GPs can be made to idle but not well.
The problem is that everyone tends to fit all the clubman bits then wonder why it’s less than ideal on modern roads🤷🏼
Remember also over does not mean bad, the Gold Star is a great bike but it is placed on a totally unrealistic pedestal
the best , RD350lc , RG500 , moto guzzi 850s T3 and le mans , Triumph T140 , Honda CB350 k series .
That’s a wide selection
As it should be we own a varied selection of bikes. Never understood people who like just one brand or model. Riding a variety makes you a better rider no doubt
3:03 Stay on These Roads 😍
Got to love the English countryside
At the learner end, the CB/CM125 twin. It cost a flipping GRAND in 1986 and was slower, more gutless and less fun than a whole host of 2 stroke 100s costing just £600.
Very true, which explains why so few were ever seen in the day or now. Interesting how the prices of smaller bikes are on the rise
A 1975 Honda 400F replaced my 1974 Rickman Bonneville which was a piece of junk. The 400F was great for twisty Cheshire back roads and would leave a Z900 in its wake. My Z900 was okay in a straight line. The 400F was more practical and just as much fun. My 50's and 60's British bikes were unreliable but easy to work on and cheap to fix.
Has to be said the Kwaker was not the most nimble bike ever built
@@bikerdood1100 It just did not want to lean over in the corners and wanted to stay upright. It was sold after a year and a 1973 CB750 replaced it. I now ride a Yamaha V Twin 1300 in Ontario.
As far as I'm concerned this video could include anything by Harley Davidson.
Watch part two
I think this is absolutely spot on based on my 45 years experience of riding absolutely everything.
Well I’m not saying their bad
Just that people heap praise on a few models when there’s a lot of great bikes out there
1970's pre restricted mopeds, the FS1E, ss50,testi champion , garrelli tiger cross etc
They are popular are really need a video all of their own I think
friend of mine went from a 4 yr owned zx10r to a gs 1250....whilst it is a tall bike with those heads poking all the way out..he could dust a lot of us out on a run.it handles very well...and he was usually 2 up on it.!!!
But ugly though 😂
The most over rated and in the mean time over priced motorcycles on the market are the Kawasaki 2-stroke triples from the 70s. Horrible machines. Dodgy handling, not particularly well made, bad fuel consumption….BUT, they are still the (motorcycling) one true love of my life! ❤😅Like the stunning but rather dim girlfriend your parents didn‘t like - but you just couldn‘t resist her! And the sound! A motor should scream like a wild big cat! And not „plop plop“ like an constipated elephant. But the prices they are fetching are bizzare! I still love them. 😊
Oh I remember
The bike obviously
I’m fussy I like I bike they can take a corner better that I can
Better to run out of balls than tyre
If you look at motorcycles from a non emotional pov you’re right. But bikes aren’t that. The 400/4 looked amazing for it’s day. Everyone wanted it and it went ok, if not the best. It was the image, as was the Brough, the Gold Star, the Bonneville. They created their own status. They hit the right spot at the time. The older GS’s earned their reputation. Solid, reliable and relatively simple. They were (and probably still are) so ugly they’ve passed through that and back into a thing of beauty. The newer ones sold well because ‘you’ became Charlie or Ewan off around the world, even if you were just popping down to Tesco. You can’t take emotion out of motorcycles, just think how it feels when the sun is shining, you bank into that bend, at the right speed and have that ‘perfect moment’. They’re all about emotion.
Those actors have a lot to answer for
And Ewan a Guzzi man too
You can add any Harley to the over rated bikes. It’s a motorcycle company supported by zealots.
Oh they come up a lot, think they’d need @ video all to themselves
Why did British companies take so long to introduce twin leading shoe brakes? Even smaller bikes struggled to stop.
Roads is the simple answer
Cobbled streets were common in wet conditions very slippy so better breaks would have led to lock ups n crashes
I love the Honda 400F, but I don't quite understand all the hype about it's handling and road-holding. The frame was essentially the same as on the 360 twins, and the swingarm, forks, shocks, wheels, tires and brakes were the same. I guess if it looks and sounds cool it must handle better?
Yeh
Revvy too
The CB350F and 400F both hit the market after the CB500 and 550 models not before. I endurance raced a Yamaha DS7 in the mid 70s against a well ridden CB400F and my little 250 would stay right with the 400. It sounded nice but without extensive mods was a bit of a slug.
It took another generation of development in the 1980s before 400s really flew
Any love for the old MZ. My mate learned on one. Not sure which model though. Learners could learn on up to 250cc back in those days.
Ran a 250 for a while myself
Did a great job getting me to work
I enjoyed and agree with your analyses. Worst bike, for me; Ducati 900SS, for the wandering front-end. Next from that was my 1981 XJ-750 Yamaha that would go to 130 with excellent brakes but would head-shake in shallow turns and scare hell out of me. Best was my Honda CX-500. It was a real sleeper with: the CDI ignition; four-valve head, tubeless tires. It revved, necessarily, to 11,000RPM with Power from 6K. Problems were a very long-and-stretchy cam-chain and a poorly designed, faulti ignition RPM-sensor that broke due to its being molded into the generator stator. I never expected it to be a handler(I was a roadracer) but, while on a ride, one afternoon, on Glendora Cyn, in So Cal, I came to a not-too-familiar hairpin turn at the end of a downhill straight. I thought, "This might be the end!" As I executed the turn, though I was expecting the frame to lift the wheels off the ground, nothing happened! I thought, "What??!!" I parked and got off to find out why I still existed on level ground. I found, to my surprise, incredible ground-clearance to the side. I got back on and repeated the performance four more times...just to verify my findings; each event more aggressive than the previous. Wow! A rider once commented, "Nice bike! for a generator!" It was a great handler. In the middle, for me, were my 1977 Honda Goldwing and my 1989 BMW K-100RS. Except for its weight, The Beemer would rate as superior; I did 130 on it and no shaking. Thanks.
Sometimes weight has its advantages
Stability being principle among them
The best of the last of the British bikes the Norton Commando, Beauty and speed and a reputation for the later.
Bit pricy these days unfortunately. A pity they didn’t have the funds to develop the bike further. NVT was a bit of shit show in the end
Had a Goldie Clubman some 50 years ago. Luckily got rid of it after 2 months. Beast to start. Wobbly in high speed bends. Still misses the featherbed twin Norton I had before. Now have a Vincent for touring, a Manx for track, a Venom for twisties and two Victors for green lane and dirt. Plus two Norton twins under restoration.
Always had a soft spot for Velocette
...loved your comments about the Beemer! ;)
Well we try to please 😂
People miss the point about Brit bikes. They were fairly lousy in a lot of respects, but they had a timeless, cult following and a sound and presence on the road that is totally unique - I love mine, but have a modern in the garage as well for when it breaks - again.
Lousy ?
When I first rode a British bike it was the competence that surprised me
After years of very negative comments I surprised how well it just worked and how engaging it was
Ok the breaks are relatively week but a sensible rider adapts accordingly
I find my old BSA to be one of the most down right enjoyable machines that I’ve ever owned.
We have a few bikes of varying ages which helps keep mileage down
Old bikes can be unreliable simply because they are old I must admit I often wonder how well some modern bikes will be running in 60 years time
@@bikerdood1100 Poor brakes, poor design, oil leaks, questionable electrics, interesting handling, reliability issues, etc, etc. Japanese bikes blew the socks off the Brit bike industry simply because they weren't like Brit bikes - and worked. I have a 1961 BSA A10, brilliant bike but requires ten times the amount of looking after than my Kwaka W650.
@@worty historical over simplification
I have a 54 A10 and a 35 Terrot as well as modern bikes
I need to do a detailed video about what happened to rather British industry most people only seem to grasp the Very edited and much over simplified highlights, or low lights.
For the record my BSA doesn’t leak and 60s and 70s Japanese bikes were poor handlers with disc brakes that were bloody awful in the wet.
And of course the japs do measure the power in the wrong place.
Do some reading around the collapse of AMC
They hit trouble years before anyone had even heard of Honda in the UK.
It’s a complex and interesting bit of history the failure of the bike industry and it’s foolish to say
British Bad
Japanese Good
@@bikerdood1100 I'm detecting a misunderstanding of what I'm saying. I'm not over simplifying anything, just making commonsense statements. The Jap bikes did have their issues but, unlike the British bike industry, they learnt from their mistakes and improved the product. Your tone seems very partronising, almost as if you feel a need to 'educate' - don't trouble yourself! If you want to read about a more comprehensive history of British motorcycles, and maybe learn something yourself, why not try the A7/A10 Forum or other, similar classic bike websites.
With respect to the Honda 400 four. This bike performed better than you described compared to the 350. I owned a 350, and my brother the 400. With only 50cc difference between them, it is very difficult to put a figure on why his used to leave me for dead on long up hill gradients, except to say l weighed several stone heavier than he, and his had a 6 speed gear bo, mine 5. And l think that's what made the difference in the end. I can't tell you if his and my bike had the same final ratio, or whether his sprockets had the same number of teeth, but while he was in top gear, l was constantly changing from 5th to fourth to keep the revs in the power zone.
Still 37hp from 4 cylinders means hard work. We have a 350 Guzzi that makes 35hp from 2 cylinders and OHV. The Guzzi makes way better mid range too so is far more engaging on a twisty road. And that bike is a contemporary. The big problem isn’t so much how it performed it’s about the value attached to it today 400s go for a fair chunk of cash more than Honda’s 550 which makes absolutely no sense. The video is not saying it’s a bad bike, y the opening words of the video say just that. The reason it’s overrated is the inflated value it has on the market today
In my opinion an inline triple is the best sounding engine in motorcycling. I would love to see the development of Triumphs' Trident from the late 60s' to present day. I plan on buying my ''last'' motorcycle = a 1050 Tiger Sport soon, and would like some development history.
Triples are great engines sitting in the half way between fours and twins. As a person who does his own service work the modern triples are rather off putting. Brilliant bikes but pricey to run { I’m tight }
I agree about the sound- multiples of 3 tend to make the best noises to my ears.
My last bike in England before moving to Spain was a Norton 600 since sold it cheap what's she worth now ?
More than you sold it for that’s for sure 😂
The cx 500 c was a great allrounder not super fast but for a six foot like myself very comfortable on long rides ,it had that summer feel all year round ,I went from a us custom bonny to the cx 500 c an it out classed the bonny in ever way easy to maintain basically just oil changes an tyres /brake pads ,where as the bonny was a pig to start on cold mornings forever rattling something loose the lights were not good in the wet intermittent electrical issues , sure they look good but for every mile ridden you could look forward to a minutes preventive maintenance prior to next outing , give me the cx 500 c every time not everyone's cup of tea but it was certainly one of mine , PS if your after one of the best bikes ever built the Honda cub for all-round simplicity reliability and work horse factor must surely be at the top of the tree .
Owned a CX myself for a couple of years and was very fond of it
Had a cub too, well two actually
As for the CX in my experience it was not without its shortcomings
I had a top end leak and the cam chain stretched at just over 30 thousand miles. This was a later Eurosport model too.
I did a video specifically about the CX because it’s such a great bike but not flawless. One of my Cubs set itself on fire 🔥?
but great bikes no doubt
@@bikerdood1100 the cx 500 custom ,was a slightly different model in terms of shape an riding position as opposed to the standard maggot rd bike ,more of a sit up an beg riding style i think the mill was the same ,standard 500 ,my friend brought the turbo 650 sport cx model had it for two weeks an traded in for a kwaka 900 z ,big difference ,I tried several race models myself rd350 fire blade gpz750 but just could not trust myself that's the trouble if your a poser like me and not an edge craver other than Milwaukie cost to much or wing cruiser mills ,there has been very few models of bikes marketed for the mid range poser other than the 500 c . imo
Oh I’m family with the C, twin shocks and smaller rear wheel.
Unfortunately they are gotta little scarce because they are getting converted to Catholicism racers. I don’t mind this because it’s made the bikes popular again but hopefully won’t mean that the standard models disappear
The SK1 1200 (faired) Bandit was overrated. Mine might have been the first on Scotland's roads, and - it burnt oil! Plus its quality of finish - paint and bright work - was the worst of any bike I've owned, ever. Its screen needed to be replaced with a flip top to get rid of the hellish turbulence experienced with that standard thing. Sure it went quite well, but so did most bikes of that swept capacity. I heard of some of these oil burners being recalled and the engine rebuilt with new block and piston group but never met an owner who had succeeded with that claim on Suzuki. Its quality of finish was nowhere near my old GS850n (1979), with none of the above issues. Buying that new bike was my worst bike purchase ever.
I owned one of the early model bandit 600s for a while
It was very nimble and very easy to ride. I do agree about built quality however. It was definitely lacking. Engine was very solid
The gold star has a mikuni card a sensedle mod my a10 had one
Fitting a modern carb makes a lot easier to live with, a lot of people want TT carb n close ration box but does that make for a good road bike ?
The 500 four came out in 1971 , the 550 in 1974 so they werent replacements for the 400 in 1978 .
Yes yes
Your several months too late with that one 😂
I ride a Kawasaki W 800 it does vibrate slightly but no oil leaks and starts on the button this bike rides very similar to my 1979 T140D special without the need to use the tool kit so often.
Well many engines vibrate to some extent
@@bikerdood1100 I am 76 now and my Bikes were 1956 T100 ,1961 BSA Super Rocket, 1960 Triumph bathtub T110, 1960 BSA Golden Flash, then a break And the T140D Special , GPZ 900R ZZR 600 , ZZR 1100 Z650 , Honda VFR Fi and now in my dotage the W800 I had most fun with the 1956 T100 which I fitted a Myers twin carb setup and 10.5 h pistons with E3134 cams this 500 could outpace a 1964 Bonnie, I also had a Lyco Triton 500 with a Slimline Norton frame Borrani times Amal GP carbs this bike was a 6 page feature in Classic Bike magazine now all gone but not my memories.
@@hughmcneillie743 nice collection
Not sure I could remember all my bikes if I’m honest, always felt that a good mix of bikes was important
Suprised not to see the Vincent listed......
The very Idea😂
I have to say I absolutely adored my Honda 400F, I did well over 120,000 miles on the thing the only where the brakes needed a fair amount of attention but the 400 dream was one of the ugliest bikes ever made, the VFR400 was its true replacement another great bike that I also did well over 100,000 miles
Just think that 400cc is plain too small for 4 cylinder bike
Why it’s more popular that’s the 550 makes not a jot of sense
yes it was not that powerful but it was my first bike after passing my test so was ideal as a learning more deal with more power than my learner bike also it just looked wonderful @@bikerdood1100
I knew the Gold Star would be here before I even clicked on it.
And it should be.
Worth putting it in for the complaints 😂
Yes it's a pity Charlie didn't win the argument in favour of KTM!
Hmm 🤔
That’s not what happened ktm turned them down because they thought they fail and thus damage the brand
Dumbest decision since that guy didn’t sign the Beatles in 62 😂
The BMW GS is also responsible for the godawful "adventure" styling with the beak-like protrusion sticking out the front and the nightmarish chaotic mass of stuff where the tank goes... Oh and those big-ass Aluminium boxes that probably remain empty for the life of the bike. Now we've got bikes sprouting adventure beaks and crash bars from almost every manufacturer. Yick.
Enjoyed your video, I think you were spot on.
The CB400 four is a nifty bike but not worth the goofy money. A CB 500 would do just fine for me and has a prettier tank.
I'll have to check out more of your videos now.
Well the styling is, let ps just say an acquired state.
I’m glad you get the point of the video. I did think it was obvious. Apparently not. That’s the thing it’s not about saying that the cb400 isn’t good or any of the other bikes to that matter. But some bikes get put on a pedestal and then attract crazy prices. Why does a 400 cost more than it’s bigger brothers ?
Heck, the R75/5 actually exceeds it's own fantastic reputation.
Well not so sure about that
Early bikes had some cam chain problems and it was very hard to replace, much easy on the later bikes thankfully, alternators can go but that’s common to just about every bike on the planet.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Pretty much every Harley ever made
Oh I hear that a lot 😂
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.
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.
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
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!
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 ?.
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.
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
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
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!
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.
What an ugly bike ! that BMW is, designed by Stevie Wonder? BMW be it car or bike, is a brand, and the owners of these machines are buying into brand, like others do with the Trainers, most real bikers or even cars, will venture out and try other makes, i have owned BSA, Triumph, Suzuki, Honda, and my by Far favorite was an 850 Interstate Mk11 Commando, Unreliable, but by far the best handling bike out of ay of the others, when it started! change it to mk2 Amal carbs, and electronic ignition, and not much could keep up with me,
I really don’t understand why people go out n buy the plug ugly BMW. Lack of soul I suspect
Carbs n electrics the things that actually do could the biggest problems on British bikes
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 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
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 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.
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.
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
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.
@@paulsmith2960 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 . @@paulsmith2960
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.
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.
I had a BSA goldstar when I was young , biggest piece of shit i ever owned .
Love the honesty 😂
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.
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 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
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.
Is this video made from a young man’s point of view ? To make any comparison you needed to go back to the time these machines were built. One of the greatest machines I have owned and ridden is a Lambretta SX200, far better than any motorcycle....ask people who originally owned and rode them for the REAL answer. It’s all a matter of opinion.
I ride old bikes the A10in the film is me 🙄
Keep calling me young if u like though I’ll take the compliment
Patronising BS or not
You don’t have to have been born in 40s to ride old bike
My oldest bike is almost certainly much older than yourself sir
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.