More Praise For The Gen 1

[Hedgetrimmer]

Another sparkling write-up in Jan issue of Classic Motorcycle Mechanics.


Suspension criticised as being a bit under-damped, but otherwise, the article has just good things to say   

[NorthWestern]

"when your bike appears in classic motorcycle magazines", what's the question for that answer

[slimwilly]

Do you smoke your pipe when you are riding it ?

[red98]

Thats the 6 and thou they have featured this year, they do get accused of pushing up prices of "future classics" but in this case I think there doing a great job 

[Exupnut]

Can anyone post the article on here???

[red98]

Go out on your faazer and buy a copy........tight ass.....

[Exupnut]

If 3000 thou owners read it on here we would collectively save around 15 grand @ £5 per copy....surely that's worth it ? Then we could donate it to you and you could sort out you nonagenarian pissbag problem lol

[red98]

Mmmmmmmm.....ok then........cash please no cheques...

[Hedgetrimmer]

Thats the 6 and thou they have featured this year, they do get accused of pushing up prices of "future classics" but in this case I think there doing a great job 

There's another article in there where they mention they've heard of some guy going round buying up loads of GPZ900s, as they can still be had at a reasonable price - those are the kind of tossers who are pushing the prices up. I wish the speculators would stay away from motorcycles, most of em probably don't even ride the things 

[noggythenog]

I have always been surprised at how well the Gen 1's go....ok when modded up..........& yes compared to modern kit they might not have the edge........but whereas the Gen2 has kind of sporty pretensions & so can be slightly shamed by the modern kit the Gen1 isnt really trying to be sporty so it gets away with its flaws imo much better than other bikes like the gen2.

[Hedgetrimmer]

I have always been surprised at how well the Gen 1's go....ok when modded up..........& yes compared to modern kit they might not have the edge........but whereas the Gen2 has kind of sporty pretensions & so can be slightly shamed by the modern kit the Gen1 isnt really trying to be sporty so it gets away with its flaws imo much better than other bikes like the gen2.

What are it's flaws though? You have to put things in context. Is an RG500 flawed because it's not an ideal tourer? 

[noggythenog]

I have always been surprised at how well the Gen 1's go....ok when modded up..........& yes compared to modern kit they might not have the edge........but whereas the Gen2 has kind of sporty pretensions & so can be slightly shamed by the modern kit the Gen1 isnt really trying to be sporty so it gets away with its flaws imo much better than other bikes like the gen2.

What are it's flaws though? You have to put things in context. Is an RG500 flawed because it's not an ideal tourer? 

Heavy i suppose is what id say......& the exup .....i like pretty much everything about the Gen1 but as i found out with my gen 2 weight can really put the shitters up you in the corners......its a shame though as a few more years from now i might be in a better position for doing more mileage in a day & thats when i might consider trying one out for the comfort they seem to have on long distances.

[Hedgetrimmer]

It is a heavy bike if twisty little B roads or track riding are your thing. But it's surprising sometimes how quickly they can be hustled along for all that. The gen 1's strength is it's versatility. It'll do just about everything to a reasonable standard, so it makes an ideal bike if you can only afford one, and do bit of touring, Sunday scratching, commuting etc. And as I and many others here have seen, upgrade the suspension (which loads of folks do whatever they ride - your TRX is no exception  ), and a little light tuning (Ivan's and a nice can for the gen 1, PC and can etc for the gen 2), and it'll deliver the smiles all the more. Ok, it's no ZX10R, R1 or GSXR, but if track days and racing was all you did, you'd buy something like that.


I have read many write-ups of the gen 1 over the years in various bike mags, and the only things that ever get criticised are the standard suspension and the EXUP. Not many bikes get off as lightly as that 

[DekF]

I'd dispute it's inability to handle tight, twisty roads mr noggy.
I did 2 trips to the Pyrenees on my gen1 & it was excellent.
I've also ridden the Alps, Dolomites, Stelvio etc, on my gen2 & it always handled well enough. It's upright seating position & wide bars coupled with an input of countersteering actually gives it the edge over sports tackle on those type of roads.

[noggythenog]

I'd dispute it's inability to handle tight, twisty roads mr noggy.
I did 2 trips to the Pyrenees on my gen1 & it was excellent.
I've also ridden the Alps, Dolomites, Stelvio etc, on my gen2 & it always handled well enough. It's upright seating position & wide bars coupled with an input of countersteering actually gives it the edge over sports tackle on those type of roads.

I agree that they can........but would a simillar package that is lighter have the advantage?..........i dunno i loved the speed of my gen2 & i did hustle on it i was never a slouch but i just didnt enjoy the cornering as much as i do on a lighter bike...whether i was doing it quicker or slower i dont know.....it is easy to come on here & boast about how much cc we can all handle & i quite rightly ask for a ribbing...and expect it .being open and honest about how confident i do or dont feel as it is useful to compare with others experience & part of the big old learning curve.


Id still like to try a decently modded gen1.....they are an admirable bike.

[Hedgetrimmer]

Noggy, you shouldn't let your experience of the gen 2 colour your opinions on bigger bikes too much. You got unlucky with a bike that wasn't set up well, and you had neither the time nor money to sort it properly. But I am certain that given those, it could have been set up more to your liking.


It's not a question of whether smaller and lighter is better. Such a bike might be more nimble in the tight stuff, but in the UK at least, that same tight stuff also tends to be bumpier and less well maintained....perhaps a heavier bike soaks up those bumps better? Or maybe a dirt bike or supermoto is better for that? Or perhaps we all need 3 or 4 bikes?


Roads vary. The bike you go out on, on any given day, doesn't. Looking for perfection in one bike that rides those roads is futile in my opinion. As long as overall you enjoy riding whatever you have, then that's good enough. The gen 1 has it's failings, but the reason so many of us stick with them is what I said before - they do everything to a reasonably competent level, and some things bloody well. The 600 is the same in that regard, as you know.

[Exupnut]

The bike was well set up b4 noggy got it....I think he just fucked around with something he wasn't sure about.

[mikelockyer]

See my recent report on my visit to a suspension specialist. Note: The rear shock runs out of gas after a few years.

[sadlonelygit]

With regard to the capabilities and drawbacks of a gen 1........it's usually down to the nut twisting the throttle

[PaulSmith]

...There's another article in there where they mention they've heard of some guy going round buying up loads of GPZ900s, as they can still be had at a reasonable price - those are the kind of tossers who are pushing the prices up. I wish the speculators would stay away from motorcycles, most of em probably don't even ride the things 

What exactly is so wrong with someone pushing up the prices of used gen 1's?

[Hedgetrimmer]

What exactly is so wrong with someone pushing up the prices of used gen 1's?

Nothing if you're selling (and able to get that higher price). Everything if you're buying. But I wasn't referring specifically to gen 1s. Did you notice mention of GPZ900s, which was the example I gave?
It's one thing for a good bike to command a good price. Rare bikes, fair enough. But just cos it's past a certain age and folks had em when they were younger, people want silly money; that's what pisses me off.
It's not just gen 1s is it? Yes, you want the bike you own to fetch good money. But 1. if you like it that much you won't be selling, then what does it matter what people would pay for it? And 2. if everyone thinks their bike should be worth more, then if you do come to sell your gen 1, you'll only find that anything else you want is priced high too, so no gain.

[PaulSmith]

There is a third view. Why would a dealer maintain a stock of coil packs, footpegs or what-have-you for a 12 year old bike no-one likes. However, if it is well-loved, a collectable or a 'future classic', then it could be worth their while to keep or even collect that stuff rather then junk it.

[Hedgetrimmer]

Very few dealers will keep much more than air and oil filters, spark plugs etc in stock for older bikes, and then only if they have regular customers who own specific models that use those parts. Manufacturers want you to buy their latest models, and aren't overly keen on maintaining supplies for older bikes indefinitely - production costs. Dealers are under pressure from the manufacturers to support the new. Once manufacturers stock has gone, that's it, and you have to source aftermarket parts. Dealers are unlikely to junk old parts stock that they already have, but generally, they won't add to it either.

If a dealer were to collect stock because he thinks a particular bike is a future classic, then he is likely to add to the problem of over-inflating the value of those models and parts in the future. He won't sell them cheaper because he has more of them, unless he got them cheaper in the first place - he'll just look to maximise his profit. If he thinks people are dumb enough to pay way over the true value, then that will influence his pricing.

My point is that speculators are getting involved in 'classic' motorcycle sales and artificially pushing the prices up to beyond where simple demand would take them. This makes it harder for the average enthusiast to afford, and they become the preserve of the wealthy.