Want to buy a new 1972 Honda CB750?

[Elysium]

Yep that's right a new 1972 Honda CB750 Super Four fresh out of the crate and it's only done 1 mile.

http://cgi.ebay.ca/Honda-CB_W0QQitemZ370323024382QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUS_moto rcycles?hash=item5638f8e9fe

[shrub]

I have covered many happy ks on those things - I owned 3 of them back in the day including one that put out 80 hp at the back wheel but still had that single disc thing on the front (wasn't a brake because it didn't slow the bike down). It was a hairy bike and could slaughter my brothers Z1000.

[Big Dave]

No. Modern motorcycles are much nicer.

[Motu]

I always wanted one....then I owned one.Never again.

[shrub]

I always wanted one....then I owned one.Never again.

Every now and again a get a rush of blood and think of buying one, but then I remember the hinged frame, the appalling brakes, 67 bhp pushing about 9000 kgs and I decide my Trumpy is much more fun.

[HenryDorsetCase]

I love them, and something like that (even though it isnt the holy grail K0 "sandcast") will hold its value I think. And if you own a honda dealership and wnat some decoration or something, then its fine. As for using it, as soon as you do, you've ripped the guts out of its value.

Sure its an old bike, a classic bike if you will, but ridden within its limits they're fun. I'd have another one. But a cheap-ish, modified one. (better brakes for starter). In fact in my experience that is the biggest practical difference between an old bike and a new one: brakes. Just about any bike can go fast enough to get me in trouble, either with Johnny Lor, or a punch in the kidneys from the passenger, or I run out of talent, but a modern bike has brakes that might allow you to get out of trouble.. old bikes, not so much.

[Motu]

Every now and again a get a rush of blood and think of buying one, but then I remember the hinged frame, the appalling brakes, 67 bhp pushing about 9000 kgs and I decide my Trumpy is much more fun.

Yes,I came to the CB750 after 15 years of British and European bikes....road bikes anyway.Sure it was very powerful and fast - but the weight and handling was WTF??!!! If I've got a bike that powerful and fast I like some back up thank you!

[popelli]

Yep that's right a new 1972 Honda CB750 Super Four fresh out of the crate and it's only done 1 mile.

http://cgi.ebay.ca/Honda-CB_W0QQitemZ370323024382QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUS_moto rcycles?hash=item5638f8e9fe

put it back in the crate

remember riding one back around 1980 - was not impressed

when they were released as the worlds first super bike they were slower than a trident, slower than a commando, slower than a bonneville, slower than a lightning and slower than a sportster

great marketing success but put it back in the crate a great investment

[HenryDorsetCase]

the reason it was the "first superbike" was because yuo could ride it without having to have a degree in mechanical engineering in one hand, a hip pocket full of spanners, and a chase van. It had lights that worked, ALL the time, electrics that electrified, ALL the time, a motor that started (on the button) EVERY time, it held together. You could (and many did) push the button and go around the block or around the world. British bikes might have handled better, some of them certainly looked better but the turn-key nature of the CB750 (oooh, first production bike with a disc brake) was what killed those other brands stone dead.

[LBD]

Been there done that and once was enough ...unless I had the dosh to collect.

[Motu]

You could (and many did) push the button and go around the block or around the world..

Yes - it was the start of the ''I don't anything about bikes or how they work,but I love it anyway'' riders.It got a lot more bums on seats.

[satchriossi]

put it back in the crate

remember riding one back around 1980 - was not impressed

when they were released as the worlds first super bike they were slower than a trident, slower than a commando, slower than a bonneville, slower than a lightning and slower than a sportster

great marketing success but put it back in the crate a great investment

Uh oh! Its CORRECTION TIME!! Please leave your anti-Jap prejudice and rose tinted spectacles at the door and step inside;

Standing quarter mile acceleration; 1970 CB750 12.5sec (67hp, 235kg, 5 speed)
1970 T150 Trident 13.0sec (60hp, 228kg, 4 speed)
1970 XLH900 Sporster 13.4sec (58hp, 240kg, 4 speed)
1970 T120 Bonneville 13.4sec (52hp, 192kg, 4 speed)
The BSA A65L is a 650cc twin - it won't be faster than a Bonneville and i can't find specs for it anyway.

The Honda killed the above machines at the time and the British repsonse was to bore their twins out and increase compression ratio which simply led to EVEN WORSE reliability including common catastrophic con-rod and big end bearing failures.

Roadtests of the period aren't scathing of the CB750's brakes and handling either, infact the magazine journos were in raptures over the front disc's performance compared to rival drum braked bikes. That negativity has come about more recently and is mostly born out of bitterness from those who mourn the death of the British bike industry rather than actual fact and experience. My Dad has two CB750s - a K0 and a K2. Both start, run and perform as they did almost 40 years ago. The K0 gets ridden the most and its footpegs and center stand are ground away quite heavily from cornering. If you pull the lever hard enough it'll lock its front wheel too. The handling and brakes are in NO WAY inferior to anything else from the period. Alot of people like to think that the British stuff handled better (for some reason) and they can get away with that opinion because handling is largely a subjective thing and cannot be easily measured like engine performance can. You can't prove it, i can't disprove it. The nicer 'feel' if anything would've been down to lighter weight - which is fair comment. Though in the list above only the Bonneville and Lightning are significantly lighter, which shoots that idea in the foot.

More modern magazine 'tests' are largely responisble for the negative bias towards the Honda's handling and brakes. They write the stuff, you read it, absorb it and then quote it as your own opinion from then on, arguing it to the death as though it were gospel. Well here i am to offer you an opposite perspective; that the reason everyone stopped buying British bikes in the 1970's is because the Jap equivalents, not just Hondas, WERE INDEED better than their European rivals.

[kwaka_crasher]

Nostalgia ain't what it used to be!

[kwaka_crasher]

Yes - it was the start of the ''I don't anything about bikes or how they work,but I love it anyway'' riders.It got a lot more bums on seats.

I think you just summed up the KB Social Networking site perfectly.

[Motu]

[QUOTE=satchriossi;1129621912. Alot of people like to think that the British stuff handled better (for some reason).[/QUOTE]

After having both (I had a CB750,my wife had a T150 Trident,disc brake) as I said the Honda was certainly fast.But the Trident was by far the better bike to ride,it's handling was so superior that the power could be used more effectively....and so for riding on a road with corners and stuff,it was the faster bike.I didn't have any problems with the front brake,but the dirty looking cast iron rotor on the Trident was more consistant and worked in the rain too.

The death of the British motorcycle industry had many reasons we won't fight about....but in reality,it was just the right time to die.It was the end of a great run,they had no answer and faded away.I have no bitterness....but fond memories.I've owned and ridden a lot of bikes over the years - I won't put the CB750 on any pedastal,and not the Trident either....apart from the noise.The bikes I've liked won't be on anyone elses list...what we like is too personal....what we don't like is open to ridicule.

[satchriossi]

The Honda was certainly fast.But the Trident was by far the better bike to ride,it's handling was so superior that the power could be used more effectively....and so for riding on a road with corners and stuff,it was the faster bike.

I guess it depends who's riding them and how they're ridden. As i said, the old man's ground a fair bit of material off the pegs and center stand on his K0, he's got a fair bit of lean angle on when he's touching parts down like that and its not like its bucking and weaving as it does it - despite the old style tires on the bike. So i'm not sure what the Triumph's got that would make it 'so superior' in the same instance, seeing as it doesn't weigh a great deal less. But i personally haven't ridden both bikes back to back so i couldn't comment on any subtle differences in feel.

The main point to make perhaps is that both CBs are starting easily, covering the miles and taking the hard riding with zero complaint still in 2010. Honda certainly built an exceptional machine in the CB750 for far more than just performance related reasons. There's one thing though - Dad credits much of his mechanicing skills to the British twins he persevered with before Jap bikes became more popular.

[Motu]

the old man's ground a fair bit of material off the pegs and center stand on his K0,r.

You've said it right there.The CB750 was the first bike I ever had that I had to drop a cheek off the seat and hang off the inside so I could get around a corner without scraping the pegs.

[HenryDorsetCase]

I do agree with you, but just one caveat. Tyres today, even stock sizes for the CB750 are MUCH better than the tyres it rolled out of the shop in 1969 - 1977) on. Sure, you can drag hard parts on your CB750, and I did on all mine, but in the day the first thing we got rid of was the center stand because it would lever one or other of the wheels off the ground if you were going hard. Same for the zorsts: they are stupidly expensive now (stockers I mean) and always have been. 4:1's were great particularly on the side that the pipe didnt exit (typically the left side) because they increased ground clearance significantly. Longer shocks if you could afford them, fork brace, if you could afford it, another disc if you could source or afford it.

Its an age thing too: You want as a "classic" what you couldnt afford, or had and thrashed the tits off when you were a spotty little herbert just getting into whatever it is you're getting into: for me that is CB750's, GPz 750's and 900's, very early GSXR's or RD400s, RD350LC, RZ350LC YPVS. If you're older you (and I am generalising broadly) will want that britbike, or some other exotica. While I really like them (Norton Commando please) and I would never categorically say "POS, would never have one", I can't see me stumping the cash to be honest. But another classic Jappa? Absolutely.

[Elysium]

If I remember right, the CB750 was made for the American market so I doubt the abilty to corner was a high priority as we all know American roads are mainly straight.

[satchriossi]

You've said it right there.The CB750 was the first bike I ever had that I had to drop a cheek off the seat and hang off the inside so I could get around a corner without scraping the pegs.

Its well cranked over before it touches down, as you must know - we're talking 45 degrees from vertical (i've followed my Dad when he's been doing it) - surely the Trident isn't lauded with better handling purely because it has more ground clearance for cornering. My point was that at that lean angle it's still handling well and tracking a secure line without bucking and weaving. It handled well by the standards of the time and with more modern tyres (as HenryDorsetCase rightly points out), still flies along at more modern speeds securely scraping bits on the floor as it goes. If its handling was as dire as the first few posts in this thread made out, then it wouldn't be capable of these things.

Well actually, reading back through the first posts you guys mercilessly slagged EVERYTHING about it off - engine, brakes AND handling. None of which deserved the abuse. I hope i've done atleast some good towards defending the bike's reputation, atleast in terms of its acceleration and braking performance compared to its rivals of the period. Even if i can't convince you of its handling characteristics.

[Motu]

Go to a Classic race meeting - none of those bikes went that well or handled like that when they were new.Now at 30 or 40 years old they really handle and stop well,ALL of them.Honda's came out with totally shit tyres...Tridents came out with TT100's,still made and used in classic racing today.The shit Bridgestones Honda put on their bikes have never been made again.

[HenryDorsetCase]

http://www.trademe.co.nz/Trade-Me-Motors/Motorbikes/Motorbikes/Classic-vintage/auction-266052596.htm

this is the sort of thing I'm more likely to buy than an utter minter: its got the period hot up "double disc" conversion (it really needs the discs drilled as well) and a 4:1: bet its got the hell flat spot between 4 and 5000 rpm that goes with it. needs pod filters and maybe clipons and a bumstop seat and a tank from Unity Equipe.......... must stop self. no more bikes you have to paint the house.

[shrub]

In 1980 - 82 I went from a 72 Bonneville to a 71 Commando to a 73 CB750. The main reason for the change was I was sick of the dramas that owning a Brit bike entailed in the early 80s (being followed home, never parking it where you couldn't see it and the whole staunch MC bullshit etc). My Honda was heaps faster than the Bonnie (or any of my mate's Trumpy twins) and as fast as the Commando and had better brakes, but didn't handle as well as either Brit. I fitted Koni shocks which helped, but it was still a bit of a whale through corners which meant I had to learn to ride differently. I also missed the low down torque of the Brits and the (isolastic) commando was as smooth. Personally I would rate the Commando a much better bike to ride and the Bonnie as slightly better to ride, but the Honda was a million times better to own.

I could wake up, go out to the shed and wheel my bike out for a ride with no pissing around getting it out of the house (usually my bedroom). Then I'd squirt some lube on the chain, check oil, gas and tyres and I'd ride it all day for as far as I wanted with no tools, no wondering what my mates with utes were doing that day and no making sure I had a couple of mates to ride with. Nothing would break, nothing would vibrate off, nothing would go out of adjustment, the electrics worked all the time and when I got to the pub I'd just park the bike and go inside for a beer knowing it would still be there when I left. Nobody tried to staunch me out, nobody worried about me riding in their patch and the general public ignored me. On the downside I wasn't allowed to park my bike outside some pubs or on the properties of some mates.

I bought a BSA Lightning about 10 years ago and it lasted 3 months before I sold it and bought a Moto Guzzi Le Mans, and I will almost certainly never own an old Brit again. I love them with a passion, but I would never want to own one again, whereas I would own a CB750 again because I am over spending time on the side of the road fixing bikes and can't be arsed spending brazillions of cash getting an old Brit sorted. I wouldn't own a CB 750 as a day-to-day rider (I have a modern Trumpy for that), but as something cool to wheel out of the shed that I could still ride to the Coast and back in a day and enjoy the ride.