The widow maker

[T.W.R]

While your statement is also correct re the '69 H1, the 1972 H2 was the first bike the magazines generally termed the Widow Maker, mainly because of the death rate of factory testers, for some reason the H1 was later also known as the Widow Maker. I am quite happy to think either is 'correct' but have many mags of that vintage and have none pre 72 H2 suggested any bike termed Widow Maker. If you have one I would love the article for my Kawasaki archives. Thank you

Interesting concept
Seeing the H2 followed on everything the H1 had already laid down in motorcycling history
Realistically we don't hear a whisper of what development bikes do to factory testers at all; all urban legends & folklore regarding bikes reputation comes from what they do once in the hands of the general population....and with the H1 it came from what the bike did to a large number of new owners from injuries to fatalities and how the bike scared the buggery out of some magazine testers when they got their hands on them.
Even on paper the H1 makes the H2 sound boring

1969 H1 500......60bhp/124mph/407lb
1971 H2 750......74bhp/126mph/422lb

Plus the H1 was the quickest thing you could buy off the shop floor over a standing 1/4 .......even when the H2 came out it still had that. The H2 also was known as having what was described as a rather broad powerband too and it was way over shadowed by it's big uncle the Z1 being released the same year.

Below is just a sample of some of the reading I have on these.....I'd have scanned them but my old scanner wont talk to the new comp so
Anyhow the TwoWheels H1 test comments on instant Kamakaze just add throttle, the Barry Sheene's 30 best bikes says the H1 quickly built a evil reputation due to it's power, handling, gas drinking and goes on to say that when it was written (1980) the H1 was still the top of the 500cc bikes for performance.
The silver book on the bottom is an official KHI publication and doesn't even utter a word about the H2 but funnily enough the H1 is along with the Z1...funny that
The TwoWheels mag also has a smaller article on the H1 done by the top tuner for Ron Angel Performance Melbourne and his parting sentence was a quote from Ron Angel himself saying "When he stops shaking he'll be able to write the review"
The two other articles are on H2s and the first one describes most of the vicious tendancies of the H1 and makes reference to the term "Widow Maker" in the 1st paragraph and that's where that finishes....nothing directed at the H2

[husaberg]

Interesting concept
Seeing the H2 followed on everything the H1 had already laid down in motorcycling history
Realistically we don't hear a whisper of what development bikes do to factory testers at all; all urban legends & folklore regarding bikes reputation comes from what they do once in the hands of the general population....and with the H1 it came from what the bike did to a large number of new owners from injuries to fatalities and how the bike scared the buggery out of some magazine testers when they got their hands on them.
Even on paper the H1 makes the H2 sound boring

1969 H1 500......60bhp/124mph/407lb
1971 H2 750......74bhp/126mph/422lb

Plus the H1 was the quickest thing you could buy off the shop floor over a standing 1/4 .......even when the H2 came out it still had that. The H2 also was known as having what was described as a rather broad powerband too and it was way over shadowed by it's big uncle the Z1 being released the same year.

Below is just a sample of some of the reading I have on these.....I'd have scanned them but my old scanner wont talk to the new comp so
Anyhow the TwoWheels H1 test comments on instant Kamakaze just add throttle, the Barry Sheene's 30 best bikes says the H1 quickly built a evil reputation due to it's power, handling, gas drinking and goes on to say that when it was written (1980) the H1 was still the top of the 500cc bikes for performance.
The silver book on the bottom is an official KHI publication and doesn't even utter a word about the H2 but funnily enough the H1 is along with the Z1...funny that
The TwoWheels mag also has a smaller article on the H1 done by the top tuner for Ron Angel Performance Melbourne and his parting sentence was a quote from Ron Angel himself saying "When he stops shaking he'll be able to write the review"
The two other articles are on H2s and the first one describes most of the vicious tendancies of the H1 and makes reference to the term "Widow Maker" in the 1st paragraph and that's where that finishes....nothing directed at the H2

I was having a tidy up and came accross a few Cycle or cycle world road test annuals, the first noted the original Mach 3s rear wheels was ofset from the front by about 1.5 inchs, the second said the next model had the same wheelbase but a longer swingarm and changed weight distribution front 43%F-57%R to 48%F-52%R
I remember reading from the first aussie road test, that Kawaki had only been intersted in quarter mile time and had developed the weight distribution for that and that alone.

[T.W.R]

I was having a tidy up and came accross a few Cycle or cycle world road test annuals, the first noted the original Mach 3s rear wheels was ofset from the front by about 1.5 inchs, the second said the next model had the same wheelbase but a longer swingarm and changed weight distribution front 43%F-57%R to 48%F-52%R

Yeah I've got similar bits but one in particular says that over the preceding models from the H1 it was literally tamed & de-tuned each year of production

[husaberg]

Yeah I've got similar bits but one in particular says that over the preceding models from the H1 it was literally tamed & de-tuned each year of production

yeah that gells with everything i have ever read about the 750 , the 750 was designed a a 650 so is very short on transfer passage room, much like a R5/RD350.
Most say the 750 was a respectable handler also.

[gsxr]

Way back in time I bought a second hand 3 month old Kawasaki S2.
I only had it for a few months and took a huge hit back then when I traded it in,
Despite what the reviews say it was an unpredictable piece of shit
Nothing down low until you hit at least 7000 revs .Then the powerband kicked in and removed the front wheel from the tarmac.
I traded it in as that f**ker was going to kill me.! month after the next owner purchased it he hit a pole and died. Totally unpredictacable

[Addo007]

https://preview.trademe.co.nz/motors...kes/1377987003
This guy says he is selling the original widowmaker

[KawasakiKid]

Interesting concept
Seeing the H2 followed on everything the H1 had already laid down in motorcycling history
Realistically we don't hear a whisper of what development bikes do to factory testers at all; all urban legends & folklore regarding bikes reputation comes from what they do once in the hands of the general population....and with the H1 it came from what the bike did to a large number of new owners from injuries to fatalities and how the bike scared the buggery out of some magazine testers when they got their hands on them.
Even on paper the H1 makes the H2 sound boring

1969 H1 500......60bhp/124mph/407lb
1971 H2 750......74bhp/126mph/422lb

Plus the H1 was the quickest thing you could buy off the shop floor over a standing 1/4 .......even when the H2 came out it still had that. The H2 also was known as having what was described as a rather broad powerband too and it was way over shadowed by it's big uncle the Z1 being released the same year.

Below is just a sample of some of the reading I have on these.....I'd have scanned them but my old scanner wont talk to the new comp so
Anyhow the TwoWheels H1 test comments on instant Kamakaze just add throttle, the Barry Sheene's 30 best bikes says the H1 quickly built a evil reputation due to it's power, handling, gas drinking and goes on to say that when it was written (1980) the H1 was still the top of the 500cc bikes for performance.
The silver book on the bottom is an official KHI publication and doesn't even utter a word about the H2 but funnily enough the H1 is along with the Z1...funny that
The TwoWheels mag also has a smaller article on the H1 done by the top tuner for Ron Angel Performance Melbourne and his parting sentence was a quote from Ron Angel himself saying "When he stops shaking he'll be able to write the review"
The two other articles are on H2s and the first one describes most of the vicious tendancies of the H1 and makes reference to the term "Widow Maker" in the 1st paragraph and that's where that finishes....nothing directed at the H2

Thank you for this. Following only my memory, I look to the H2 as the widowmaker, but have heard this term with the H1 somewhat after the fact perhaps. I owned and raced the early H1s and H2s, a fantastic era when production bikes had exciting horsepower and little else. Brakes and handling were not great but we all had the same rubber band frames to deal with. Great fun. The early 500 was definitely more of a handful with an extremely narrow powerband, but the 750 was quite a bit quicker and more top end. The 500 claimed the quarter mile in 12.4s, the 750 was 12.0 and felt even quicker. I still ride my 1973 750 almost every day, now over 300,000km still going like a swiss watch.

yeah that gells with everything i have ever read about the 750 , the 750 was designed a a 650 so is very short on transfer passage room, much like a R5/RD350.
Most say the 750 was a respectable handler also.

Both the 500 and 750 were perhaps respectable handlers until you get on the limit, then a bit scary, but good scary. The RD350 was very good handler until leaned over enough to ground the underexhaust footpeg bracket....then both wheels get levered off the ground, so traction becomes difficult, but another great bike

[T.W.R]

Thank you for this. Following only my memory, I look to the H2 as the widowmaker, but have heard this term with the H1 somewhat after the fact perhaps. I owned and raced the early H1s and H2s, a fantastic era when production bikes had exciting horsepower and little else. Brakes and handling were not great but we all had the same rubber band frames to deal with. Great fun. The early 500 was definitely more of a handful with an extremely narrow powerband, but the 750 was quite a bit quicker and more top end. The 500 claimed the quarter mile in 12.4s, the 750 was 12.0 and felt even quicker. I still ride my 1973 750 almost every day, now over 300,000km still going like a swiss watch.



Both the 500 and 750 were perhaps respectable handlers until you get on the limit, then a bit scary, but good scary. The RD350 was very good handler until leaned over enough to ground the underexhaust footpeg bracket....then both wheels get levered off the ground, so traction becomes difficult, but another great bike

The original test on the H1 states that there was a firm belief that the front end was taken directly from the kawasaki sidewinder and was horribly under sprung & the rear wasn't much different; it'd track nicely through corners on a trailing throttle but apply some throttle or tickle something up mid corner and well yeah hang on for some fun.
The reports on 1/4 times, there's a mix of 12.4 through to 13.2

The stupidity of stating the term "Widow Maker" being a result of what the bike was doing to factory test riders is just utter tripe.....basically in a nutshell if something under development is doing that it definitely doesn't make it into the production line and out to the market
The original test states that the H1 was selling like hot cakes in the US and being $965 Aus dollars to buy there was nothing else even close to it on the market and purchasers had a better than even chance of getting into trouble.
History proved that fact and the H2 just followed on the H1's shirt tales not the other way around

[gsxr]

Thank you for this. Following only my memory, I look to the H2 as the widowmaker, but have heard this term with the H1 somewhat after the fact perhaps. I owned and raced the early H1s and H2s, a fantastic era when production bikes had exciting horsepower and little else. Brakes and handling were not great but we all had the same rubber band frames to deal with. Great fun. The early 500 was definitely more of a handful with an extremely narrow powerband, but the 750 was quite a bit quicker and more top end. The 500 claimed the quarter mile in 12.4s, the 750 was 12.0 and felt even quicker. I still ride my 1973 750 almost every day, now over 300,000km still going like a swiss watch.



Both the 500 and 750 were perhaps respectable handlers until you get on the limit, then a bit scary, but good scary. The RD350 was very good handler until leaned over enough to ground the underexhaust footpeg bracket....then both wheels get levered off the ground, so traction becomes difficult, but another great bike

How many sets of rings and rebores have been involved is attaining 300,000 km

[KawasakiKid]

The original test on the H1 states that there was a firm belief that the front end was taken directly from the kawasaki sidewinder and was horribly under sprung & the rear wasn't much different; it'd track nicely through corners on a trailing throttle but apply some throttle or tickle something up mid corner and well yeah hang on for some fun.
The reports on 1/4 times, there's a mix of 12.4 through to 13.2

:

The H1 and H1A are much nicer on the gas than on a trailing throttle, same with the H2. Kawasaki took 6 months to put the H1 on the road from nothing, they were originally going to build a 750 4 stroke (they did release this in Japan early '70s) when Honda beat them to it with the CB750, so not surprising they didn't handle too well. I ran a 12.58 on the 500 and 11.98 on the 750. On the racetrack the 500 would never throw you off, the 750 was more of a bitch. Neither really liked corners, nor straights either, but you just hang on and go full throttle anyway. When they would speed wobble, better hard on the gas than off.

[T.W.R]

When they would speed wobble, better hard on the gas than off.

that's the only way to do it, close the taps and you're asking for trouble

[Grumph]

The H1 and H1A are much nicer on the gas than on a trailing throttle, same with the H2. Kawasaki took 6 months to put the H1 on the road from nothing, they were originally going to build a 750 4 stroke (they did release this in Japan early '70s) when Honda beat them to it with the CB750, so not surprising they didn't handle too well. I ran a 12.58 on the 500 and 11.98 on the 750. On the racetrack the 500 would never throw you off, the 750 was more of a bitch. Neither really liked corners, nor straights either, but you just hang on and go full throttle anyway. When they would speed wobble, better hard on the gas than off.

Yeah, 12.6's on my H1 at the old Canterbury Car club drags. Handling was much better with clubmans bars - everyone put flat bars on them but I went further with the clubmans bars and got the weight even further forward. Helped immensely. The biggest problem with either racing or street riding the early H1 is the huge and violent step in the power curve. I've got a road test somewhere in an English mag where the tester had it come on song while laid over for a corner - he didn't do that again.

The bike which started this ad of course could not by any stretch of the imagination be classsed with either of the triples. It's more of a widowers consolation ride....

[sidecar bob]

at last, a real widow maker.
http://www.trademe.co.nz/motors/moto...1382382766.htm

[razza11]

at last, a real widow maker.
http://www.trademe.co.nz/motors/moto...1382382766.htm

Get in quick to be the proud owner of this early release of next years model

Sent from my ZTE R84 using Tapatalk

[pritch]

I remember reading from the first aussie road test, that Kawaki had only been intersted in quarter mile time and had developed the weight distribution for that and that alone.

I seem to recall that back then Kawasaki didn't actually have a test track as such, they used an old airfield runway. It was thought that this would certainly account for their handling.