Other Bikes » Why are modern bikes so heavy?

Back in the heady days of my relative youth I had a Norton 750 Atlas (well actually I had two but the first one was stolen). Looking up the specs for this it was quoted as having a wet weight of 180kg.

I've been looking at the Honda NC750X specs. This is also a 750cc parallel twin, albeit water cooled instead of air cooled. The specs say it has a kerb weight of 220kg.

The Norton had a steel featherbed frame, which was not exactly a lightweight item, conventional forks, steel rimmed wheels and spokes, a separate gear box necessitating a primary chain case with another chain, drum brakes, a steel petrol tank and a steel oil tank.

The Honda has a steel frame, which doesn't look as though it contains nearly as much tubing as the Norton, conventional (if upside down) forks, alloy wheels, a unitary engine, disc brakes and, I'm guessing, a plastic petrol tank.

OK so the Honda has OHC vs Norton's OHV but does that account for the best part of 40kg? What the heck is all that extra weight?

edit - I forgot the starter motor vs the kick start lever

Larger batteries, exhaust systems, balancer assemblies, and fuel tanks, too. Also, newer bikes are just larger in general. My ‘71 Triumph TR6R feels like a toy compared to all the rest of my bikes (including a Hinckley Bonneville which outweighs it by 68 lbs). I actually like having a bit more room, though light weight is always desirable. A +-500 lb bike is a decent compromise for my needs...

Well I'd say there isn't much in it on the battery, and I also forgot that the Norton had two silencers to the Honda's one...

I had a ride on a friend's Kawasaki W650 and that felt like a toy after the RS - but even that is quoted at 195kg dry!

I would also say that I could carry vastly more luggage (i.e. camping gear) on the Norton with me + pillion than I could ever stow on the RS even with just me on it.

I totally agree that modern bike as WAAAAAY too heavy. My '71 Norton Commando weighed 395 pounds. Yes, it had relatively little power by today's standards but my current '73 Commando does not give up much, if anything, in the twisties and it's relatively light weight - 430lbs, is a joy compared to modern bikes, INCLUDING my RS.

Ive become interested in "going back to my roots,' which is sport bikes. I'm considering one of the current Ducati SS models - 430 lbs - as a possibility.

Don't whatever you do plump for the Honda,never have I ever ridden such a bland uninspiring motorcycle in my life. I had one for a week as a loaner while my K1300s was having accident damage repaired.
If you only ever take one piece of advice from me let this be it.
You'll be bitterly disappointed with it.

I had a test ride on a dct version, I was tipto on it which was disappointing, I really liked the ride, it was really light and fast off the mark and a fun little bike, then I went on the motorway with it ahhh, slight crosswind, it was knocked all over the place It was horrible.

I think, if you want a cheap, nippy commuter bike you can't go wrong, if you ride outside 40mph zones forget it.

Overall it's a 750 cc bike with 500 cc performance.

Ged

About 5-yrs ago, dropped my Oilhead RS off for an over-night service. The dealer gave me a Bonneville as a loaner and all was OK until I hit the Interstate. 80mph, truck traffic and light cross winds had me all over the road. Couldn't believe a Bonneville used to a "Big" bike.

Don't panic - I wasn't thinking of the Honda other than as a possible town "scooter". Just it was a 750cc twin for comparison.

I don't think it would take luggage like this either (although the 1 litre can of Castrol GP50 strapped on the top probably wouldn't be required).

Willy.jpg - Bild entfernt (keine Rechte)

"I've been looking at the Honda NC750X specs. This is also a 750cc parallel twin, albeit water cooled instead of air cooled. The specs say it has a kerb weight of 220kg."

I know it's probably comparing apples and oranges, but I think that speaks volumes about the RS: 236kg wet weight. I have no idea why the NC should be so heavy...

Cheers

Paul B.

PS: I you want to feel a heavy bike, try a GTR1400. 300kg wet weight. Start adding luggage and you're up at around a third of a metric tonne. Great fun when parked in gravel...

Zitat von Yoda im Beitrag #8

---

Don't panic - I wasn't thinking of the Honda other than as a possible town "scooter". Just it was a 750cc twin for comparison.

I don't think it would take luggage like this either (although the 1 litre can of Castrol GP50 strapped on the top probably wouldn't be required).

---

Zitat von Paul B im Beitrag #9

---

"I've been looking at the Honda NC750X specs. This is also a 750cc parallel twin, albeit water cooled instead of air cooled. The specs say it has a kerb weight of 220kg."

I know it's probably comparing apples and oranges, but I think that speaks volumes about the RS: 236kg wet weight. I have no idea why the NC should be so heavy...

Cheers

Paul B.

PS: I you want to feel a heavy bike, try a GTR1400. 300kg wet weight. Start adding luggage and you're up at around a third of a metric tonne. Great fun when parked in gravel...

---

A month before graduation, but having accepted a job, I signed the loan papers on this 256-kg gem.
1980 GS750e.jpg - Bild entfernt (keine Rechte)
A delicious blend of excessive weight, modest power and ultra-lean carburetion, this beast (rock) laughed at cross winds.....just as a dog with no legs would.


Oh, and to add misery to it, I mounted a set a Samonite saddle bags. Incredibly well made, with the weight to prove it.

I saw a set of those Samsonite Tribar bags just a couple of weeks back. They were in remarkable condition, but so was the Moto Guzzi Jackel they were mounted upon...

Zitat von Blackshirt im Beitrag #13

---

I saw a set of those Samsonite Tribar bags just a couple of weeks back. They were in remarkable condition, but so was the Moto Guzzi Jackel they were mounted upon...

---

Actually they aren't, back in the past I had an XS750 and XJ900, both shaft drive and both heavier than the RS. The large jap touring bikes were all heavy bikes and had none of the tech modern bikes have and made less power and many if not all didn't handle as well. What some of you are comparing to are the old British bikes, these were designed in the late 50's early sixties and were never really updated until it was far too late and the japs took over. The Brit bikes were light, were short on power in comparison and as for reliability......well modern bikes are way better in that respect. So the big yams, Suzuki's and Kawasaki's were just as heavy, if not more so than their modern counterparts.