Morning all from an RE5 owner

[t140v]

Morning, have owned my bike for 3 years and covered over 5,000 miles on it up to present, was running rough when I bought it but have persisted and now have it running as it should.Has a spark plug adaptor fitted so I can use a conventional plug and an uprated check valve on the oil feed to the carb.Pics at Lotherton Hall VJMC show.Regards Stuart.

[gripper]

That looks very nice, I thought the Re5 had its instruments in a cylindrical pod or is that the early models?

[Charles Wilson]

That looks very nice, I thought the Re5 had its instruments in a cylindrical pod or is that the early models?

The 1975 RE-5M had the odd design. After sales of the M fell off the table, Suzuki redesigned the outer instruments and turn signals, replacing them with more a traditional offerings.They also dropped the second set of points that operated when the deceleration of the engine was above some parameter. This was supposed to "cure" the stumbling and backfiring.It didn't work, of course. Thank you , Comotor.I had the RE-5A, similar to the one shown and it was quite a nice M/C. It had its character traits but it carried me through sun and storm alike.I ran it into the ground and all it did was start and run some more.CW

[gripper]

How well do they perform? apart from fuel consumption. I guess they are quite weighty. I know the Suzuki Kettle was not a good handler in its day.

[Charles Wilson]

Actually, Cycle mag stated that the RE-5 was the first Japanese M/C that actually handled properly.I could never induce a wobble. However, I have it on good authority that the rear swing arm bushings were a weak point, a cost cutting feature. With upgraded rear shocks and attention to detail, the RE-5 was very good in the handling department. It was narrow and, even though it used a variant of the GT-750 frame, the motor was hard mounted and did not flex.It was heavy. The Single Rotor @ 497 cc with an oil kooled rotor is at the upper limit of viability for a M/C and the RE-5 was a version of the KKM-502 which NSU had standardized and was promoting world wide. The carburetor was a Solex 18-32 Downdraft HHD which was licensed to Mikuni. What Suzuki did was take the KKM-502 and make the support devices fit in a M/C. Oil Kooled rotor and all the weight along with it, a one-into-two exhaust created one heavy M/C. The carb primary intake runners follow a tortuous track and no one had considered any alternatives. Even today, people look at the carb assembly and ask if there's something else that could have been done. Hell, yes!!! It topped out at about 65 HP.I do not denigrate Suzuki at all here, they had their vision and if they had pulled it off, motorcycling would be different today.There was a different vision, however. It used roller bearings and air kooling and did away with the weight. It used 2 small rotors. It turned out to be incredibly quick and was one of the best handling motorcycles of all time. Suzuki produced about 6000 RE-5s in the US. This other company produced about 1000 total.What's important here is that the M/Cs are not lost even though both companies came oh-so-close to making the concept work. My time with the RE-5 was a Joy. As I read the old road tests of the Norton, I feel the same type of connections.Thnx,CW