GS500->GSX-s750

[J_Walker]

I actually consider the CB500s to be the defacto REPLACEMENT for the GS, so Suzuki was never bothered to replace it with modern 500 design.

In a similar way, I suppose the the GSX-S/GSR could be considered the updated of the cancelled Nighthawk 750: parts-bin bike tuned for urban civility and highway ability. Ih admit to being tempted...some publications and comment section scuttlebutt knock it for not being a Gixxer with handlebars. I like it as a potential cheap tourer that's a bit more substantial to the 650 class.

if Suzuki "modernized" the GS, it would just be added junk really.. if we're talking the same platform and not a whole new one. emissions stuff and maybe fuel injection? big whoop.

I honestly think that if Suzuki wanted to re-do the GS. keep the parallel twin, 800cc with the ability to bore to 850. [so lots of extra meat!] keeping it air-cooled with a larger oil cooler, plus fuel injection and a more touring/everyday mind set for the bikes use.. so largish fairings with big meaty windscreen/lots of rain protection. tubular frame design for people who love naked bikes the ability to go naked. a few other things here and there.

If suzuki modernized the GS at all you would significant performance gains. The engine is absolute garbage. It's a tank, but it's garbage. You can't do much with a DOHC 4 valve 500cc engine. Even the kawi EX500 has 8 valves.

I'd go the other way. Keep it 500, give it 4 cylinders, 16 valves, and throw away as much weight as possible. The GS is extremely underpowered in it's current form, and all things considered its not a *bad* bike, but it's a 70s twin on a modern frame with ok carbs. EFI, 4 cylinders, and 16 valves would easily make it compete with modern SV650s. I'd bet the GS500 would get all new respect.

but going 4 cylinders just beats the point of me owning a GS to begin with.... parallel twins have a very unique exhaust note. lets just face it, in the US there isn't much of market for small displacement bikes. so better to go bigger parallel twin and be pushing at least the 90 HP range.

The last thing I would buy a GS for is it's exhaust sound. It sounds like an angry lawnmower/angry sewing machine. More on the sewing machine side. Its fun to rev but obnoxious at idle imo. The whole reason I suggested 4 cylinders and 16 valves is because smaller reciprocating mass produces more power for the displacement because the RPMs can go higher, and the one thing that is truly awful about the GS500 is it's completely anemic power band.

There's a HUGE market for smaller displacement motorcycles. Honda has released updated versions of their 250 as well as a 300cc. Small bore motorcycles are getting extremely popular because they offer economy and comfort with enough power to be interesting. The GS is outdated, and I wouldn't be surprised if Suzuki pulled it altogether because it can't compete. I mean consider that the GS was outdated 15 years ago. Now with the 300cc trend catching on it won't be long before Suzuki sees no point in producing them I bet.

A 1000cc motorcycle has all the torque needed to be interesting at stop lights, and plenty of white-knuckle terrifying speed to be awesome on the highway and track. If you don't want a 1000cc bike, any of the triumph triples is vastly superior to every twin I've ever been on. More power, comparable torque, and a better engine design IMO.

I ride my GS because it's easy to work on, and overall a decent bike for general riding. But every single time I get on the throttle something is missing. I think a lot of motorcycle enthusiasts would agree with me. I don't want to come off as an @$$hole in this post, I'm more just venting my frustration that the GS could be an amazing bike with a few tweaks, but Suzuki really dropped the ball on almost every aspect of the bike.

you totally ignored the point of my orginal post and went on your own rant. 

you're REDOING. the GS. that means, all new everything, engine + platform. basically making it the predecessor to the GS. so the whine of the engine that the GS has most likely wouldn't be there any more.

as far as the 250 and 300cc bikes. they aren't cool... they try to hard, just like the F version of the GS. why put sportbike styled fairings on something that struggles to get past 80mph. Don't get me wrong. fairings DO something other then look cool, but lets be honest, the fairings on the 250 and 300cc bikes aren't there for function. I look at the late 80s and early 90s sport touring bikes, with the big chunky fairings that can stop every rain drop from hitting you and your passenger. now that's function!

I believe there's a gap between CHEAP and EXPENSIVE sport touring bikes. the cheap end is basically the sports bikes that people upgrade to be better for touring. the expensive are things like the newest Honda Gold Wing going for like 24k at the stealerships.

[Atesz792]

but going 4 cylinders just beats the point of me owning a GS to begin with.... parallel twins have a very unique exhaust note. lets just face it, in the US there isn't much of market for small displacement bikes. so better to go bigger parallel twin and be pushing at least the 90 HP range.

Yeah, the parallel twin has a great character. Fast forward a few years, I can imagine myself on a TDM 900 or an XTZ1200, and the engine design thingie plays a huge part in that.
Doesn't shake like a single, and you don't have to rev it past 10k to actually do anything like an inline four (I do know I am exaggerating here). Easier (and/or cheaper) maintenance than a V-anything (one cover to remove when checking valves, for example). If you're into V-twins just look for a 270° crankshaft parallel twin, that will do it all except for the looks.
Now I have no experience with triples, but a Yamaha MT-09 Tracer that is whispered to be the successor of the TDM could be a very nice ride.

[Dr.McNinja]

bleh.

[cWj]

you totally ignored the point of my orginal post and went on your own rant. 

Well, you kind of missed the point of my post preceeding yours.   

("...Suzuki was never bothered to replace it with a modern 500 design"....not "modernized")

and another thread bites the dust...