Blank Slate GS500 ( if Suzuki were listening)

[rscottlow]

Man, so much to comment about on this.

First of all, if traffic is moving at 85mph, then it's hard to understand the need to "get around" another vehicle. In other words, what's the real need to have excess power to pass a vehicle moving at 85mph? If there's a slow-moving vehicle, gravel truck, whatever, then a GS500 has more than enough power to pass it. But if you're seriously talking about a real need to go 100mph on public roads with posted speeds of 65-75mph, well I just can't possibly relate. I hope you get arrested driving like that.

To avoid an accident or collision you know the brakes are far more effective and safe to use than accelerating away from trouble. Going faster when trouble approaches is maybe not the best plan.

Anyway, I'm not the right person to argue this. I don't like riding on the highway due to wind and the "if you crash" safety issue so I avoid it. But I can assure you a GS500 is fast and powerful enough to use on the freeway at legal speeds in the USA.

Arrested? For 100 in a 75 at 4 AM when there's nobody on the road? That's intense, man. 100 MPH on my GS is scary as hell, and I avoid it except for in rare instances. The GS is all I know, but I'm sure 100 on a bigger, heaver bike feels much more planted and is considerably safer.

There are certainly instances, especially on an interstate, where increasing speed is more effective and safer than slowing to avoid an accident. One example - 4 lane divided highway (2 each direction), and I move over into the left lane to pass a line of slow moving vehicles. A car, far exceeding my pace catches up to the line of vehicles, moves over to pass them, and finds me there putting along in the left lane moving 30 MPH slower than he is. By the time he sees me (motorcycles are invisible to cars, you know) he can't slow enough to avoid running into the back of me. I have no escape path to my left, right, or by slowing, however if I'm able to accelerate I avoid a rear-end collision.

Granted, a lot of things would have to go wrong in this circumstance, but it's only one example and crazier things have happened. With the number of distracted or doped up drivers on the road you never know what could happen. Having the capacity to increase your speed from a 70 MPH speed limit in a hurry has its practical applications outside of the racetrack. Of course, if you're the perfect driver who putts along at the posted speed limit in the slow lane all the time, then you probably don't need a faster bike. I'm not advocating riding like a moron, but let's be honest, there are times and places where using the speed limit as a "reference point" is okay IMHO.

but what ever. everyone here seems to think their GS500 isn't scooter tier [when it is.. common now], guess I'm barking up the wrong tree on this forum trying to argue other wise... as it seems those who agree with me, are long gone. This is my last post on this thread.

I enjoy my GS a lot, but other than the TU250X I rode for my MSF course, it's all I've ever known. I think many people around here are either in the same boat, or they've ridden bigger bikes and decided that it's not for them. Personally, I'm sure that after I ride something faster I'll be itching for the thrill of it, and once I own something better I'll know the joys of EFI, bigger tires, better suspension, etc. For now, I'll continue to ride and enjoy the GS since it's what I've got.

[mr72]

but what ever. everyone here seems to think their GS500 isn't scooter tier [when it is.. common now], guess I'm barking up the wrong tree on this forum trying to argue other wise... as it seems those who agree with me, are long gone. This is my last post on this thread.

Seriously? 13.65 second quarter mile @ 95.5 mph. Under 5 seconds 0-60 time. Those are acceleration numbers only the very fastest cars can touch. If that's not enough for you to make a pass, there's something seriously wrong. If you are stuck on a road with 5 gravel trucks in a row all driving below the speed limit and you think you must pass them all at once, then my honest advice is pull over and take a 5 minute break, let the trucks get a big lead on you and then they won't be in your way.

Or you know, follow the law, pass them one at a time, don't exceed the speed limit to pass, etc.

Geez.

I drove a Miata for 15 years that was a notch slower than my GS500 and just about as exposed to the elements and never once had any problem whatsoever keeping up with or passing whatever traffic I found in my way on any road in the great state of Texas. And with only one tire effectively braking, I think the thing that makes the GS500 dangerous at >20mph above posted freeway speeds is not a lack of power.

Yeah GS500s are not fast enough to really effectively ride like a complete squid.

[qcbaker]

...

Yeah GS500s are not fast enough to really effectively ride like a complete squid.

Oh ye of little faith. One can squid on any machine, if the rider is willing. You don't have to be going particularly fast to be a squid, all you need is no gear and intense desire to piss off every driver you pass.

But in all seriousness my highway GS experience has been fine. I don't think more power is wholly unnecessary, but I also don't think that the GS is unsafe on the highway or anything.

[mr72]

Oh ye of little faith. One can squid on any machine, if the rider is willing.

LOL! You may have a point there. I stand corrected.

[Bluesmudge]

The GS is definitely a dog on the freeway. Especially with a passenger, or at high elevation, or a strong headwind, or up a steep hill, or on freeways with 70 and 75 mph speed limits where traffic is traveling 80 - 85 mph (I have had to deal with all of the above while loaded with camping gear for a 2 week trip). Where a lot of bikes are comfortable at that speed all day long the GS is running high revs, burning oil and getting poor gas mileage. Yes the bike can do it but you have to be a certain type of rider to put a lot of miles on that way.

If I could get a new GS500 I would prefer it to be closer to 50 hp at the wheel, more torque earlier in the rev range, water cooled, fuel injected and ABS brakes. Other than that I wouldn't change anything. Honda basically makes that bike with their CB500F and CB500X bikes. My GS500 is currently at 40,000 miles. If Suzuki doesn't come out with anything comparable by the time my GS dies I'm going with the Honda.

[gregjet]

The "weight" arguement for feeling planted is problematic, as that would make a 165kg MotoGP bike feel unplanted at 300kph ( 180mph). They don't ( they really don't!). Planted is a function of many things weight being only a small part. My 85cc Honda RS125 GP framed race bike felt very planted at 80mph (don't know how it felt above that as the track was too tight for that speed). It weighed 70kg ( yes 158lbs).

50-60HP from a modern designed, EFI, water cooled motor is a no brainer. Dead easy. EFI also gets rid of the altitude problem and gives more midrange torque for two up ( if that's your thing). Acceleration is a function of midrange torque, not upper range HP.

[Watcher]

EFI also gets rid of the altitude problem

So does proper jetting...

If the GS is a dog at "high elevation" try maybe not running jets designed for sea-level air density?

[Bluesmudge]

I live at sea level. If I am going to spend a few hours going over a high altitude pass every once and awhile I'm not going to stop and re-jet my bike in the middle of a ride.

[mr72]

FI is a must for any new bike even if you cannot justify it with performance; it is nearly impossible for a new road motorcycle can meet today's emissions standards with carburetors.

I still disagree about liquid cooling, but that's just because I think air cooled motorcycles have a simplicity that's worth keeping if possible, and I dig that rough/raw character of air-cooled bikes. I mean, you go very far on this quest for a new GS500 and you are going to wind up with an SV650 or a Burgman.

[Watcher]

@Bluesmudge that's a good point.  At the same time, they make thumb-screws for the mixture adjustment.


Actually, I'm kind of curious about how much altitude changes fuel use.  I live around 2400' and frequently ride up the mountain to around 9000', and I don't feel like my motorcycle is bogging down or anything up there.  Which is odd because I get the feeling my Duc is running a bit rich down in town...

[ajensen]

Suzuki should re-make the GS500 into whatever it takes to pass pollution-control standards while keeping the engine as similar as possible. They should make it an 8-valve head and sell the entire top end as a kit we can bolt on our old bikes.

[The Buddha]

I mean, you go very far on this quest for a new GS500 and you are going to wind up with an SV650 or a Burgman.

Yuck, V twin - hell no, but thinking it further, Suzuki is just the stupid type to do a 400cc SV.
I'm actually hoping they'd make a single and replace the savage, the DR-650, the GS naked and GS sport bike in 1 swoop.
Cool.
Buddha.

[Watcher]

They should make it an 8-valve head and sell the entire top end as a kit we can bolt on our old bikes.

As cool as that would be you know they won't, too much opportunity to make more money otherwise.
They're in the business of selling motorcycles, people won't be as willing to trade in their old GS for the new one if they could just slap a new head on for a fraction the cost and get a big performance boost.

[gregjet]

The probability of it being anything other than a 4 valve on a modern design is pretty slim. Whole host of reasons. Everything from emmisions to compactness of motor. 4 valve motors cost more design, manufacture and set up than the giant 2 valve heads of the GS , so they would not be making 4 valve heads if 2 would do. Even ordinary cars have 4 valve heads and have for a while because it makes the heads smaller and allows emission controls to work better.
Buddah, You have a large aversion to vtwins. Any reason? I love em. The VTR250 is one of my favourite motorcycles ( mini Ducati but more reliable and a clutch that doesn't require a gorilla). I for one would love a well designed Vtwin 400 road bike ( read NOT CRUISER)
I suspect you may be right about a big single road bike though. About time for them to try that one again. The DR650 single is as old ( older?) a design than the gs500. Something along the lines of a DRZ400 design with fuel injection? The Suzi singles vibrate pretty badly so it would require some modern balancing stuff. But a big single can be made pretty smooth . My Husky TR650 ( BMW rotax designed Loncin made) was pretty good for touring, so quite possible to do. The motors tend to end up pretty tall though.

[HPP8140]

My newer gsxr left me stranded with less than 20k miles.

It's amazing I've ridden a few GSs totaling over 100k miles across states and it has never left me stranded, usually when something goes wrong you can just ride around the problem, still can't believe it. It's nice to have something to put miles on and it's easy to do valve adjustments....the honda cb500 looks difficult....

[The Buddha]

My newer gsxr left me stranded with less than 20k miles.

It's amazing I've ridden a few GSs totaling over 100k miles across states and it has never left me stranded, usually when something goes wrong you can just ride around the problem, still can't believe it. It's nice to have something to put miles on and it's easy to do valve adjustments....the honda cb500 looks difficult....

Yea GS'es usually limp home if they had to. Newer sport bikes were meant to be crashed in the first year of ownership, and then the manufacturers don't have to honor the warranty.
Cool.
Buddha.

[Random00]

Yuck, V twin - hell no, but thinking it further, Suzuki is just the stupid type to do a 400cc SV.

The SV650 actually started out life as the SV400. 
http://www.suzukicycles.org/SV-series/SV400-SV400S.shtml

[mr72]

SV400 is Japan only, right?

That'd be a very cool bike to have if one were to be found here in the USA.

[The Buddha]

SV400 is Japan only, right?

That'd be a very cool bike to have if one were to be found here in the USA.

They made the 650 and the 400 at the same time, a year after the TL1000 which was by then roiled in a lawsuit in England. The push away from the "TL" moniker had these 2 being called SV. The 650 came to Europe and US while the 400 did not.
And a V twin is a stupid engine configuration. Its stupid in a cruiser, stupid in a sport bike and definitely stupid in a standard. Its long and not narrow enough, plus 2 valve cover and 2 cam chains as well as 2 separate exhaust headers etc etc. List is endless, in frontal area they can be smaller than a parallel twin, but usually the frontal area is determined by the radiator and that in a V twin has to be  good bit bigger cos the rear cyl doesn't get as much air cos the front cyl is blocking it.
Anyway easy to work on and simple don't belong in the same sentence as a V twin.
Yea yea secondary balance crap ...  I get that, but you put a 90 degree crank in a parallel twin and you get the same effect.
Cool.
Buddha.

[mr72]

And a V twin is a stupid engine configuration. Its stupid in a cruiser, stupid in a sport bike and definitely stupid in a standard....
Yea yea secondary balance crap ...  I get that, but you put a 90 degree crank in a parallel twin and you get the same effect.

I won't debate that point. I dig my parallel twin! Seems like the sweet spot for motorcycle engines.

But I do still desire to own a V-twin bike... one in particular. But my desire to own one is in spite of it being a parallel twin. It just checks all the other boxes that no other new motorcycle does.

Right now I'd settle for a 25 year old GS500 that didn't leak oil.