High_Side wrote:ZooTech wrote:2) One day I was cruising along on my way home from work doing about 75mph when I came upon a Pontiac Grand Prix in the passing lane doing maybe 65mph. I moved over to the right and started to pass, which apparently pissed this guy off for some reason, so he took off, determined to not let me pass. Despite dropping from 6th to 4th and landing smack in the meat of the bike's powerband, I got my "O Ring" handed to me by a 2-ton sedan with a 3.8 liter V6.
I've said it before but this proves it even more: Your Nighthawk was ill. I (more than most) can appreciate the torque that comes with a bigger bike, but your Nighthawk was not giving you anything like it should have been capable of doing. It was a much faster bike then that when new.
I really don't want to argue with ya, High_Side....but there are two things that bother me about that.
1) My bike was in the shop twice - once to check out a leak in the shift-shaft seal, and once for a new clutch. The first time it was there for about three days, and the second time it was there for six weeks! The head mechanic at the dealership I took it to actually owns a pristine '86 NightHawk 700SC (the red/white/blue version), and he rode it both times and never said a word about the power not being where it should. As a matter of fact, the clutch slippage was so intermittent that I actually signed a release letting the mechanic use the bike as a daily driver to and from work and whatnot so he could experience the slippage if and when it happened. In all the miles he put on it (several hundred as I recall), he never once said anything about the power.
2) The bike started right up, warm or freezing cold. It idled perfectly and never smoked, spit, or sputtered.
Plus, when I traded it in, the mechanic at ASK Kawasaki (a different dealer) looked the bike over thoroughly and even took it for a ride. They said it was one of the cleanest NightHawks they'd ever seen.
So, perhaps it was ill . . . or perhaps it was just heavier than snot (80's way of building bikes) . . . or perhaps it was the fact that, looking at the dyno chart, the bike made its peak HP between 8000 and 9500 RPM, and put out maybe HALF that otherwise. Half of 80HP is a measly 40HP, trying to haul 500+ pounds of bike and 200+ pounds of rider around, with no torque to speak of (peak 45ft/lbs).
Regardless of
why it couldn't hold its own against a family sedan or a 30mph headwind, I wanted something with more torque. I'm the kinda guy that would take a Mustang GT over a Honda S2000. I like stump-pulling, tractor-like torque, not high-winding, screaming horsepower. The Bandit 1200 has a lot of torque, as do the V-Stroms, and the C90, Vulcan 1600, and the Mean Streak. And even if the 700SC was capable of it but just ill, I wouldn't drop the kind of money on it that would be necessary to correct it. It was 20-years-old at the time, and had a leaky shift-shaft seal that I was quoted close to $2000.00 to fix.
