CJ360 question

[eatmorepies]

I'm interested in a CJ360 on eBay. Internet research suggests possible
camshaft problems. The internet is not always reliable. Does anyone have
experience of this engine? Any known weaknesses?

John

[The Older Gentleman]

Yes. It's one of the worst engines Honda ever built. Avoid like the
plague.


--
Honda CB400 Four CB125S CG125 Triumph Street Triple Guzzi
California Yamaha 660 Tenere Suzuki GN250 TS250ER x3
So many bikes, so little garage space....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

[Ross]

"eatmorepies" wrote in message news:bkg5dp...@mid.individual.net...

>I'm interested in a CJ360 on eBay. Internet research suggests possible
>camshaft problems. The internet is not always reliable. Does anyone have
>experience of this engine? Any known weaknesses?

I've recently parted with a CJ250 that I'd owned for years...a great little
bike that's very underrated. It never ceased to amaze me that everyone
"knows" how bad they were but at the same time there weren't enough sold for
that many people to have ridden one, everyone says it, so it "must" be true!

Yes, they can have camshaft problems unless they are well looked after, and
sadly a LOT were not...if the bike is low mileage, hasn't had loads of
owners, and has had a bit of love and attention over the years it could be a
chance to get a nice little bike cheap because everybody "knows" what
rubbish they are! ;-)

Regards
Ross

[The Older Gentleman]

Ross <ro...@redtreeorchard.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

> It never ceased to amaze me that everyone
> "knows" how bad they were but at the same time there weren't enough sold for
> that many people to have ridden one, everyone says it, so it "must" be true!

I had one, and it was shite. The 360 is the same, with extra vibes.

[ianp...@hotmail.co.uk]

On Friday, January 24, 2014 11:24:35 PM UTC, TOG@Toil wrote:

>
>
> Yes. It's one of the worst engines Honda ever built. Avoid like the
>
> plague.
>
>

Arbut isn't the front end and the back wheel the same as 400/4? If so, and I'm unsure about it, is there enough money in buying and breaking?

Boxerboy

[The Older Gentleman]

<ianp...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

> Arbut isn't the front end and the back wheel the same as 400/4? If so, and
> I'm unsure about it, is there enough money in buying and breaking?

Yes, indeed. Except that the fork legs on the CJ series were
black-coated.

And racks/carriers fit both as well.

But that's about it.

[Ross]

"The Older Gentleman" wrote in message
news:1lg1gaf.5y6yo219i5ti8N%totallyde...@yahoo.co.uk...

Ross <ro...@redtreeorchard.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

>> It never ceased to amaze me that everyone
>> "knows" how bad they were but at the same time there weren't enough sold
>> for
> >that many people to have ridden one, everyone says it, so it "must" be
> >true!

>I had one, and it was shite. The 360 is the same, with extra vibes.

Oh dear, a rough one was it?

I enjoyed owning the one I had, and the bloke who bought it off of me is
enjoying it too. It never let me down and nothing broke...just regular
servicing and not thrashing the life out of it! It was well suited to
pottering around the back roads of Kent or nipping in to town.

Regards
Ross

[The Older Gentleman]

Ross <ro...@redtreeorchard.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

> Oh dear, a rough one was it?

The 360s simply vibrated more than the 250s. Yoi'd expect it. Higher
reciprocating weights and (like the 250) no balancer shafts.

[Mark Roberts]

On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 21:33:39 +0000, totallyde...@yahoo.co.uk
(The Older Gentleman) wrote:

><ianp...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Arbut isn't the front end and the back wheel the same as 400/4? If so, and
>> I'm unsure about it, is there enough money in buying and breaking?
>
>Yes, indeed. Except that the fork legs on the CJ series were
>black-coated.

And you will have to swap the internals from the 400 as the 360's
aren't as sophisticated.
I managed to find some immaculate stanchions from a 360 in Arizona.
Bought them for a few quid and stumped up the 60 quid to get them
posted :)


--
Mark Roberts

[The Older Gentleman]

Mark Roberts <ma...@martem.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> And you will have to swap the internals from the 400 as the 360's
> aren't as sophisticated.

I used to think that, because it was what we were told years ago, but
actually they've got the same part numbers. Springs, stanchions and
dampers are identical between the CB360 and CB400F.

The CJ360 did actually get a change - different damper rod.

[Mark Roberts]

On Sun, 26 Jan 2014 15:08:16 +0000, totallyde...@yahoo.co.uk
(The Older Gentleman) wrote:

>Mark Roberts <ma...@martem.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> And you will have to swap the internals from the 400 as the 360's
>> aren't as sophisticated.
>
>I used to think that, because it was what we were told years ago, but
>actually they've got the same part numbers. Springs, stanchions and
>dampers are identical between the CB360 and CB400F.
>
>The CJ360 did actually get a change - different damper rod.

Something was definitely different. Maybe it was the damper rod.
In any event; I swapped the whole lot over to be sure :)

--
Mark Roberts

[The Older Gentleman]

Mark Roberts <ma...@martem.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> Something was definitely different. Maybe it was the damper rod.

Not on the CB360/400. All the same.

The real difference, which affected the handling (which was chronic on
the CB360 and way better on the CB400), was the weight distribution.

The CB360 has horrible flighty and light front end. The 400 was a
heavier engine, and the low bars threw more rider weight onto the front
end. The result was a transformation.

I'm guessing, but when they built the CJ360, they knew the CB360's
handling was suspect, so they revised the damping.

[Mark Roberts]

On Sun, 26 Jan 2014 20:11:16 +0000, totallyde...@yahoo.co.uk
(The Older Gentleman) wrote:

>Mark Roberts <ma...@martem.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Something was definitely different. Maybe it was the damper rod.
>
>Not on the CB360/400. All the same.
>
>The real difference, which affected the handling (which was chronic on
>the CB360 and way better on the CB400), was the weight distribution.
>
>The CB360 has horrible flighty and light front end. The 400 was a
>heavier engine, and the low bars threw more rider weight onto the front
>end. The result was a transformation.
>
>I'm guessing, but when they built the CJ360, they knew the CB360's
>handling was suspect, so they revised the damping.

CJ not CB.
The damper rod, oil lock thing and the spring have different numbers;
according to the fiches I have.
I'm pretty sure the rod and oil lock bits actually *looked* different.


--
Mark Roberts

[The Older Gentleman]

I think we're agreeing at cross-purposes. Yes, CJ internals are
different to CB400, but CB360 ones are identical.

[Ross]

"The Older Gentleman" wrote in message

news:1lg3jic.lpimay3m5myoN%totallyde...@yahoo.co.uk...

>The CB360 has horrible flighty and light front end. The 400 was a
>heavier engine, and the low bars threw more rider weight onto the front
>end. The result was a transformation.

>I'm guessing, but when they built the CJ360, they knew the CB360's
>handling was suspect, so they revised the damping.

The CJ's had lower bars, too (same/similar to the 400/4?) which presumably
helped put more weight on the front end.

Regards
Ross

[TOG@Toil]

On Monday, 27 January 2014 09:24:45 UTC, Ross wrote:


> The CJ's had lower bars, too (same/similar to the 400/4?) which presumably
> helped put more weight on the front end.

Yes, they did, didn't they? My CJ250 actually handled quite well, at least by Honda standards. My CB360 was just a horrible bike: like I said, the extra capacity made it vibrate more. And the handling was just nasty.

Oddly, I really liked the styling of the CB250G5 and CB360. Still do, actually. But then I like(d) the styling of the CB500T as well, and that really was atrocious.

[Ross]

"TOG@Toil" wrote in message
news:9c8456e4-1777-480a...@googlegroups.com...

I don't think I've ridden a CB250G5 or CB360 but have had a 350K4 which was
nice and smooth and the drum brake was better than the CJ's disc...the CJ360
I had was a looooong time ago but I don't remember it being particularly
rough at the 60-70mph I mostly travelled at then. The CJ250 was a more
recent bike that I only parted with late last year, and whilst it had a
rough patch in the midrange (4500rpm 'ish) but then smoothed out the harder
you rev'ed it. Obviously not smooth like a modern bike, the new Suzuki 250 I
replaced the CJ with is smooth as silk at any rev's and much easier and more
relaxing to ride....and the brakes work too!

Regards
Ross

[The Older Gentleman]

Ross <ro...@redtreeorchard.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

> I don't think I've ridden a CB250G5 or CB360 but have had a 350K4 which was
> nice and smooth and the drum brake was better than the CJ's disc...

The CB350 twin was indeed a sweeter engine than the 360. In fact, the
whole bike was better IMHO. Smaller and lighter.

>the CJ360
> I had was a looooong time ago but I don't remember it being particularly
> rough at the 60-70mph I mostly travelled at then. The CJ250 was a more
> recent bike that I only parted with late last year, and whilst it had a
> rough patch in the midrange (4500rpm 'ish) but then smoothed out the harder
> you rev'ed it. Obviously not smooth like a modern bike, the new Suzuki 250 I
> replaced the CJ with is smooth as silk at any rev's and much easier and more
> relaxing to ride....and the brakes work too!

Ah, old Honda brakes...

[Hog]

The Older Gentleman wrote:
> Ross <ro...@redtreeorchard.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I don't think I've ridden a CB250G5 or CB360 but have had a 350K4
>> which was nice and smooth and the drum brake was better than the
>> CJ's disc...
>
> The CB350 twin was indeed a sweeter engine than the 360. In fact, the
> whole bike was better IMHO. Smaller and lighter.
>
>> the CJ360
>> I had was a looooong time ago but I don't remember it being
>> particularly rough at the 60-70mph I mostly travelled at then. The
>> CJ250 was a more recent bike that I only parted with late last year,
>> and whilst it had a rough patch in the midrange (4500rpm 'ish) but
>> then smoothed out the harder you rev'ed it. Obviously not smooth
>> like a modern bike, the new Suzuki 250 I replaced the CJ with is
>> smooth as silk at any rev's and much easier and more relaxing to
>> ride....and the brakes work too!
>
> Ah, old Honda brakes...

I saw a mint 350K4 in the gold colour for sale somewhere recently. Over
£6000 asked!
It was a rather nice SOB, but not that nice.

[The Older Gentleman]

Hog <SPAM...@CHIPShotmail.co.uk> wrote:

> Over Ł6000 asked!

It wasn't Motorcycles Unspeakable in Uxbridge, was it?

[Hog]

The Older Gentleman wrote:
> Hog <SPAM...@CHIPShotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Over Ł6000 asked!
>
> It wasn't Motorcycles Unspeakable in Uxbridge, was it?

Ah http://www.classicandracebike.co.uk/ but I see the seller is indeed... I
assume they are well known jokers?

The CB250/350's are the LOUDEST bikes in the Road Racing scene, enough to
make your ears drums hurt. They change hands for the Ł3000 mark I think,
properly sorted and tuned.
Tuned they put out an awsome 40-45bhp ;o)

--
Hog

GSXR1000K4 Ducati ST4S GasGas 250 Raga

[The Older Gentleman]

Hog <SPAM...@CHIPShotmail.co.uk> wrote:

> I see the seller is indeed... I
> assume they are well known jokers?

You're not wrong.

[Ivan D. Reid]

On Tue, 28 Jan 2014 21:18:36 +0000, The Older Gentleman
<totallyde...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote in <1lg7ci8.1qumv301wyge80N%totallyde...@yahoo.co.uk>:
> Hog <SPAM...@CHIPShotmail.co.uk> wrote:

>> Over ?6000 asked!

> It wasn't Motorcycles Unspeakable in Uxbridge, was it?

As a resident of Cowley Village, I wouldn't call that Uxbridge at
all -- seems to be Perivale, but I'm not familiar with that area, other than
having heard the name once or twice.

--
Ivan Reid, School of Engineering & Design, _____________ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. Ivan.Reid@[brunel.ac.uk|cern.ch] Room 40-1-B12, CERN
GSX600F, RG250WD "You Porsche. Me pass!" DoD #484 JKLO#003, 005
WP7# 3000 LC Unit #2368 (tinlc) UKMC#00009 BOTAFOT#16 UKRMMA#7 (Hon)
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".

[Kellerman]

Camshafts and bearings made from a special Jappanese cheese <1>. Oil
changes every 1500 miles or the camshafts wears alarmingly and can be
fucked in 5000 miles.
There was a company in Ware that used to line bore the heads and fit
roller bearings. They would then last forever - provided the oil was
changed every 1500 miles..........
Dave

<1> had a CB360G5 in the late '70 - went OK

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

[The Older Gentleman]

Kellerman <kellerm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> There was a company in Ware that used to line bore the heads and fit
> roller bearings.

That was the infamous Jock Kerr Engineering.

They had a truly dreadful reputation.

[Kellerman]

On 09/02/2014 16:21, The Older Gentleman wrote:
> Kellerman <kellerm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> There was a company in Ware that used to line bore the heads and fit
>> roller bearings.
>
> That was the infamous Jock Kerr Engineering.
>
> They had a truly dreadful reputation.
>
>

Funnily enough the name thats come to mind is "Joy Enginerring". Was
around 1979 - I think. The mod done to the 360 was OK during the time I
owned the engine. The bike was like Trigger's broom - it had a new frame
because of serious rust and a new engine because of - you've guessed it
- alarming camshaft wear. I can't now remember which engine had the
roller bearing mod.
Kellerman aka Snot

[The Older Gentleman]

Kellerman <kellerm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Funnily enough the name thats come to mind is "Joy Enginerring".

They knew what they were doing.

[Jeremy]

In article <1lgt6qs.1fi3ldy11la6p4N%totallyde...@yahoo.co.uk>,
totallyde...@yahoo.co.uk says...

>
> Kellerman <kellerm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > There was a company in Ware that used to line bore the heads and fit
> > roller bearings.
>
> That was the infamous Jock Kerr Engineering.
>
> They had a truly dreadful reputation.

Never heard of him but had to google and this is the kind of story
quickly uncovered:

"The Superdream 125 conversion ran with a nylon piston in the redundant
barrel.
A local chap by the name of Piggy had such a device as it was deemed
unlikely that he would ever pass his test.

I also recall a friend of mine buying not only the Jock Kerr 480c.c. Big
Bore kit for his Honda 400/4 but also the turbo add on. We were all
quite keen on the project until we realised that the kit of parts had
been very badly put together and nothing lined up, the exhaust was a
very shoddy piece of scrap tin and the turbo looked like something out
of a central heating boiler, it ran like bag of sh1t, burnt oil and
pissed what was left out of the engine breather and was a good 30 MPH
slower than before he started the project. "


--
jeremy

[Hog]

The Older Gentleman wrote:
> Kellerman <kellerm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> There was a company in Ware that used to line bore the heads and fit
>> roller bearings.
>
> That was the infamous Jock Kerr Engineering.
>
> They had a truly dreadful reputation.

Oh ged, blast from the past. Didn't he also flog some gawd awful big bore
kits?

[The Older Gentleman]

He did. And then sleeve-down kits for 250s to convert them to 125cc
twins. That was a bad idea because the huge liners he used to replace
the standard ones were so thick they didn't transmit the heat properly
to the fins, and the pistons siezed.

Then he came up with the 'dummy piston', which was basically a metal
slug in one cylinder of your Super Dream, now a 125cc single.

He also offered an exchange engine service - hand in your tired old lump
and cash for a supposedly totally refurbished unti. You can guess what
went wrong there.

Finally, he gave up fiddling with engines and launched an exhaust
company called Dynaflow. That didn't last long.

[Mark Roberts]

On Mon, 10 Feb 2014 19:39:40 +0000, totallyde...@yahoo.co.uk
(The Older Gentleman) wrote:

>Hog <SPAM...@CHIPShotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> The Older Gentleman wrote:
>> > Kellerman <kellerm...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> > That was the infamous Jock Kerr Engineering.
>> >
>> > They had a truly dreadful reputation.
>>
>> Oh ged, blast from the past. Didn't he also flog some gawd awful big bore
>> kits?
>
>He did. And then sleeve-down kits for 250s to convert them to 125cc
>twins. That was a bad idea because the huge liners he used to replace
>the standard ones were so thick they didn't transmit the heat properly
>to the fins, and the pistons siezed.
>
>Then he came up with the 'dummy piston', which was basically a metal
>slug in one cylinder of your Super Dream, now a 125cc single.
>
>He also offered an exchange engine service - hand in your tired old lump
>and cash for a supposedly totally refurbished unti. You can guess what
>went wrong there.
>
>Finally, he gave up fiddling with engines and launched an exhaust
>company called Dynaflow. That didn't last long.

Sounds like a right Joker!

--
Mark Roberts

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 09:30:52 -0000, "Ross"
<ro...@redtreeorchard.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

>Yes, they can have camshaft problems unless they are well looked after, and
>sadly a LOT were not...if the bike is low mileage, hasn't had loads of
>owners, and has had a bit of love and attention over the years it could be a
>chance to get a nice little bike cheap because everybody "knows" what
>rubbish they are! ;-)

Same applied to other shite bikes of the day. I bought a Yam XS250
purely as mechanical back-up to get me into London. The PO had
lavished care and attention on it, Hagon shocks, rebuilt forks, and
with various grease nipples where the factory had never planned on
any. As a result, it handled well, sipped fuel like it was gold and
only showed its limitations on the open motorway, when it was only
barely capable of dicing with trucks on long uphill slogs. Not a bike
for m'ways, but apart from that, it acquitted itself well enough as a
spare for a year or two. It was the lack of power that prompted me to
buy a pair of 400 pistons, but never got around to fitting them.