Kawasaki Z250
Big Dave
Yes, yes, yes, I know about buying basket cases - I didn't buy this
one, it was free.
What does the vox populi think of Z250s?
I don't remember anyone raving about them when the first appeared.
And I don't remember anybody slating them either.
Any thoughts?
Dave
JB
"Big Dave" <flyi...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:1137579332.6...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
the bunch in terms of performance. The XS250 was very slow but reliable; the
CB250G5/CJ250T were *utter* shite; the 250Dream/Superdream was slow and
heavy, but again reliable (mechanically at least). The Z250C (single pot)
was fun but not on a par with the CB250RS.
I assume yours is a twin? The last of these iirc, was the Z250'Scorpion'.
Not bad for its time ,but seriously outperformed by any of the strokers.The
main thing I always remember about 70/80s 4-stroke twins was always change
the oil regularly or you will wreck the cam/head.
Funnily enough I've just seen someone flogging an engine for one in our
local free ads paper.
Thinking of using it as a 'Morocco Steed' then?
JB
TOG@toil
Big Dave wrote:
Depends which model - there were two basic types, the single and the
twin, and both appeared in multiple variants.
The single is rarer and we got it as a straight roadster - sort of an
overgrown Z200 - and a US Custom version. Nice little soft engine, but
a bit slow.
The twin, aka the Scorpion, is far more common. They were also
amazingly fast for a four-stroke, because they were actually designed
as a 250 rather than being a sleeved-down 400 like the Yamaha or Honda
twins of the era.
Engine's a Honda-like SOHC twin. Early ones had trouble because the oil
pump gear was plastic and stripped its teeth..... They were always in a
high state of tune, and needed careful servicing, especially oil
changes and valve clearances.
First ones were a sort of silver-blue. There was a green meanie Kork
Ballington model (special paint only). They also produced a sort of
economy version with wire wheels and drum brakes. Then it got even more
power, a monoshock rear end and belt drive, exactly like the GPz305.
The 305 is a bored-out 250, and appallingly unreliable.
I've owned a standard model. They're bloody good fun to ride - they do
over 90 (something like 95-97 on the clock) and handle well.
Economical, too.
They're not collectable - £500 should get you a really nice example.
So worth spending a little dosh on if you want a commuter hack.
Problem areas - top ends, camchains, crankshafts, like the 305 - only
not quite as bad.
Big Dave
Yes its a Z250 twin. 1980 model.
I remember the XS250 for those reasons - slow but reliable.
The CJ250 was total shite. Shiter than the CB250G5.
I've owned CB250RS's and still have one in the throes of being rebuilt.
The Kwak turned up for nowt so I said yes I'll have it.
Dave
Big Dave
JB wrote:
> Thinking of using it as a 'Morocco Steed' then?
Erm, what's a Morocco Steed ?
Anything to do with camels?
:-)
Dave
'Hog
> The CJ250 was total shite. Shiter than the CB250G5.
Amazingly so! and the K4 was such a nice bike too.
There was a rare and strange thing possible with the G5. The fork tops
could let water leak in. Over time the air gap above the oil could be
consumed until a hydraulic lock was formed. Still, a rigid front end
didn't make the handling worse.
--
'Hog
'96 Bastard B12 '89 R100RS '78 RD400 XS650
JB
Those *mad* buggers who did Frankfurt on very small engined bikes and are
proposing Morocco as the next destination.
Jb
Ace
<hogSPAM&@freenetCHIPS.co.uk> wrote:
>Big Dave wrote:
>
>> The CJ250 was total shite. Shiter than the CB250G5.
>
>Amazingly so! and the K4 was such a nice bike too.
Was it bollocks. Given that the 250 choice around that time included
the beautiful pear-shaped tank RD250, the Kwak S1 and the GT250 anyone
choosing a Honda was quite clearly a complete sad git of a loser.
--
_______
.'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2
`\|/`
`
'Hog
> On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:05:41 -0000, "'Hog"
> <hogSPAM&@freenetCHIPS.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Big Dave wrote:
>>
>>> The CJ250 was total shite. Shiter than the CB250G5.
>>
>> Amazingly so! and the K4 was such a nice bike too.
>
> Was it bollocks. Given that the 250 choice around that time included
> the beautiful pear-shaped tank RD250, the Kwak S1 and the GT250 anyone
> choosing a Honda was quite clearly a complete sad git of a loser.
I didn't but several mates wanted 4 strokes, all the above were 2. RD
man I was.
Ace
TFFT.
Big Dave
Streuth NO! I haven't heard of those "adventures" so far.
Presumably a search through the group archive will turn up some details
of their exploits?
Dave
Big Dave
Ace wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:05:41 -0000, "'Hog"
> <hogSPAM&@freenetCHIPS.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Big Dave wrote:
> >
> >> The CJ250 was total shite. Shiter than the CB250G5.
> >
> >Amazingly so! and the K4 was such a nice bike too.
>
> Was it bollocks. Given that the 250 choice around that time included
> the beautiful pear-shaped tank RD250, the Kwak S1 and the GT250 anyone
> choosing a Honda was quite clearly a complete sad git of a loser.
>
Erm. I had a Honda CB200, so do I count as a double sad git loser, or a
pikey sad git loser? <grin>
I had a "round tank" RD350 (1974) later. Fucking mental, but only 22mpg
at best.....
The S1 - is that the white one? around 1971-ish
Austin Shackles
enlightened us thusly:
>the
>CB250G5/CJ250T were *utter* shite
I can confirm this, having briefly owned one.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
In Touch: Get in touch with yourself by touching yourself.
If somebody is watching, stop touching yourself.
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.
Andy Wegg
> >the
> >CB250G5/CJ250T were *utter* shite
>
> I can confirm this, having briefly owned one.
I know someone that had a CJ250T with a *chromed* tank and side panels,
thereby giving the lie to the phrase "you can't polish a turd".
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
'Hog
> On or around Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:07:01 -0000, "JB" <J...@nospam.net>
> enlightened us thusly:
>
>> the
>> CB250G5/CJ250T were *utter* shite
>
> I can confirm this, having briefly owned one.
This isn't AA FFS
'Hog
> On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:23:46 -0000, "'Hog"
> <hogSPAM&@freenetCHIPS.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Ace wrote:
>>> On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:05:41 -0000, "'Hog"
>>> <hogSPAM&@freenetCHIPS.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Big Dave wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The CJ250 was total shite. Shiter than the CB250G5.
>>>>
>>>> Amazingly so! and the K4 was such a nice bike too.
>>>
>>> Was it bollocks. Given that the 250 choice around that time included
>>> the beautiful pear-shaped tank RD250, the Kwak S1 and the GT250
>>> anyone choosing a Honda was quite clearly a complete sad git of a
>>> loser.
>>
>> I didn't but several mates wanted 4 strokes, all the above were 2. RD
>> man I was.
>
> TFFT.
Not unsurprisingly the RD's were just as reliable as the 4T's though the
idiot who decided on an MZ TS250 rather let the side down. Not to
underestimate the K1-4 and 250/350 Honda's mind, there is a whole Road
Race class for them in Ireland and those boys have a *lot* of fun for no
money. It's actually quite tempting around 0330 some nights.
platypus
>
> Not unsurprisingly the RD's were just as reliable as the 4T's though
> the idiot who decided on an MZ TS250 rather let the side down. Not to
> underestimate the K1-4 and 250/350 Honda's mind, there is a whole Road
> Race class for them in Ireland and those boys have a *lot* of fun for
> no money. It's actually quite tempting around 0330 some nights.
Is that when they come past your house on full noise?
--
platypus
the old ennui
'Hog
LOL....it's the 900cc Weslakes that make the ears bleed
TOG@toil
'Hog wrote:
> Austin Shackles wrote:
> > On or around Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:07:01 -0000, "JB" <J...@nospam.net>
> > enlightened us thusly:
> >
> >> the
> >> CB250G5/CJ250T were *utter* shite
> >
> > I can confirm this, having briefly owned one.
>
> This isn't AA FFS
>
Oh yes it is.
<Holds up hand>
I owned a CJ250. *And* a Honda CB360 (which I admit wasn't as bad as
the 250)
'Hog
> Oh yes it is.
>
> <Holds up hand>
>
> I owned a CJ250. *And* a Honda CB360 (which I admit wasn't as bad as
> the 250)
I had a K1 and a CX500 at the same time <wince>
Lozzo
> Not unsurprisingly the RD's were just as reliable as the 4T's though the
> idiot who decided on an MZ TS250 rather let the side down. Not to
> underestimate the K1-4 and 250/350 Honda's mind, there is a whole Road
> Race class for them in Ireland and those boys have a *lot* of fun for no
> money. It's actually quite tempting around 0330 some nights.
Your idea of 'no money' differs from mine then. A race prepped 350K4
sells for upwards of 3 large and some spares aren't easy to find so are
consequently expensive. I'd rather buy a race prepped CBR600 for that
money and know I'll be able to keep it in one piece for ever
--
Lozzo
GSX-R1000 K1
GPZ500S
GSF600 W
Lozzo
> TOG@Toil wrote:
>
> > Oh yes it is.
> >
> > <Holds up hand>
> >
> > I owned a CJ250. *And* a Honda CB360 (which I admit wasn't as bad as
> > the 250)
>
> I had a K1 and a CX500 at the same time <wince>
I never bothered with shite like that. I had other crosses to bear.
Lozzo
>
> Big Dave wrote:
>
> > I've just be given a basket case Z250. Late 70s/early 80s.
> > Yes, yes, yes, I know about buying basket cases - I didn't buy this
> > one, it was free.
And a metallic mint green one (same as the then current Z1000ST), these
were the A1 model.
> There was a green meanie Kork
> Ballington model (special paint only).
Based on the A1 model to celebrate Korky B's double GP championship wins
in 1978/9. The A1 was followed by the A2 which had minor mechanical
differences and different paint colours. Then came the A3 which had
proper little 'Scorpion' badges on the side panels and an automatic
sidestand retracter which was operated by a peg on the front sprocket.
A3 models had GPZ style stripes on the tank and tail, though they didn't
share the same shade of Firecracker red, the 250A3 was metallic deep
burgundy or metallic royal blue.
> They also produced a sort of
> economy version with wire wheels and drum brakes.
This was the Z250B model, available in plain blue or plain red with a 2-
1 exhaust and drum brakes front and rear.
> Then it got even more
> power, a monoshock rear end and belt drive, exactly like the GPz305.
> The 305 is a bored-out 250, and appallingly unreliable.
I quite liked the 305s, but as most were caned to fuck by young lads
trying to keep up with their mate's 350LCs, they didn't last very long,
especially when said young lads didn't bother changing the oil every
3000 miles.
Tim
<hogSPAM&@freenetCHIPS.co.uk> writes
>Big Dave wrote:
>
>> The CJ250 was total shite. Shiter than the CB250G5.
>
>Amazingly so! and the K4 was such a nice bike too.
>
--
Tim
http://www.stopharlownorth.com/
'Hog
> Your idea of 'no money' differs from mine then. A race prepped 350K4
> sells for upwards of 3 large and some spares aren't easy to find so
> are consequently expensive. I'd rather buy a race prepped CBR600 for
> that money and know I'll be able to keep it in one piece for ever
Didn't think they were that expensive here. Main difference is those
boys don't usually kill themselves! unlike the 600's. Then again a
CB250 rider did manage the unlikely last year.
Steve Parry
news:MPG.1e38a13cd...@news.individual.net...
> said...
>>
>> Big Dave wrote:
>>
>> > I've just be given a basket case Z250. Late 70s/early 80s.
>> > Yes, yes, yes, I know about buying basket cases - I didn't buy this
>> > one, it was free.
>
>> First ones were a sort of silver-blue.
Metallic Stardust Silver as per Z1000D Z1-R [1] and Z650C and the Z250C
ISTR
<snip>
[1] sigh 1st love
--
Steve Parry
K100RS SE & F650
and a 520i SE Touring for comfort
(not forgetting the SK90PY)
Ace
wrote:
>
>Ace wrote:
>> Was it bollocks. Given that the 250 choice around that time included
>> the beautiful pear-shaped tank RD250, the Kwak S1 and the GT250 anyone
>> choosing a Honda was quite clearly a complete sad git of a loser.
>>
>
>Erm. I had a Honda CB200, so do I count as a double sad git loser, or a
>pikey sad git loser? <grin>
>
>I had a "round tank" RD350 (1974) later. Fucking mental, but only 22mpg
>at best.....
>
>The S1 - is that the white one? around 1971-ish
Yeah, I think most of them were white with green coach-lining. Not
sure how long they were around before it became the KH, but 1971-1974
sounds about right.
Big Dave
Ace wrote:
> On 18 Jan 2006 04:32:46 -0800, "Big Dave" <flyi...@btopenworld.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Ace wrote:
>
> >> Was it bollocks. Given that the 250 choice around that time included
> >> the beautiful pear-shaped tank RD250, the Kwak S1 and the GT250 anyone
> >> choosing a Honda was quite clearly a complete sad git of a loser.
> >>
> >
> >Erm. I had a Honda CB200, so do I count as a double sad git loser, or a
> >pikey sad git loser? <grin>
> >
> >I had a "round tank" RD350 (1974) later. Fucking mental, but only 22mpg
> >at best.....
> >
> >The S1 - is that the white one? around 1971-ish
>
> Yeah, I think most of them were white with green coach-lining. Not
> sure how long they were around before it became the KH, but 1971-1974
> sounds about right.
>
IIRC, they were good for well 100mph weren't they?
Dave
TOG@toil
Big Dave wrote:
On the clock. True 90+. The later KH250 was detuned and slower, until
the last B5 model when they gave it some power back.
Big Dave
TOG@Toil wrote:
> Big Dave wrote:
>
> > I've just be given a basket case Z250.
<snips>
> The twin, aka the Scorpion, is far more common. They were also
> amazingly fast for a four-stroke, because they were actually designed
> as a 250 rather than being a sleeved-down 400 like the Yamaha or Honda
> twins of the era.
<snips more>
> Problem areas - top ends, camchains, crankshafts, like the 305 - only
> not quite as bad.
Thanks for the info, TOG. Appreciated.
Its the twin : a 1980 on a 'W' plate is as much as I know at present.
>From your comments I assume that, depending on completeness[1], its
worth rebuilding and riding for the "fun factor" rather than any
"collectable desirability".
[1] Having known the bloke its coming from for a few years, I'd guess
at it being 95% complete or better.
Thanks.
Dave
Ken
Something like this needs listing on Ebay, where someone might find it
very useful for spares, dont even think about rebuilding it, as you are
very likely to spend more than twice what its going to be worth to get
it back on the road, and some parts are going to be very very
difficult.
k
Big Dave
"Ken" <autosugg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1137829444.9...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Thanks for your comments, Ken.
I'll ignore them, though
Dave
Ken
here, and takes note of replys from the likes of TOG, is ever going to
heed the advice of someone who actually knows what they are talking
about!
k
Steve Parry
news:1137829444.9...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I'll have you know my RD250B was far from shite!
Big Dave
"Steve Parry" <k100rs_199...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:43jn5fF...@individual.net...
> "Ken" <autosugg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1137829444.9...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> The Z250 was like the other 250 twins of the time, utter shite!
>> Something like this needs listing on Ebay, where someone might find it
>> very useful for spares, dont even think about rebuilding it, as you are
>> very likely to spend more than twice what its going to be worth to get
>> it back on the road, and some parts are going to be very very
>> difficult.
>>
>
>
> I'll have you know my RD250B was far from shite!
I never said it was!!!!
<reads post>
Oh I didn't did I?
I haven't got a fucking clue
<goes back to sleep>
Dave
Big Dave
Lozzo wrote:
> said...
> >
> > Big Dave wrote:
> >
> > > I've just be given a basket case Z250. Late 70s/early 80s.
>
> were the A1 model.
>
> > There was a green meanie Kork
> > Ballington model (special paint only).
>
> Based on the A1 model to celebrate Korky B's double GP championship wins
> in 1978/9.
Just incase anyone is still bothered :
The Z250 in question has just turned up.
Its on W plate ('79/'80?) and its a green Kork Ballington model.
Dave
Lozzo
That's a very late registered A1. Most A2s were on V plates with some on
Ws.
jonrich...@gmail.com
> "Big Dave" <flyi...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:1137579332.6...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > one, it was free.
> >
> >
> > I don't remember anyone raving about them when the first appeared.
> > And I don't remember anybody slating them either.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> The Z250 twins weren't bad for a 4-stroke. The Z250 was probably the best of
> the bunch in terms of performance. The XS250 was very slow but reliable; the
> CB250G5/CJ250T were *utter* shite; the 250Dream/Superdream was slow and
> heavy, but again reliable (mechanically at least). The Z250C (single pot)
> was fun but not on a par with the CB250RS.
> I assume yours is a twin? The last of these iirc, was the Z250'Scorpion'.
> Not bad for its time ,but seriously outperformed by any of the strokers.The
> main thing I always remember about 70/80s 4-stroke twins was always change
> the oil regularly or you will wreck the cam/head.
> Funnily enough I've just seen someone flogging an engine for one in our
> local free ads paper.
> Thinking of using it as a 'Morocco Steed' then?
>
> JB
I can remember refusing to buy a brand new Honda CJ250 in 1977 and taking a CB200 instead as it had electric start. Nice to know after all the years I made the right decision as I never had any problems with the CB200 until I hit black ice and wrote it off driving to work one morning. Traded it in for a Suzuki X7 which was a pure performance machine and stolen a few months after I got it. When it was recovered it had another 9000 miles on the clock and I thought that was not a problem not knowing that 12000 miles was about the life span of an X7s engine.
The Older Gentleman
> I can remember
As far back as 2006?
Because that's the age of the post you're replying to, idiot.
--
Honda CB750F2 CB400 Four CB250 CB125Sx2 CG125 Triumph Street
Triple Guzzi California Yamaha 660 Tenere Suzuki TS250ERx3
More garages needed....
chateau dot murray at fastmail dot fm
Tim
> <jonrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I can remember
>
> As far back as 2006?
>
> Because that's the age of the post you're replying to, idiot.
>
>
YTC#1
>
>> <jonrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I can remember
>>
>> As far back as 2006?
>>
>> Because that's the age of the post you're replying to, idiot.
>
>
It was less pointless than the reply he was replying to, he is neither
incompetent nor stupid [prat], on the other hand he can be pompous so
will give you that :-)
--
Bruce Porter
"The internet is a huge and diverse community but mainly friendly"
http://ytc1.blogspot.co.uk/
There *is* an alternative! http://www.openoffice.org/
The Older Gentleman
> On 08/27/14 08:50, Dan wrote:
> > On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 22:08:32 +0100, The Older Gentleman wrote:
> >
> >> <jonrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I can remember
> >>
> >> As far back as 2006?
> >>
> >> Because that's the age of the post you're replying to, idiot.
> >
> > Oh, do fuck off. You pointless, pompous prat.
> >
>
> It was less pointless than the reply he was replying to, he is neither
> incompetent nor stupid [prat], on the other hand he can be pompous so
> will give you that :-)
So *easy* to wind them up....
The Older Gentleman
> Yeah, you're a legend.
And you're a bellend.
You really need to work on your banter and insults, kid.