My brother bought a Hondamatic back in the early 80's. There was nothing good to be said about that bike.
2007-12-11 02:02:28 · 24 answers · asked by ninebadthings 7 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Motorcycles
Ok, I'm sure it was bulletproof. But it was also a slug and just a drag to be on. I'm sure any 350 could own it.
2007-12-11 15:17:10 · update #1
MZ Scorpion MX125.
MZ - (think East German engineering at its 'finest') decided to break into the US market again in 1999 with 2 models, both used a humongous 125cc water cooled engine (about the size of a 500cc model from anyone else), and the same chassis for the MX as the street version.
The little street bike was okay (really slow), but the MX version was taller than a KTM adventure, and flopped into turns so bad it nearly threw you off.
MZ Scorpion = Lack of power? Check! Heavy as !@#$%? Check! 6" taller seat height than anything else in the class? Check! Dangerously crappy handling? Check!
Yea, they were a real big seller.
2007-12-11 05:52:56 · answer #1 · answered by ducatisti 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
In the 80s I had a Kawasuki 450. That bike always felt like I was riding on a flat tire
2007-12-11 21:31:58 · answer #2 · answered by Thunderoadvtx1300 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Honda CD-200 Benly,
Honda CB-250 Superdream)
best was Yamaha RD250
2007-12-11 10:53:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Early 90's Ninja 250 - but because the bike was NOT right for me. Borrowed it from a friend as he needed to borrow my truck. Used it to get to and from work, NOT a bike for a six foot 220lbs man to ride. Anything over 50 mph and it felt like the front end was lifting, it was uncomfortable to ride.
Granted I have mostly ridden cruisers or big sports bikes, so this was very small for me.
2007-12-12 09:04:35 · answer #4 · answered by simon y 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There's lots of people who will argue with your assessment of the Hondamatic. The 750-4 is nearly bullet proof, for one thing. It may have been a bit ahead of its time, though.
For me, worse bike is a tossup between the 883 Sportster and the (S&S) Indian.
2007-12-11 19:29:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. 1 Bad: 1947 Indian Chief
No. 2 Bad 1942 Harley 45
No. 3 Bad 1950 BSA B34
No. 4 Bad 1949 Harley 74 (Pan Head)
Good ones???? too many to list, but one of the most loved-
1955 Vincent Black Prince.
No.2 Loved 1990 Kaw ZX11, with a bit of work. "Black Mirah"
Tomcotexas.
2007-12-11 12:55:04 · answer #6 · answered by tomcotexas 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Suzuki S40 Boulevard, my previous bike. Horrible handling, 110 mile range, painful seat, stiff ride, weak headlight, weak brakes, loud backfires & a very uncomfortable riding position. Got rid of it after 3,900 miles in 2 1/2 years. I should have taken a test ride first but at least it was cheap.
2007-12-12 00:07:55 · answer #7 · answered by Joe_Bleaux 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
650 BSA chopper. neck kicked out to about 40 degrees,12 over fork tubes , no sliders just the tubes with a hole drilled in them for the front axle(called a rigid front) no front brake of course.(nobody used front brakes then) welded on hard tail, looked cool but like all bsa's it vibrated so bad it made a sporty feel like a gold wing in comparison unless you kept the revs down. didn't keep it long only a few months in the early 70s. didn't have any trouble selling it, it was a chick magnet with a stepped king&queen seat & a tall sissy bar.
2007-12-11 16:04:43 · answer #8 · answered by Who Dat ? 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
1982 (or was it 83?) Honda CX500 turbo. While being the first factory turbocharged bike was very cool it was otherwise a handful to ride. Center of gravity too high, long boost lag, lower compression (than the regular CX500 to allow turbo, slower off the line. Oh yeah, fragile bodywork too.
2007-12-11 14:01:12 · answer #9 · answered by forhirepen 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hondamatic CM400A.
Was not a bad bike, ran well.
Too short (seat height).
Too wide.
400cc needed way more than 2 gears.
No kicker.
2007-12-11 19:54:02 · answer #10 · answered by Firecracker . 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋