Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

old skool zed,opinions??

Discussion in 'Bike Reviews, Questions and Suggestions' started by greaser, Sep 2, 2007.

  1. hi guys got any thoughts on kawa z 750 1980 model?seen 1 for $1500ono in fair cond.i know ya wont get much for that price,just think it would be ok as a 2nd bike,maybe customise it a bit,are they hard to get parts/tyres etc..

  2. Parts are easy enough to get second hand, BUT, there's plenty of new reproduction gear available for them that is made for teh Z 1000's, but is the same as on teh smaller bikes, parts from cables to handlebar switch blocks etc.
    Kawasaki still carries parts for the older bikes too, and aren't too bad on price.
    Is it a 750 twin or four? The twins are merely average bikes(coarse, vibrations), the four is a lovely engine. Both are pretty indestructible, but the fours have starter clutch issues at higher mileages (listen for a starter that disengages too soon or occasionaly won't crank the bike over).
    Otherwise, they are simple, strong bikes that ride very nicely.

    Regards, Andrew.
  3. KAWA Z750
    1980-85, 738cc DOHC four,
    70hp 125mph 45mpg 480lb
    Enlarged and restyled Z650 with nasty handling. Early models suffered tensioner problems, engines don’t like neglect - from the main bearings through to the top end. Also custom Ltd version with strange handling and better reliability. Turbo version’s almost extinct due to the complexity.

    I like the big 80's UJM's, they can be great fun, but there are better to be had than the Z750.
  4. If it's cheap and reasonably roadworthy, I'd go for it. Old aircooled Jap fours can provide loads of budget fun.

    They're relatively simple, parts are available and fairly cheap (particularly consumables like tyres) and they're still fast enough to leave 99% of four wheelers at the lights.

    The Z750 wasn't a ground breaker like, say the Z1 or the Katana or the GPZ900R so I wouldn't see it ever becoming a "classic" but it was still a pretty decent bike for its day.

    I wouldn't take too much notice of this. It looks like the blurb from the Used Motorcycle Guide entry. The UMG was a pretty good mag (I started buying it way back in 87) but some of their price guide entries barely gave a nod towards accuracy. Pretty funny though :) . I always liked the one for the Honda CB900 (the real one) "Cheap way of going very fast".
  5. Yes it is. I consult the umg online site all the time. A lot of funny stuff on there. You may be right about accuracy, I wouldn't know, it's the only comprehensive source I've found for info on old bikes.

    Having said that, I've never heard anything great about the Z750. Surely there's a reason the Z650 is a much more popular bike.

  6. It's often the case that the first of anything is the purest and nearest to the designer's intentions.

    In the case of vehicles, what starts out a light, sporty hotrod puts on weight and bling until it's a flabby parody of its former self.

    Hence, the Z650 gains classic status whilst the heavier and less sporty 750 is a bit of a Cinderella, up against a larger range of middleweight fours than the 6 ever needed to compete with.

    On the plus side, that makes the 750 a whole lot cheaper and I suspect a bit of work can turn it into the 650's equal in terms of riding qualities.

    By today's standards they're all dinosaurs anyway. But, like I said, potentially a bucket of cheap fun with a bit of retro cool thrown in. After all, lots of people bought Zephyrs and that really was a "Fat Elvis" sort of bike :p .
  7. I've ridden both, the 750 is just a bit less tight than a 650. The difference felt to be just in a softer suspension at both ends, it didn't do anything untoward and was easy to ride fairly briskly.
    The 650 is a nicer bike both for styling and handling, but not that much nicer. The only really bad thing about a 650 is the 16 litre tank, 200 kms is a generous mileage before reserve, the later Z's addressed this with the big square tank.
    I think the 650 being more pricey is merely due to lesser numbers now available. Certainly the later Z's, with twin front discs, alloy wheels and rear disc are a much better basis for a modified bike, and the engine is basically a bored 650. They also have the bonus that early GPz stuff bolts on so parts are very easy to come by.

    Regards, Andrew.