R65 vs R100

[Lucky_Lou]

My neighbor at work is a real bike nut and has several bikes, is current love is his Fireblade, he also has a Shadow a lovely old Condor (Swiss Army) an old Guzzi California current project and a R100 which he has passed to me to "sort out".
As i often borrow his forklift i was happy to help him out.
Basically it just wants a carb tickle and introducing to the Mark 3 "Texas" vacuum gauge and a couple of tweaks here and there.
In the interests of science a road test was of course required.
Ive ridden an R80 before and didnt feel it was all that different to the R65 apart from crappy cornering.The R100 however does have great acceleration but i have to say i am not sold on the benefit as i am not a speed freak and the longest  journey i am ever likely to make would not be more than a couple of hundred miles so long range cruising is not an issue.
Both bikes are 1979 the R100 features rear disc brake which is frighteningly ineffective.
All things considered i will stick to my R65 the grass is greener syndrome  has been cured.
Lou

[Altritter]

Topic Summary - Displaying 1 post(s). Click here to show all
Posted by: Lucky_Lou        Posted on: 03/30/11 at 15:43:55

Ive ridden an R80 before and didnt feel it was all that different to the R65 apart from crappy cornering.

Interesting. Lou, do you remember whether it was the "small" or "large" frame R80 you rode? I've not ridden an R80, but I recall reviews of early R65s that said that an R80 offered the same handling as an R65, but had more power and a higher top end. This is consistent with the folklore that the earlier (twin-shock, I presume) R65 frame was the prototype for the R80.

[Lucky_Lou]

The R80 was before i found the R65 and to be honest i didnt take much notice of the technicalities it was my brothers bike (now he has been re-educated to an R65) a 1985 GS.
Lou

[Barry]

Interesting comparison Lou. Always good to hear our short wheelbase frame handles better.

All the early R80/100s have a 3" longer wheelbase than a 79 R65. Then they lopped an inch off for the R80ST and others from 85 - so they probably handle better. I'd really like to try one of those .

Never liked the idea of a rear disc brake they add maintenance hassle and were just introduced for marketing purposes.

[kaleuclint]

Hello - new member!  I own a '78 R100RS and used to own a '80 R65.  The reality for me is that the 'little' R65 can do pretty much everything that the RS can - except cruise at 160 km/h.  Or maybe carry a heavy pillion passenger.  The R65 is probably more comfortable, easier to maintain (fuses, old filter not hiden behind fairing pieces) and quicker handling.  The R100RS is more stable, more powerful but coarser due the larger piston mass), and prettier.  Not sure what the maintenance issues with the rear disc are -- never a problem -- but I accept there's more feel with the rear drum.  In the real world (speed limits, etc.) the R65 is a very underrated machine.  Mine was probably the best bike I've ever owned in terms of actual riding, and I'd like to get another one -- though I wouldn't sell my RS to make way for it...