R65's little brother

[lucky]

I enjoy riding the little R65 since day 1 I got her running. Her little brother came to me by a surprise and I think I like the little brother even better.

I learned they have many interchangeable parts, but if you sit them side by side, you will find many difference in them.

I have to say that ... the ST runs much better than that she made to replace.












 

[clonmore1]

Hi Lucky,

Nice pics, I am looking at an ST myself...

I thought the 45 was the 65's 'little' brother?

[Barry]

R80st's are nice bikes and very desirable. A collectors item for sure as they are relatively rare. I wouldn't describe them as related to R65's though.  There some similarities in design philosophy but few common parts. 

The R45 on the other hand is the true little brother and with the decals removed is physically indistinguishable from an R65 to all but a trained eye that knows where to look for clues.

[georgesgiralt]

Fantastic bike !
You are lucky ! Keep her in good shape, they are rare.

[lucky]

In proper English, I thought we call the older child, big brother, to his younger brother.

The R65 was made in Aug 1981, and the R80ST was made in July 1984. Therefore, technically, R65 is the older bike comparing to the R80ST.

That's why I called the R80ST is R65's little brother, even ST is taller, bigger and faster (not much due to the gear ratio).

 

[clonmore1]

Lucky,

I heard that about the gear ratio, talking to a Beemer indie over here recently about the ST, he changed the rear hub (not without some difficulty and access to a machine shop) to reduce the rpm at UK motorway speeds on his Fathers ST.

I really like the look of the ST and have one in my sights, just not sure if I want another project after the one I already have...

[lucky]

Chris,

If I were do that, I will change out the 5th gear which will be much easier than machining/modifing the final drive.

The ST and G/s use the one and the only final drive with 3 bolts wheel hub. As far as I know, there is no other gear ratio option from factory. It does about 4500 rph at 70 mph which is very similar to R65.

We all know those two bikes are not really modern traffic friendly anymore. If I knew I will be on the highway for awhile, I just pick something else.



 

[wilcom]

I just pick something else.

Nice stable!!!!    what is that dustbin faired fellow setting there......?  Love the Flying Tiger teeth there to pick up the road kill   LOLOLOL

[clonmore1]

"We all know those two bikes are not really modern traffic friendly anymore. If I knew I will be on the highway for awhile, I just pick something else".
---------------------------------------------------

Agreed Lucky,

I am looking at more modern machinery for that very reason!

I live near some of the best roads in the UK for biking, but also want to use one of my bikes for longer distance stuff with a fair bit of motorway work.

[Billmc]

"We all know those two bikes are not really modern traffic friendly anymore. If I knew I will be on the highway for awhile, I just pick something else".

What makes you say that? Would you clarify?
I have been on two major 500+ mile trips on mine since August and another 1K around town and find it very easy to ride in traffic and at speed on secondary highways. I avoid the major ones in my cars and truck so its not a problem on the bike.

[lucky]

Nice stable!!!!    what is that dustbin faired fellow setting there......?  Love the Flying Tiger teeth there to pick up the road kill   LOLOLOL

I believe I posted here before.

That's a dusbin on a 81 R100

Agreed Lucky,

I am looking at more modern machinery for that very reason!

I live near some of the best roads in the UK for biking, but also want to use one of my bikes for longer distance stuff with a fair bit of motorway work.

As matter as fact, I am on the market for a new machine as well after I sold my 05 K1200s.
Even a 40mm carb R100 has hard time to keep up with the traffic those days. It's not much of the power, it's more chassis and brake limitation for those 30+ years old machines.

 

What makes you say that? Would you clarify?
I have been on two major 500+ mile trips on mine since August and another 1K around town and find it very easy to ride in traffic and at speed on secondary highways. I avoid the major ones in my cars and truck so its not a problem on the bike.

I understand it's very subjective when I said not modern traffic friendly. I could ride whole day without getting on a major highway whole day. Avoiding inter-state, express way or highway mean traveling distance will be limited. The speed limit in CT and this part of the country is 65 mph. People usually drive 75 mph on those highway. Yes, R65 or R80ST can keep up with it, but without wind protection and running 5000+ rpm all the time isn't really that enjoyable. Also, there are not many passing power left if needed for safety reason.

I also learned something new couple months ago while I rode a 92 R100RT from LA back to CT.

 This is the ride report if anyone who cares.
http://advrider.com/index.php?threads/luckys-first-cross-country-trip.1182627/

Many places down at south have speed limit of 75 mph on the highway. We were cruising around 75-80 mph and some of the 18 wheelers even tried to pass us. Also, when everyone is doing 80 mph (GPS speed), even a R100 shows the lacking power/chassis stability.

Overall, I think it's a 40+ years design which we have to accept the fact.

 

[Matt Chapter]

When I went to New Mexico in April, I did quite a bit of riding at 95 mph.  Now, I burned a half quart of oil in ~2k miles, but the R65 seemed fine to me.  Sure, it took a little bit to get a full head of steam, but the passing lanes on the state highways were long enough.  Whether or not that type of trip is wise I will leave to the reader's judgement.

However, I will posit that the monoshock suspension, and my new Progressive shock specifically, are better than the twin shock.

On the other hand, I do have my eye out for a modern midsize sport tourer.

[Billmc]

...However, I will posit that the monoshock suspension, and my new Progressive shock specifically, are better than the twin shock.

Matt did you find that the Progressive Monoshock raised up your seat height and if so, what did you do to make it lower again, if anything?
I bought the standard length one, noticed it was longer than the one it replaced (not Factory stock), it raised up my body and seat at least 1 1/2" No matter what I've tried I can't seem to adjust it down to a lower position. Have you any suggestions?
I too love the way it handles but I would love to get my full foot back on the ground at stops!

[/i]

[lucky]

When I went to New Mexico in April, I did quite a bit of riding at 95 mph.  Now, I burned a half quart of oil in ~2k miles, but the R65 seemed fine to me.  Sure, it took a little bit to get a full head of steam, but the passing lanes on the state highways were long enough.  Whether or not that type of trip is wise I will leave to the reader's judgement.

However, I will posit that the monoshock suspension, and my new Progressive shock specifically, are better than the twin shock.

On the other hand, I do have my eye out for a modern midsize sport tourer.

Would you might share what mid-size sport touring bike you have your eyes on?

[Matt Chapter]

Would you might share what mid-size sport touring bike you have your eyes on?

I'd skip the top box.  Not super excited about chain drive.  And I'm still saving my pennies, but this is the direction my stable is going.