Suzuki Snapshots

Collected wisdom from the Suzi Two-Strokes Bulletin Board

Mar-Apr 2003

Ignition timing

Q. how much pre ignition is the mark point on the ignition system.
the manual say that is 3.4 mm before top and that's24°

the engine have a stroke off 64 mm and that's 360° 64mm / 360 = 0.1777 mm = 1°
3.4mm/ 0.17777 = 19.1° the ultimate question is what's correct 24° OR 19°

A. Ignition Timing: T500R/J/K Angle 24 deg BTDC +3 deg/- 2 deg
Corresponding Value in Piston Stroke: Standard 3.40mm
Tolerance 2.86mm - 4.26mm
If you work out 4.26mm/0.1777 = 23.9635 deg and 2.86/0.1777 = 16.088 deg
What they are saying (looking at piston movement ONLY) is that the MAXIMUM advance you are allowed is 24 deg and the MINIMUM is 16 deg. Anywhere in between is acceptable but DO NOT EXCEED 24 DEGREES BTDC.
BUT.....if you look at crank angle tolerances as listed above the MAXIMUM allowed is 27 deg with the MINIMUM allowed 22 deg.
You're right...there's much confusion here BUT I personally would go with the piston travel specs RATHER THAN the crank angle(s) listed. In my humble experience, engineers around the world consider this a much more accurate measure of piston position than any crank angle marks on a flywheel. The Suzuki Service people always told us that they PREFERRED timing settings to be done via piston position rather than flywheel marks. I think this had something to do with the fact that any flywheel can be rotated slightly both ways due to manufacturing tolerances in keys and keyways.
Besides, you can always start out with the advance set at 3.40mm and ride it knowing no harm will come to the engine. You can then check your plugs and adjust the timing as needed from that point up to a maximum of 4.26mm BTDC.

Pascal - I am afraid that your maths is wrong. You cannot divide the stroke (64mm) by 360 to get piston movement/degree since the relationship is not linear (its sinusoidal). This means that the piston moves much less near TDC for a given angle rotation of the crank. H2RICK is right - set your timing for 3.4mm for standard compression ratio. If you have skimmed the heads, you will need to retard a little.

A good mechanic will always set with a dial guage. A degree wheel is nowhere near accurate enough.


ready to reassemble T500 crankcases, need help
Posted by MattP on March 15, 2003, 1:52 pm

I completely tore down my '75 T500 engine, now I am ready to put it back together. I cleaned and checked everything, installed all new seals and a NOS crank that I had checked for runout (less than a thousandth). The transmission looks basically new to me. I can shift through all the gears and the kickstarter works like it should, the kickstart and shifter pawls and gears look new to me. I carefully cleaned and lightly oilstoned the case mating surfaces. Now I have questions about joining the cases, I want to get it right!
I'm going to use Three Bond sealer that I got from the dealer, unless someone objects. It is gray and comes in a tube. What is the best way to apply this stuff? With your finger? Should I put it only on the upper case, then mate the halves? The manual says to apply it in a thin even layer, but how 'thin' is thin?? I don't put it on the shaft bushings or crank bearings, right?
Also in what sequence should I tighten the case bolts? Of course I must start with the top case bolts, but my Suzuki manual, Clymer, and Chilton's all differ in explanation of this proceedure. I think I should start with the lowest number on the upper case, tighten all those, then flip it over and start with the lowest number on the bottom half. Is that right? Does it matter? I cleaned all the case bolt threads and will use copper anti-sieze on them and torque them just to specs.
Let me be clear - I have never been inside an engine before and have absolutely no experience whatsoever other than reading the manuals, so I can use any and all experienced advice. I know plenty of you guys have rebuilt engines, and any advice you can offer is greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Posted by JA on March 15, 2003

Just a few pointers. Cases are a very close fit so it takes only a very light coat on one side of the cases, most of it will squeeze out. I apply with my finger. Do not put on bearings or bushes, The seals are up to you , I don't. I just hope you didn't ruin the cases with the oil stone, I have never heard of dressing cases other than removing old sealer. I don't have the torquing sequences for the suki, but the main thing is to get the large main bearing (crank) bolts properly torqued in a criss cross patern. I like to have everything ready to assemble right there, so as soon as you have the sealer on the case half you can slide them together. I lightly tighten all the bolts down and then torque the main bearing bolts first. And I have no idea what torque specs you should use. The factory specs are for dry clean bolts, and lubrication with throw the torque figures way off. (over tighten)

Posted by rngdng on March 15, 2003

I'm sorry to disagree, but the torque will not be adversely affected by oil or grease. Dirty threads will give you a false reading due to friction, but grease will not cause you to overtighten. Use the factory specs.


GT500 are my crank seals gone?
Posted by john patterson on March 17, 2003, 3:58 am

Can someone help me with advise please. I have just put a Gt500 on the road after sorting wiring out and various cycle parts. It seems to go really well in the low gears you can rev it all the way. However after running a bit if i open it up in top gear at about 70mph all of a sudden there is a massive power loss almost like it is going to die this is accompanied by tinkling noise. Reducing the revs and cruising a bit all goes back to normal. Again it accelerates fully in the lower gears. Help.

Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?
Posted by Craig on March 17, 2003, 4:51 am, in reply to "GT500 are my crank seals gone?"

My first thought is that the carb float heights are too high, which is starving the motor of fuel when you make more demands of it -- i.e. when you open it up in a high gear at higher speeds.
The tinkling noise could simply be normal piston slap, which happens because the engine is being turned by the road speed, rather than driving the bike along.

I would recommend checking the fuel delivery system including tap, hoses and carb floats. Check the filter in the tap is clean (5 minutes -- but don't overtighten the bowl when you put it back on, just make it snug). Maybe fit a new fuel line, and make sure the float heights are right (not sure what the actual measurement is for GT500s, but Muzza's T500 site has them).

Then try again and see how you go. Bad crank seals are usually indicated by difficult starting from stone cold, poor overall performance and excessive smoking, usually just from one exhaust pipe.

However, don't diagnose bad seals just from smoking ... the bike may simply need a good hard 50-mile run to clear out all the oily crud from the cases and pipes.

Good luck, keep us posted how you go on.

Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?
Posted by captainbellybuster on March 17, 2003, 5:09 am, in reply to "Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?"

I would agree with Craig, you would see copious amounts of smoke & a drop in transmission oil, if the seals had gone & I doubt you would be getting to 70 mph!!! The "ting" noise could be a "pinging" which indicates too lean/starving of fuel. Check the fuel system from start to finish & for any air leaks between carbs & the barrels. Also if you have not long had the bike, check the jet sizes/needle settings/float heights against those on Muz's site in "technical stuff". Let us know how you get on. Cheers, Paul.

Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?
Posted by JOHN PATTERSON on March 17, 2003, 5:23 am, in reply to "Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?"

How come it revs alright in the lower gears. doesnt that mean the float levels are okay etc. I will check the fuel as this is a lot easier than replacing seals. I dont know about gearbox oil yet as I have just renewed it. The performance in the lower gears seems really quick. Is a power band normal on this bike as it seems to get urgent at about 5000 rpm.

Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?
Posted by Muzza on March 17, 2003, 7:23 am, in reply to "GT500 are my crank seals gone?"

Sounds very much like a fuel problem, not seals. Check the carb settings, you are probably pinging. What fuel are you running?

Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?
Posted by john patterson on March 17, 2003, 7:31 am, in reply to "Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?"

Thanks Muzza.
I hope you are right. It doesnt seem to pink until after the event has happened. I am running ordinary unleaded petrol. What worried me was I read in the haynes manual T500 that this could be a sign of seals gone allowing air into the crankcase weakening the mixture and causing a massive power loss. It also said that this would only happen in a high gear when going fast. Have you seen this? If so what do you make of it.
Cheers John

Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?
Posted by Craig on March 17, 2003, 9:21 am, in reply to "Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?"

The fact it picks up again when you back off the throttle makes it reasonably certain there's a fuel delivery problem. I wouldn't worry too much about Haynes' "troubleshooting" guides, they are notoriously vague ...
It will not do it accelerating in the low gears because you're only loading it with the throttle for a relatively short time in each gear. However, holding it at 70+ in top gear, then winding the throttle on, draws a *lot* of fuel. If the float height is not right, it will cause the motor to run leaner and eventually starve it.

Is the bike otherwise standard (std airbox, std exhausts)?

Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?
Posted by john patterson on March 17, 2003, 10:35 am, in reply to "Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?"

Thanks Craig, I am feeling somewhat better after the responses i have had. At the weekend I will completely check out the fuel system and carboretters. The bike is bog standard. This message board is really useful. I will let you know what happens, but it may take a while.

Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?
Posted by JA on March 18, 2003, 3:43 am, in reply to "Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?"

I had a simuliar problem. It eventually turned out ot be the clear fuel filters I had installed. So check out the petcock and the rest of the fuel system. The carbs run out of gas, until they can refill and the mixture is way lean, that can cause the "pinging".

Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?
Posted by John Patterson on March 18, 2003, 3:55 am, in reply to "Re: GT500 are my crank seals gone?"

Cheers JA. It seems everyone is pointing me in the direction of fuel. Its nice to hear from someone whos had a similar problem.

How to clean a carb after years of sitting???
Posted by Fast Eddie Kinney on March 13, 2003, 9:37 pm

Is acid bath the only way to go for a carb which was stiing for years in old gas? Or is there another way to get these baies clean without spending the $50.00? Any suggestions?

Fast Eddie: $50....where did that come from ??? Just go down to your....
Posted by H2RICK on March 14, 2003, 12:27 am, in reply to "How to clean a carb after years of sitting???"

nearest auto parts place and buy the gallon can of Gunk Carb Cleaner. It's reusable and works great. Acid bath is NOT required and the Gunk should only cost about US$25-$30...and it's REUSABLE !!!
Diassemble one carb completely, put all the bits (EXCEPT for the floats and any gaskets/orings) in a 28oz vegetable tin with the lid cut off and a bunch of holes poked in the bottom with a small nail and a small wire handle made so you can lift it out of the cleaner. It helps if you can chip out as much of the crud from the float bowl as you can BEFORE soaking the carb parts in the cleaner. Then take the gallon can of Gunk cleaner, pour it into one of those big Hills Brothers (or similar) coffee can (that you've scrupulously cleaned before hand) and THEN slowly dip the vegetable tin of carb parts into the carb cleaner, letting it sink to the bottom.
The carb cleaner works best at room temperature or slightly warmer but do
NOT/NOT do this in your HOUSE. The smell will kill you AND stink up your house for eternity. Use the cleaner ONLY in a well ventilated garage or shed.
After about 1 to 2 hours lift the small can of carb parts out of the coffee can of carb cleaner, let the small can drain thoroughly (making sure the float bowl is drained of carb cleaner) and then wash all the parts in clean solvent. Blow ALL the passages out with compressed air and you're ready for reassembly. Pay particular attention to the air/fuel passages in the carb body AND the passages in the pilot jet, main jet and needle jet.
Meanwhile, you've taken the floats and immersed them completely in a small jar of Simple Green Cleaner/water (4 parts water: 1 part Simple Green). Tie the float assembly to a chunk of steel or a big nut or bolt so it'll be completely submerged in the Simple Green/water solution. This will eat the crud off the brass floats after about 24 hours at room temp and leave them clean but dull looking. Shine them up with a small chunk of NeverDull wadding and they're ready to go.
Reassemble the carb and set the idle air screw as per specs and you're ready to go onto the next carb.
If you're a newbie to all this, surf on over to Sudco's site (or maybe Mikuni's site...I can't remember which) and download their online version of the Mikuni VM carb manual. It's got a lotta stuff in it like exploded views and parts nomenclature and it's FREE !! Gotta be good...right ??? LOLOLOLOL
Good luck with your project.

Posted by sfulwood on March 14, 2003, 12:33 am, in reply to "Fast Eddie: $50....where did that come from ??? Just go down to your...."

Didn't someone post a message indicating that regular anti-freeze was a good way to clean carburetors? Maybe it was another forum.
I was interested in how well that suggestion would work. I'll have to look around for the original post.

I do know that the stuff called "KaBoom" works wonders on carburetors though. Probably not good for heavy deposits though.

Re: Anti-freeze?????? Hmmmmm......
Posted by H2RICK on March 14, 2003, 12:36 am, in reply to "Anti-freeze?"

I'd really want to think about that one, sf. Ethylene glycol has a LOT of a type of sugar in it. I don't think I'd be want'n that in my carb body passages....would you ??

Re: Anti-freeze?????? Hmmmmm......
Posted by m in sc on March 14, 2003, 12:00 pm, in reply to "Re: Anti-freeze?????? Hmmmmm......"

You're right scott, its antifreeze in the crockpot, then you rinse it after its done.
The method is to put a crockpot on just under simmer, in a well ventilated area and leave the carb ody in there for about a day, on. Afterwards, rinse it out and dry w/ hairdryer and you should be set.
Acid? on a carb body? oh heck no, never. that pot metal is wayyy to delicate. Learned that lesson many years ago and the result was a ruined Carter AFB.

Re: How to clean a carb after years of sitting???
Posted by Jeff G on March 14, 2003, 11:05 am, in reply to "How to clean a carb after years of sitting???"

$25 or so and you can get a carb cleaning kit at the auto parts store. Comes in a gallon can with 3/4 gallon of cleaner and a parts bin/strainer that keeps you from having to search through the cleaner for the jets. Use it outside or in the garage because it stinks.

GM dealers sell a product called Cleens
Posted by Peter E on March 14, 2003, 12:25 pm, in reply to "How to clean a carb after years of sitting???"

that's supposed to be poured into a carb with the engine running to get rid of carbon deposits in the engine. Turns out its one of the best carb cleaners I've ever come across. I also soak pistons in it to remove carbon deposits. Like the Gunk product it really reeks so use it outside. It comes in liquid or spray. I use the liquid. It also cleans the entire carb body so old dull carbs come out looking really nice and its kind to rubber and neoprene parts.
Peter E.

Re: GM dealers sell a product called Cleens
Posted by pascal on March 16, 2003, 2:47 pm, in reply to "GM dealers sell a product called Cleens"

you are right
the gm carbu cleaner is the best cleaner i ever used.
i drive a pontiac fiero and there is just one cleaner that can remove carbons and other dirthy stuff in the injection system .
i use it always for my bikes to clean the old carbs who are still for manny years .
it solved all and cleans perfect.
the spray is the best for me (its more like a foam )


Suzuki GT750 horsepower ratings
Posted by Barry on March 19, 2003, 1:56 pm

Speaking of horsepower ratings, the '77 GT 750 was supposed to have the most horsepower of all the year models but the cylinder part numbers are the same as '75 & '76 so where did the extra ponies come from ? What would you have to do to pep up the older ones to '77 specs. I rebuilt my '76 from the ground up, bored the cylinders .5mm, new crank seals and did some heavy cleanup and matching of the intake and exhaust ports and blended the edges of the intakes to the diameter of the rubber carb boot. Not really broken in good yet (150 miles) but seems to really come on above 5000 and start to pull hard. What about electronic ignitions, any more performance to be had with replacing the points and adjusting the timing?

Re: Suzuki GT750 horsepower ratings
Posted by Foxkilo on March 20, 2003, 5:29 am, in reply to "Suzuki GT750 horsepower ratings"

There are alot of confusing infos out regarding the power of the Buffalo. Different power claims for different countries. There are only two lines of models to sepate. First the J-l series (72-74) had according to Suzuki a power rating of 63hp probably measured as SAE horse power, whereas the later ones M-B (75-77) had 70hp. In Germany for example they were rated with 52/63 DIN hp respectivly. Butbhaving said this due to lack of a new official test the M model was still sold and rated officially with 52 hp although it had already all the changes incorporated. The power in crease was achieved by different timing, higher compression (mainly thinner headgasket), different exhaust system and carb jetting. Confusing is the situation around the L model (74) which already looks like the later ones but was technically still the old tuning step. Even the exhaust was internally the same as the old cone-style type. If you have the chance to compare an L one with an M one noe that the baffle plates are in different locations.
Conclusion no difference between 76 and 77 models.

Re: Suzuki GT750 horsepower ratings
Posted by rngdng on March 20, 2003, 7:00 am, in reply to "Re: Suzuki GT750 horsepower ratings"

Not to mention the "L" has the cross-overs between the headpipes.

Re: Suzuki GT750 horsepower ratings
Posted by Craig on March 20, 2003, 5:35 am, in reply to "Suzuki GT750 horsepower ratings"

According to the UK road test on Gazza's site , the changes were made between the L and M models (i.e. around 1975) and involved raising the exhaust port 2.5mm, dropping the inlet by 5mm, thinner head gasket to up compression and revised exhaust internals .... pretty radical porting changes.
Yours may already have the changes done. Not sure an electronic ignition would give you any more top end power, but you should get easier starting and better low-end. Also, no more fiddling with points.

Having said that, Suzi's aren't very sensitive to ignition timing and they tend not to go out of adjustment very quickly ... the factory quotes an acceptable timing range of over 4 degrees so it's not a super-critical factor.


Aircooled triples cylinder head musings ....
Posted by Craig on March 18, 2003, 12:37 pm

Why did Suzuki use a single cylinder head across all 3 barrels on the 380 and 550? On the twins, they've done it all ways possible -- one head, two heads etc.
Also, why not use long barrel / head studs like Kawasaki, and on the T20 / T250 / GT250?

It would be a much smaller pain in the @ss if Suzi had gone the three separate heads route, at least on the aircooleds ... and I can't see any drawbacks in terms of rigidity etc.

Musings inspired by having to remove the head to fix ONE weeping gasket ....

Maybe for
Posted by AL on March 18, 2003, 2:43 pm, in reply to "Re: Oh yes ...."

noise control, and thermal averaging between cylinders, since head temp was a big thing with suzuki on those. Look at the size of the head fin area, especially the center cyl. plus ram air.

Re: Oh yes ....
Posted by rngdng on March 18, 2003, 9:08 pm, in reply to "Oh yes ...."

I'll tell ya'; you'd be happy for those short little studs if you'd ever removed a stuck H2 or Buffalo cylinder!! What a pain. Those long studs corrode really badly and can be nearly impossible to remove. Count your blessings.


T500 crankcase bolt torque specs
Posted by MattP on March 17, 2003, 2:45 pm

There are 3 sizes of bolts that hold the T500 engine cases together: 6mm, 8mm, and 10mm. The T500-II shop manual only lists torque specs for the 6mm (7 ft-lbs) and 8mm (14 ft-lbs), but for some reason doesn't give any torques for the 10 mm bolts that go all around the crankshaft chamber (from beneath). The Chilton's and Clymer manuals, however, give general torque specs for 10mm bolts (25 ft-lbs). Just in case anyone was wondering.

Re: T500 crankcase bolt torque specs
Posted by rngdng on March 17, 2003, 3:43 pm, in reply to "T500 crankcase bolt torque specs"

My GT750 manual (Official Suzuki) lists my 10mm case bolts as a maximum of 27.6 ft/lbs, I believe. I set mine on 26 ft/lbs. 25 would be within the range as well.


Cracked Cylinder Head
Posted by Henri on March 23, 2003, 1:13 pm

Dose anyone know why a T-500 would crack a cylinder head. I was turning between 5000 to 6000 RPM in 5th gear when it cracked. I though a spark plug had come out. It seems like I read somewhere that the T-500 would crack a cylinder head, but I can't remember what they said caused it. Any information on this subject would be helpful to prevent this from happing again.
Thanks Henri

Krash Larrivee is the resident expert on the subject...
Posted by MattP on March 23, 2003, 2:53 pm, in reply to "Cracked Cylinder Head"

of cracking cylinder heads. I imagine in most cases the cylinder head will crack because of uneven torqueing of the cylinder bolts, or just because it is old and fatigued and finally gave out in some weakened spot. I don't think it is a common occurrence.

Unfortunately Matt Is Correct.........
Posted by Krash on March 23, 2003, 3:49 pm, in reply to "Krash Larrivee is the resident expert on the subject..."

I have piles of cracked cylinder heads at home. Most of mine cracked due to over-revving under race conditons, and many of them were milled 40 thou., although I have cracked stock ones as well. The head is one of the few weak spots in the T500 motor, but I rarely hear of it happening on a streetbike. Did it crack from one of the inner bolt holes (a small one) and go right to the spark plug hole? That's where all of mine crack, usually the left one. Other racers have had luck milling the top of the cylinders perfectly flat and they say that stops the cracking. I went so far last season as to only run the four main head bolts and at a few pounds under the recommended torque spec (24 ft. lbs. is given for the big ones), on the advice of Les Trotter (T500 racer from England). This worked well as I didn't crack anymore heads, but I did get some weepage at the head gasket eventually. The problem became so annoying that I shelled out the 300 pounds sterling for a set of Crooks Suzuki heads this year. They are a sandcast version of the stockers, but with a machined in squish area that greatly improves mid-range, not to mention being stronger than the originals. 500 bucks might not be your cup of tea for a set of heads, but it definitely cures the problem.
Check your cracked head. Is it really carboned up? This could be increasing the compression so much as to crack the head, and or cause detonation. Is your timing correct? That will do it too. I know you said that the head cracked at 5000-6000 RPM, but it's highly probable that the head started to crack well before you ever noticed it. Been twisting it's tail alot lately? Good luck with it.



crank seal part number ??
Posted by pascal on March 27, 2003, 4:25 pm

can sommeone give me (urgent)the curent suzuki part number of the right crank seal.
its the seal on the clutch side .
the other seals are availlable in the bearing and seal shop buth the seal on the right side with the dimensions 30/62/8 is not a standard seal.
if i got the curent suzuki number i can order them to my suzuki dealer.

Re: crank seal part number ??
Posted by Parksie on March 27, 2003, 6:30 pm, in reply to "crank seal part number ??"

If it's for a T500 the Suzi part number is

Re: crank seal part number ??
Posted by john on March 27, 2003, 6:40 pm, in reply to "crank seal part number ??"

I have a 1970 t500 and just replaced the rt outboard seal. I took the demensions to the local parts house and got one for $10.00 worked just fine. It is available from suzuki at about 2&1/2 times that amount. I was told by a dealer that the inner c/s seal were no longer available.
does anyone know anything different on that subject?
smoking out the rt exhaust pipe. john

Re: crank seal part number ??
Posted by john on March 28, 2003, 12:18 pm, in reply to "Re: crank seal part number ??"

i pulled the clutch side cover, clutch assy., and the drive gear off the crank. there is a internal snap ring to remove and then the seal comes out of the case. i coated the new seal with hard oil and drove it in place. that fixed about 80% of my problem. you may need a new side cover gasket, i made mine. i then filled the unit with 80-90 gear oil. it is quieter and the clutch does not drag. i still have a light smoke out the rt pipe especially under hard accel. damn inner seal i guess. john


'68 T500 Float level setting
Posted by Rob on March 27, 2003, 2:00 am

Does anybody know the correct float level setting for the VM34 Mikuni found on the early T500 (Cobra)?

Re: '68 T500 Float level setting
Posted by captainbellybuster on March 27, 2003, 4:58 am, in reply to "'68 T500 Float level setting"

Hi mate, according to Muz's site, 27mm. is the go. That's with the carbs inverted & the gasket off, from the bowl shoulder to the top of the floats. Cheers, Paul.


GT500 Swing arm
Posted by Roger on March 25, 2003, 11:38 pm

Hi all
Well my disasembly of my bike has got to the end [except for the engine!!] and I am down to final bits of the swing arm.
After the careful application of heat I got the swingarm bolt undone and drove the two pivot spacers [61251-15001] out of the arm... they are absolutely stuffed... the bearing surface all scored - so I will need to track down some new ones :-)

However my first little problem is with the bushings [09307-22002], I have got a pair of new ones which are some sort of fibre compound, while the ones in my swingarm look like brass [or similar] but I cannot get the old ones out of the arm... any suggestions of how???? I tried some heat but no luck so far.


Re: GT500 Swing arm
Posted by X6er on March 26, 2003, 8:00 am, in reply to "GT500 Swing arm"

This was the hardest part of the restoration, trying to remove those damn bushings. I got mine out, but destroyed them in the process. If I remember correctly, I used heat, hammer and vise grips. Once I got a good grip with the vise grips, you would think they would twist right out, but even then it took several hours, and was very frustrating. There must be a better way, and will be watching to see if someone comes up with one. I also used new bushings that were different from the original ones. I bought some from Australia, and they were a fiber like material. They seem to work okay so far, but then I haven't put many miles on the bike. good luck

Ah ha, I had fun with this one too..
Posted by Tad on March 26, 2003, 9:24 am, in reply to "GT500 Swing arm"

on my gt550!, it sounds like someone installed bronze bushings ( modern ) to replace the peices of plastic crap you are going to put in now
Easy way of getting the bushings out is to take a flat head screw drive, place it against the the main middle peice that rests between the pivot arm spacers and hit it with a hammer! this will push the peice down onto the bushins and pop one out.. flip it over and hit it the other way and pop goes the other one !

Not very difficult


Tads right.......
Posted by Gazza on March 26, 2003, 11:22 am, in reply to "Ah ha, I had fun with this one too.."

thats how I do it but with a long shafted punch made from a screwdriver (lol) I find the edge of the punch works better than the flat blade but hell each to his own trusted method. If it works don't change it He is also right about the plastic/fibre/sh*t bushes to replace with. Be careful how you knock them out and visit your local friendly engineering workshop and ask them to copy them on a lathe in phosphur bronze. Or give them the SA and the pivot shaft so they can measure up. Or the lot lol. Sorry for rambling on Good luck!

Bronze bushings are absolutely available for
Posted by Peter E on March 26, 2003, 4:33 pm, in reply to "Noboby makes bronze for the titan?"

the T/GT500 and 250. Can't find a listing for the 185 but some research might reveal that they've the same as the 250. If you can't find em give me a shout and I'll get them for you ([email protected])
I always keep a stock of SAE660 bearing bronze on hand and make my own bushings. Here's a tip for those who have access to a lathe. Take the centre hole in the bronze bushing out to the exact same diametre as the pivot bushings that go inside them and then finish to size with a brake cylinder hone. You can get an awesome fit that way.

Peter E.

Re: Ah ha, I had fun with this one too..
Posted by Roger on March 26, 2003, 6:20 pm, in reply to "Ah ha, I had fun with this one too.."

Thanks Tad... But I thought that you could do anything with the wonder plastic!!... Yes I would be happier with bronze.
As for your technique... I tried being reasonably gentle with a cold chisel [if that is not a contradiction in terms] and succeeded only in carving a bit off the collar of the bushing... that was how I knew it was bronze!!

Perrhaps I just need to be more agressive? "If at first you don't succeed - get a bigger hammer"



Just some notes from this board on Swarbrick pipes
Posted by Cappy on March 29, 2003, 9:16 am, in reply to "Swarbrick chambers"

Re: Swarbrick pipes oops!
Posted by Frank on July 28, 2002, 5:10 am , in reply to "Swarbrick pipes oops! "
These pipes are superb - but are incredibly easy to ruin. You can't take enough time and patience to get them right. You must tack them up as Todd said. There is no other way to get them absolutely right. Next, they must be TIG, not MIG or bronze welded. If there is an old time tin smith/panel beater in your area then he can gas weld them but you need to see him to do a demonstration first. The thinner the weld the better the pipes resonate and the more power they make. Don't let anyone weld them who is watching the clock and just wants to get on to the next job. Remember that they need rubber mounting at the rear and spring mounting at the front. The rubber bushes should not be crushed but merely lightly compressed. Use Loctite stud fix, not normal grade Locite, on a nylock nut for safety. Don't use the same nut twice. If you know an extremely skilled panel beater, you can have him knock flats in the pipes without reducing their performance. To get the ground clearance on my race bike, our local hammer genius simply, and that's the understatement of the year, knocked flats on the underside of the exhaust with a planishing hammer. Five minutes on either side and there was a ruler flat panel laid into the pipe - just by hitting it. And don't try that one at home. No matter how much time, effort and money you spend getting them welded and set up it will be worth the effort. Rush the job, or try to do it on the cheap, the pipes won't work and you will hate them. Regarding porting, get Eric to do you a set of Proddie racing barrels and use the early Mk1 carbs and you will have a genuine 130mph road bike which will run with any classic bike of any size or make.


Posted by keith on March 31, 2003, 12:00 pm

I tried to install the newtronics ignition on my 71' t500 suzuki this weekend and found that the adjustment plates dont exactly line up with the holes that are in my Stator. I tried to enlarge the slots on the adjustment plates to get the optic pickups 180degrees apart and found that I had run out of room with the adjustment plates.
Does anyone have any first hand experiance with this system?
I just spoke with Shaun from Newtronics in England and he was not aware of this problem.

cheers keith.

Yes, I had the same problem.........
Posted by Cappy on March 31, 2003, 5:44 pm, in reply to "HELP WITH NEWTRONICS IGNITION"

with mine. I just took a small rat tail file and enlarged the holes. I also made slots to get the right adjustment. I also had a problem with the hub that holds the optic wheel on. I had to shorten mine by about .125 inch on a lathe. Other than hooking the coils in reverse the system is great. I would just alter your plates by carefully opening up with a file.
Hope this helps,


Re: Yes, I had the same problem.........
Posted by ROBERT C. on April 1, 2003, 2:21 pm, in reply to "Yes, I had the same problem........."


Re: ..shorten ..reverse.. ah !!
Posted by Andy on April 2, 2003, 3:03 pm, in reply to "Re: ..shorten ..reverse.. ah !!"

Yep I had that on my GT250L.One of the lamps was not being covered so I just filed it down a bit until the lamp could in more to get covered.Took 10mins to figure and and 1min to cure.Good Luck.


T500 intake.....Long or short......which is best ?
Posted by murray on March 31, 2003, 11:30 am

Does anyone know what the advantage is of the much longer carburetor intake tracts on the later T500s ?

Re: T500 intake.....Long or short......which is best ?
Posted by Spen on March 31, 2003, 11:35 am, in reply to "T500 intake.....Long or short......which is best ?"

A longer inlet tract will give better low down response...........

Re: T500 intake.....Long or short......which is best ?
Posted by H2RICK on March 31, 2003, 1:19 pm, in reply to "Re: T500 intake.....Long or short......which is best ?"

I think Spen means "more torque". This is a favourite trick of engine designers, especially "diesel" engines. Response times to throttle changes are compromised slightly but for street use this is not usually a noticeable problem. You can get a rough idea of any engine's performance orientation by looking at the length of the intake tracts e.g. Big K stroker intakes vs. Suzi stroker intakes.
The H1 500 Kwak triple (very short intakes) is a more "abrupt" responding bike than the GT550 Suzi
triple (quite long intakes) BUT the H1 has ZERO torque until about 5000-6000 RPM whereas the GT550 will pull like a tractor from about 2500-3000 RPM.

Re: T500 intake.....Long or short......which is best ?
Posted by Spen on March 31, 2003, 2:53 pm, in reply to "Re: T500 intake.....Long or short......which is best ?"

An old trick with our pre 65 trials bikes is to extend the inlet tracts, this gives better low down pull.
My Suzuki race bikes have shortened inlet tracts to get the fuel in quicker and make the little things go-o-o-o-o...........

Detuned T500s

Posted by Muzza on March 31, 2003, 8:56 pm, in reply to "T500 intake.....Long or short......which is best ?"

The T500K and later models had longer intakes which served to detune them. The cynical view is that this was done by Suzuki to make the GT triples look a little less pathetic. The old twin was dropped from 47bhp to 44bhp to give the more complex, heavier and expensive GT550 look better. The 550 after all was rated at 50bhp and you couldn't have an old twin being competitive could you?
The longer inlet tract was matched to a restricted inlet port which gave the T500 a little bit more low end grunt but only at the cost of higher fuel consumption and a drop in horsepower.

When racing the T500, always fit the shorter inlets.

Re: original question...
Posted by captainbellybuster on April 1, 2003, 7:59 am, in reply to "Re: Detuned T500s"

I have the longer intakes on my '71 T500. Basically it's easier to fit them & make my own rubber fitments than pay a fortune (A$54 each) for the short ones. I ride 2 up alot & mine pulls really hard from 3500 rpm, as opposed to 4500 with the shorter intakes. I've noticed no compromise in the top end (5-7000 rpm) it goes hard. Basically as we say here, "go with what ya got!" Cheers, Paul


Posted by BARRY on April 4, 2003, 7:28 pm

and I am trying to set the timing on my GT750, I have the Clymer manual on cd and I printed out the part about timing the motor and it says connect a meter across the points. It beeps open or closed, what do I need to do, disconnect the wire to the points, clip on one side of the points and the other side to the case or the other side of the points or what? Even the '73 TS 185 I bought new and the KTM 300 that I race don't have points and I have no experience setting them. I guess the next thing I'm gonna get is a Newtronic Ignition and not have to mess with this again.

Posted by todd on April 4, 2003, 7:51 pm, in reply to "I HATE POINTS, I'VE NEVER HAD A BIKE WITH THEM"

Connect one side of your continuity tester to the nut that holds the wire to the points assembly. Connect the other side of the tester to a point on the bike that is grounded (engine case works fine). While the points are closed, you should get a signal that there is continuity in the side of the ignition.
As you are rotating the crank, the points should just begin to come apart and the the light should go off (showing a break in continuity). This is the moment that the sparkplug will fire, and the point where you want to line up the timing marks.

Does this make sense?

For more explanation, have a look at the link below for instructions on setting the timing on a GT750

"Regarding the timing setting issue; I studied the chapter on setting the timing in the "Suzuki Service Guide Model GT750" and the correct setting is specified as 24 degrees BTDC plus minus 2 degrees. There is a table showing the piston distance in millimetres corresponding to 22,23,24,25,26 degrees respectively for the two cases center or R/L cylinders. This should mean that the factory suggests there can be a plus/minus 2 degree tolerance in the setting before timing is considered as needing adjustment. This span corresponds to about 1 millimetre in piston advance tolerance (roughly one full turn of the dial gauge, see table below). My point is that the engine is not likely to burn pistons if you end up 0.1mm off the 24 degree setting but from practical tests I can testify getting a dial gauge is a good idea. It also looks important that when turning the crank to check for when the breaker open, that the crank be turned forward by turning from the right side of the crank or by using the kick starter, not by turning the timing shaft, due to a small slack in the coupling between crank and shaft. The difference between these two ways of turning the crank seems to correspond to about 0.2 mm difference in result on the dial gauge."
>Due to the angle of the R and L spark plug holes the measured distance is higher for these, as can be seen from the table. 24 degrees is the ideal crank timing advance to aim for when setting the timing. The mechanical imperfectness in the breaker contacts seem to add at least a 0.1mm jitter in the position where the plugs will fire when running. The precision will vary with the condition of the points."

Posted by barry on April 4, 2003, 9:29 pm, in reply to "Re: I HATE POINTS, I'VE NEVER HAD A BIKE WITH THEM"

the plug is firing when the points are open? I thought it fired when closed. Maybe I should lay off the silver bullets

Posted by rngdng on April 5, 2003, 2:45 am, in reply to "Re: I HATE POINTS, I'VE NEVER HAD A BIKE WITH THEM"

Yes, they fire just when they open. When closed the coils charge up; they open and the coils discharge.

Posted by Jerry on April 4, 2003, 8:50 pm, in reply to "Re: I HATE POINTS, I'VE NEVER HAD A BIKE WITH THEM"

Reminds me of a biker buddy from the 70's. He had a 750 Kawi triple with velocity stacks, flip up license plate, the whole nine yards. Asked him if he'd help me tune my T500 (same one I'm ridin' now). First thing he needed was a six pack and a bag of ... When he was READY we set the point gap FIRST, then he pulled the celophane wrapper off his marlboro's and stuck it between the closed points. Rotated the engine with a wrench until the timing marks lined up, then rotated the points PLATE untill the Marlboro wrapper slipped out. it ran like a top, had to stay in third gear to keep up with that Kawi though!

Re: Why not use a strobe?
Posted by captainbellybuster on April 5, 2003, 5:52 am, in reply to "Re: I HATE POINTS, I'VE NEVER HAD A BIKE WITH THEM"

Hi mate, I always use a timing light on my 500 & will use it on the GT550 when its up & running. The 500 runs perfectly timed this way & so did my old GT750. Cheers, Paul.

The hard part for me is actually the points gap...
Posted by MattP on April 5, 2003, 11:56 am, in reply to "Re: Why not use a strobe?"

The points gap when fully opened is a very important specification... too small and arcing can occur, too large and the final voltage decreases. Either one effects the hottness of the final spark at the plug. When I set mine it is really dificult for me to decide if I have the gap right. The 0.014 inch feeler gague should 'drag' a little I hear... but that is a qualitative 'feeling' and I can't ever feel satisfied about it. Also I have been told that you cannot trust the timing marks on the rotor - they are only an approximation. I am setting my timing with a dial indicator (the engine is on the coffee table, not in the frame) and preliminarily it looks like when the timing is actually set at 3.4 mmm BTDC the timing marks DO NOT line up!!
You can determine the exact point at which the points first open (and the spark fires)by measuring the resistance across the points - one lead attached to the moving point assembly (spring, wire, or wherever works) and the other grounded to the stator body somewhere.

Posted by sfulwood on April 5, 2003, 11:30 am, in reply to "I HATE POINTS, I'VE NEVER HAD A BIKE WITH THEM"

Newtronics may very well be the way to go, but don't give up on the points out of frustration.
As mechanically declined as I am I am finding that I can adjust the points on my twin just fine. It took some doing for me to understand just what was occuring, but once it "clicked" everything became clear and my bike is running strong.

Just another little victory I've enjoyed while working on the bike.

Posted by Barry on April 5, 2003, 7:28 pm, in reply to "Re: I HATE POINTS, I'VE NEVER HAD A BIKE WITH THEM"

Thanks for the input, the biggest trouble I was having was with a Fluke multimeter that was a piece of *&%$, I finally got it right after I found out it fires when the points open, I didn't know that. Runs lots smoother now, was so rough the mirrors shook bad at idle, thanks. Supposed to be a sunny 75 degrees tomorrow, good day for a ride.


captainbellybuster- your engine mods
Posted by bikerbrom on April 9, 2003, 7:37 am

Hi Captain;
a while ago you said you use '71 T500 barrels with the later model's long intake manifolds, with no real top end power loss & better bottom end. I like the idea of 'the best of both worlds'.
Do you use the '71 airfilter and 'carbs with this setup, or later model 'carbs and airfilter? Did you have to fiddle with the jetting?

Re: captainbellybuster- your engine mods
Posted by captainbellybuster on April 9, 2003, 4:55 pm, in reply to "captainbellybuster- your engine mods"

Hi mate, I use an original airbox with a GT air boot. I think I may have had to cut it down a little. I have a slight jetting problem, with the idle jets. When the engine gets very hot, it is leaning out a little. Whether this is due to the extra ditance the fuel has to travel, I am not sure, maybe it's evaporating?!?!? I turned the idle jets in to 3/4 turn. It runs a little rich when cold, but fine when it warms up. The reason I did it was Suzuki wanted $54 for each intake. I had the aluminium ones on hand & cut my rubbers from a 302 Ford radiator hose! Cut my own gasklets for the boot to barrels & job done for $12!! ( I have plenty of spare rubber to renew my intakes as well !!) The other reason was that I was running pod filters. They were a jetting nightmare!!! I now run standard jetting & will try 1 size up on the idle jets, so they can be set at their 1&1/2 turns as recomended. I'll see if I can find a pic of the setup & post it on my photo site. Cheers, Paul.

Re: captainbellybuster- your engine mods
Posted by Phil C on April 9, 2003, 5:12 pm, in reply to "Re: captainbellybuster- your engine mods"

Scuse my ignorance on this one but how do you maintain a smooth stepless inner diameter in the inlet hose if you use ordinary radiator hose. I apppreciate that the outer would fit OK but what about the gasflow when the fuel hits the edge of the inlet stub on its way into the engine?

Phil C

Re: captainbellybuster- your engine mods
Posted by captainbellybuster on April 9, 2003, 9:47 pm, in reply to "Re: captainbellybuster- your engine mods"

Hi mate, the carbs butt right up to the inlets (same diameter). Havn't noticed any problems so far with flow. Cheers, Paul.


T500K Newbie questions
Posted by Chris B on April 9, 2003, 7:45 pm

I'm the proud new owner of 73 T500 and read in Muzza page that the engine numbers and frame numbers were supposed to match. Well, mine don't-- my frame is 65xxx and my engine 64xxx. If it was a replacement engine wouldn't it be a later number? Plus, absolutely zero evidence that the engine has ever been out of the bike (until now!!) Can anyone confirm their experience please?

2. My color seems to be rare-it is the Candy Lavenadr I think. Again no evidence of a respray. I have seen a sales brochure with this color but H2Ricks' paint list does not inlude this color for the 73 K. Thoughts?

Chris B

Re: T500K Newbie questions
Posted by X6er on April 9, 2003, 9:52 pm, in reply to "T500K Newbie questions"

Hi Newbie
I have a 67 X6, a 73 T500K and a 75 T500M, and none of the engine/frame #'s match. Don't think it was a priority with Suzuki like it might have been with some manufacturers, for example, my 66 Yamaha YL1 Twinjet had matching #'s. I'll bet your bike is original, and even't if not, no big deal. Good riding.

No probs on the engine number vs frame number thing.
Posted by H2RICK on April 10, 2003, 12:10 am, in reply to "Re: T500K Newbie questions"

That practice was discontinued about midway through the 69 model year if memory serves.
As to the paint thing: the T500K had 2 colours - 715 Candy Wine Red and and 279 Coronado Blue. California Burgundy (or Candy Lavender) 216 was an "R"
model colour. Ya gotta be careful with these Japanese-to-English colour name translations and trying to match 'em to the colour itself. Sometimes the translations are not exactly....well...exact.
I can appreciate that you took the time to go to Muzza's site and actually read some/all of the stuff there. That shows that you're smarter than some people that try to fix an old bike. Welcome to the board and enjoy your new ride.

Matching numbers
Posted by Foxkilo on April 10, 2003, 4:09 am, in reply to "No probs on the engine number vs frame number thing."

With Suzuki you can't be shure of anything. With some models they had matching numbers and with others not even after '69. My t350 J (72) has matching ones.


Cobra - Titan
Posted by Paul on April 10, 2003, 11:18 am

What are the differnces in a Titan and a Cobra?

Re: Cobra - Titan
Posted by X6er on April 10, 2003, 5:44 pm, in reply to "Cobra - Titan"

A Titan is a big guy in mythology, and a Cobra is a deadly snake in India. Now if you are talking Suzuki's, I am about to show my ignorance because I am too lazy to look up the facts, which I have right next to me. The original 500cc Suzuki twin was called the 500/5 in the U.S., and I believe Cobra in the U.K.. The 500/5 became the T500 Titan in the U.S., and the T500 ? in U.K. I have heard the early bikes in the U.S. also called Cobra's, but don't know if that is correct. Since I just bought my first T500 late last year I am a little light on the details. If only you had asked something about the Hustler! Anyway, the T500 fanatics will have your answer.

Re: Cobra - Titan
Posted by jp11 on April 10, 2003, 5:49 pm, in reply to "Re: Cobra - Titan"

I think the UK importers had to drop the Titan name because it was registered with UK dealer who supplied race/customising parts.

Re: Cobra - Titan
Posted by Rob on April 10, 2003, 6:10 pm, in reply to "Cobra - Titan"

I'm here in the U.S and this is how I understand this whole Cobra-Titan thing. I grew up with lightweight Suzuki's in the late 60's and early 70's and one of the bikes the younger kids like myself were in awe of was the Suzuki Titan. It was always the "Titan" or the T-500. I went on to own a number of other British and Jap bikes during the 70's but did'nt actually own a Titan until about 1982; a '68 model. I did'nt just own the bike, I restored it way back then. I sold it of course. The bikes were still known to me and everybody that I associated with as "Titans" or T-500's. The older Jap bikes began to surge in popularity in the 90's and I wanted a Titan again and eventually located a beat '68 model to restore which I did. It's really getting tough to find some parts for the early model and it took four years to find every last piece. I learned that now in the 90's, the Suzuki enthusiasts were calling the early chrome tank T-500's the "Cobra". I believe that because the first model of the T-500 had a "funky" monicker attached to the U.S. model (500/5) that did'nt catch on and was quickly replaced by the popular Titan name that the enthusiasts adopted the Cobra name from the same bike marketed in Britain and Australia. As I understand it, the first three model years (T-500, T-500II, T-500III) were all called the Cobra in those markets. I own a'68 T-500 and a '70 T-500III and they're both "Titans" to me. I never heard "Cobra" attached to the U.S. bikes until the 90's and I have been a real enthusiast since the early Titan days. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.

Same Thing Only Different ;)
Posted by Jug on April 10, 2003, 6:40 pm, in reply to "Re: Cobra - Titan"

The Cobra Models used the Gas Tanks with the Chrome panels with the Rubber Knee pads and the Diamond pleated seats.The Cobras also used a different piston with a a Port window that was closed at the bottom.The 69 Titan models used some of the same parts like the rear fender but they ditched the Diamond pleated seat for the the straight pleated type seat.The Titan also uses the open type port window in the piston.I beleive that there was a difference in the frames too.the 69 and 70 models were basically the same only the 70 model had a different paint and decal scheme and a toaster rack on the tank.I have a 69 model that had the original Mesa Orange but is getting a non standard original Suzuki Genuine Silver and red stripe paint scheme.The original paint was too far gone to have copied.The whole bike was too far gone to have any hope at returning to it's original condition so I have installed a GT 550 front end with clip onsand 34mm Dellorto Carbs and 2 into 1 Strader expansion chamber.I hope to get it going by the end of this summer but I can't get away from work long enough to get anything done.

Re: Same Thing Only Different ;)
Posted by Muzza on April 10, 2003, 9:40 pm, in reply to "Same Thing Only Different ;)"

The Cobra and Titan models are covered in detail on the 500 Suzi website.....the differences are spelt out in a number of places...there are heaps of pictures and writ-ups on these bikes.


Maharishi Fattifatbastard’s Guide to Zen
Posted by Maharishi Fattifatbastard on April 11, 2003, 12:17 am

Thought I would share this ...... don't ask me why..........
Maharishi Fattifatbastard’s Guide to Zen

Do not walk behind me, for I may not lead. Do not walk ahead of me, for I may not follow. Do not walk beside me either, just [email protected]&k off and leave me alone.

The journey of a thousand miles begins with a broken fan belt and a flat tyre.

The darkest hours come just before the dawn. So if you're going to steal your neighbour's milk and newspaper, that's the time to do it.

Sex is like air. It only becomes really important when you aren't getting any.

Don't aspire to become irreplaceable. If you can't be replaced, you can't be promoted.

Remember, no-one is listening until you fart.

Never forget that you are unique, like everyone else.

Never test the depth of the water with both feet.

If you think nobody cares whether you're dead or alive, try missing a couple of mortgage payments

If at first you don't succeed, avoid skydiving.

Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish, and he will sit in a boat and drink beer all day.

Have you ever lent someone $20 and never seen that person again? It was probably worth it.

If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.

Some days we are the flies; some days we are the windscreen.

Good judgment comes from experience, experience comes from bad judgment.

The quickest way to double your money is to fold it in half and put it back in your pocket.

A closed mouth gathers no feet.

There are two theories about how to win an argument with a woman. Neither one works.

Generally speaking, you aren't learning much if your lips are moving.

Never miss a good chance to shut up.

Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.

When we are born we are naked, wet, hungry, and we get smacked on our arse. From there on in, life gets worse

The most wasted day of all is one in which we have not laughed.

Remember not to forget that which you do not need to know.

New designed squish heads are availlable
Posted by pascal (belgium) on April 11, 2003, 6:39 am

like i tell before i design ne squis heads for the t500.
i tested the heads on my bike on the dyno and the results are perfect.
you have a profit of 2 hp and 14 nm off torque on 8000rpm.with standard 98 oct feul.
the ignition advance is 22°
the nock problem on high rpm and full ignition advance is complete solved.
it are metal inserts for the orriginal heads.
you have to fraise the heads out on the milling machine to put the inserts in.
the benefit off this heads is .
they never can break.
comparition with the old squis heads on my bike.
suzuki t 500
porting inlett 170°
outlett 200°
carbs mikuni vm 34 mm sprinkler 220
swarbrick pipes
ignition digital hpi
oil elf 2-stroke full synthetic pre mix 1/20

old squis head results. (24 cm³)
power 63hp (900 rpm) torque 52 nm
pre ignition 24°
max rpm 10500.
spark b10 ngk
power range 7500 - 9000 rpm

new head results. (20.5 cm³)
power 65.5 hp torque 66 nm
preignition 22°
max rpm 8000
spark br8 ngk
power range 4400 -7500rpm

price for the insert squis heads 240 euro set 426Au


The first Suzuki disc brake....
Posted by captainbellybuster on April 12, 2003, 9:10 am

front end? Kel & I were talking, the historics are coming up at Willowbank Raceway next month. The question arose about the fact that they will not let me race a T500 with a disc brake. I have to have the twin leading shoe. Now for the "but" part. If Suzuki fitted a disc brake to "any" of their models, up to 1972, I could say that I've adapted one from that model to run on the Titan, thus keeping the bike within the "era" that it was built. Fingers crossed they did run a disc at that time on one of their models! Cheers, Paul.

Re: The first Suzuki disc brake....
Posted by Muzza on April 12, 2003, 10:31 am, in reply to "The first Suzuki disc brake...."

I presume you are wanting to run in the pre-72 Post Classic class.
As we run under the same rules nationwide, what is the problem with the guys at Willowbank?
All racing TR500s and T500s in Australia use a front disc brake or even the twin disk brake. Some die-hards of course run the drum. Some genuine TRs run the Ceriani 4 leading shoe.

You can run the Suzi 4 leading shoe drum brake if you have one as it came out in 1972.

As to the disk brake Suzi ran them (and they are identical to the road going disk brakes) in 1972 on their race bikes. There is plenty of evidence of that eg pics at Daytona and elsewhere.

The T500s have run disk brakes since at least 1988 in historic racing in Oz as that is when I put one on the track.

Show them some of the pics from the website. Disk brakes galore.

If they are too thick to cope with that you can run Honda disk brakes...came out in 1968 or Kawasaki Disk Brakes...came out in 1972.

I would like to see where the disc brakes are dis-allowed? have they changed the rules or something?

2003 GCRS
Posted by Muzza on April 12, 2003, 11:15 am, in reply to "Re: The first Suzuki disc brake...."

There is nothing in the GCRs prohibiting disk brakes...
There is plenty of evidence of disk braked 500s racing and I have publications showing Suzis racing with disk brakes in 72.
13.1 AN OVERVIEW The following Rules governing Historic road racing motorcycles are written to facilitate the
organisation of uniform, safe and fair competitions. The express purpose of these Rules is to ensure the motorcycles are in a condition, which is
visually compatible with the period of racing being portrayed. These rules are to be interpreted
so as to ensure that motorcycles are presented in the spirit of the period. The onus of proof of eligibility shall rest wholly upon the rider or entrant of the machine. Service
and Parts Manual publication dates are not proof of eligibility.

13.3.1 Categories For the purposes of determining eligibility machines are categorised as follows:
Period 1 Veteran Up to 31st December 1919.
Period 2 Vintage 1st January 1920 to 31st December 1945.
Period 3 Classic 1st January 1946 to 31st December 1962.
Period 4 Post Classic 1st January 1963 to 31st December 1972.
Period 5 Post Classic 1st January 1973 to 31st December 1980.

13.3.3 Eligibility The eligibility and dating of Historic motorcycles shall be considered in terms of major and minor
components and the period of the motorcycle shall be the period of the latest major component. Major components are:
a) All engine and gearbox external castings;
b) Frames;
c) Swinging arms;
d) Brakes;
e) Forks and fork yokes; and
f) Carburettors. All other components shall be considered as minor components. Major components that were manufactured outside a specific period, but which are visually
indistinguishable from period components shall be eligible for that period. Minor components may be modified or updated provided that they remain visually compatible
with the period being depicted. Components manufactured outside the period are eligible if permitted under these by-laws. All machines, whether standard or modified, must comply with the specifications of the period.

13.4.1 Periods 1 and 2 At least one efficient braking system and a primary drive guard if so driven;

129 Unless otherwise contained in the machine¡¦s original specifications wheel rim widths must not
exceed WM3.
13.4.3 Period 4 Unless otherwise contained in the machine¡¦s original specifications, wheel rim dimensions of a
minimum of 457mm (18¡¨) diameter, and maximum WM4 width on all wheels. Oval or rectangular number plates. Reed valves and crank case induction on two stroke engines but only if the engine of original
manufacture was so fitted
13.5.3 Period 4 Accessory air assisted front forks. Electronic fuel injection. Power jet carburettors. Mono-shock rear ends. The following machines or their major components:
a) Kawasaki 900Z1.
b) Yamaha TZ.
c) Yamaha RD. Mag wheels ¡V (Cast metal wheels) Rear disc brakes, unless originally factory fitted.
13.5.4 For all periods except period 5: Slick or grooved slick tyres. Shock absorbers with remote or external reservoirs.

13.6.3 Period 4 Mechanical fuel injection. Methanol. Keihin CR Special round slide carburettors up to 33mm bore size.

Why do I bother to even post this stuff !!!! PAY ATTENTION GUYS !!!!
Posted by H2RICK on April 13, 2003, 12:14 am, in reply to "Re: The first Suzuki disc brake...."

The FIRST Suzuki disc brakes were built in August of 1972 when the 1973 models were being built. Any bike built up to the end of December of 1972 should be legal....if dates are all that count. Show the Hitlerite rules enforcers a Buffalo with double discs that was produced in 1972 for the 1973 model year. End of problem.

Re: Why do I bother to even post this stuff !!!! PAY ATTENTION GUYS !!!!
Posted by Muzza on April 13, 2003, 12:41 am, in reply to "Why do I bother to even post this stuff !!!! PAY ATTENTION GUYS !!!!"

Too right buster, that's what I am saying but even more so that the race bikes were out in mar 72 with them and privateers were running other brands before that including Lockhead, Honda, Kwacka, Scarab and so forth.
The track Nazis are being Suzuki-phobes....the big point they need to recognise is that T500s have been running disks for 15 years in the historic class and no-ne has changed the rules out-lawing them because they are legal, so what is their big beef.

Tell them to ask their mates in NSW, Victoria, SA and WA.

Take them to the website and show them the 3,584 Suzi 500s running disks in all forms of historic racing around the world.

Show them the Suzis at Daytona with disks in 72...oh what the heck...send them back to Iraq to enforce the rules. Sorry to mention the war.


Fork seals
Posted by D-bone on April 12, 2003, 10:16 am

I'm looking for fork seals for a 76 gt500,can you help...

Re: fork seals
Posted by Roger on April 12, 2003, 8:52 pm, in reply to "fork seals"

I have just got a set of GT500 fork seals from Parts-n-more [] Part # 27-1007 @ US$8.00 a pair


Another service from Maharishi Fattifatbastard


Back to Suzi index page


  Classicbikes Australia

Muzza - 2002