Cycle News - Archive Issues - 1980's

IDlpression: Suzuki 450GAZ Easytonse antoUlatie By Dorde Woodruff Many riders automatically equate bikes using torque converters to cars similarly equipped. But simplifying the task of operation by use of an automatic transmission comes_ off differently to a rider than it does to a driver. The rider's task is much more complicated to start with. In traffic he/she is busier, not only with managing the m-achine, but with the increased attention one must pay to"the driving scene because of his vulnerability. You can look at the automatic feature as being a loss, of control over gearing, and of acceleration. Or you can look at it as a gain, freeing up the rider for more precise control of the other functions of ,riding. In practice, the way this comes out is that the rider who doesn't feel a need for maximum straightaway acceleration can enjoy a bike like this very much, enjoy its nimble maneuvering in tra££ic without time lost to shifting decisions and executions. A go~ part of a rider's perception of a bike with an automatic transmission as being car-like or not depends on how much motorcycle-like acceleration it does retain. Accelerati.on, as from a red light, is slowed while the torque converter is hooking up, but some time is gained by not having to shift. This equation comes out favorably in the case of the GS450GAZ. The important thing is not that it's less quick than other middleweight bikes, but that it is quicker than cars, even when used as a true automatic rather than a semi-automatic; that is, without routinely using low range. ,In this respect it has an advantage over the Honda 450 automatic which seems to have less low end power, (though everyone agrees it's better since it grew up from a 400). I did use low on the Suzuki on a 1O,000-foot mountain pass to hurry by cars. The lack ef need for low in the usual starting or passing was in spite of riding it at elevations of 4500 feet or more, where an engine loses over 10% of its power. L<;>w is used on steep downhills as it provides some engine braking. The owner's manual, in the cautious manner of suc publications, cautions against shifting down at highway speeds because of the di££erence in engine braking between the two ranges. I didn't find this a problem, though the bike will twitch a little. This twitch when changing ranges at highway speeds, with its sideways component, was the only sideway·s movement I noticed to remind me that it was a shaft drive bike. The throttle does need to be of( when changing ranges or shifting from neutral. With a torque converter the engine always loads the transmission with some torque. Shifting will clunk, although to lessen the' shock, springs and rubber cushioning are provided for the gears; the transmissi.on will complain with resistance and noise jf you try to shift without closin!'{ the throttle. The bike's nimbleness in traffic is aided by the fact that it's light and small, though not dinky. Wheelbase is 55.9 inches, an inch longer than Suzuki's other '82 450s. Its claimed dry weight of 396 pounds is 15 pounds or so more than the others, but the seat height, 29.1 inches, is low and so is the center of gravity. Though the seat gives the impression of being thin, it never became uncomfortable on a 1600-mile tour. True, the longest day on this tour was less than 300 miles, due to weather and short days, but an hour on a saddle is generally enough to make you squirm if that's going to happen. With its shaft drive, the other interesting and unusual feature (on a 450), the bike makes a comfortable, hasslefree, one-up tourer.It's too bad cruising range is on the short side, particularly inconvenient in the west where there isn't a gas station at every crossroads. Reserve came at 2.4 gallons, normally about 120 miles at these high elevations with mileage averaging 50.6 mpg. (An owner I met from Chicago gets 60.) With my worstmileage tankful, trying to maintain 60 mph against a tearing headwind, lI' ..... f J1 reserve came at 88 miles. Rather than the two quarts claimed, I later found that .9 gallon more of the ta'nk's claimed capacity of 3.4 gallons is available after going on reserve; had I time to run out a tankful before going touring, I could have gone farther between gasoline transfusions. Cost-wise the bike comes o££ better than convenience-wise; though it isn't as thrifty on gas as your average 400 or 450, what you lose in fuel costs, you save in chains, chain lube, and sprockets, more or less. Not to mention cleaning costs. For me the Suzuki also saved camping costs. My usual tourer is a bigger, taller, heavier and more top heavy bike which, being but a medium size female person, I can't lift if it goes down. For that reason excursions onto dirt with it are limited, including getting o££ onto a camping spot. Therefore I stay at commercial and public campgrounds more often than I really want to. With this one I could confidently weave through sage or between trees and rocks to the exact spot of my choice for a night'S homeaway-from-home. The Suzuki also has the very endearing quality, to a female rider, of going on the centerstand easily. The Suzuki gives little away to the bigger bike as a tourer other than range. The Yamaha will go 108, clocked, at these elevations - but I rarely tour that fast. It has slightly better straight line stability, with air forks and sti££ aftermarket shocks added - but the Suzuki, stock, is quite stable, especially for a bike of this size. It's impossible without a clock to tell how fast it goes, as it has no tach, but it must be in the high 90's and it just gets more stable with more speed. Like the Honda, a bike which in general functions similarly, the Suzuki has a pod with indicator lights in place of a tach: neutral, and low (L) and high (0) range indicator lights, and those for oil pressure, park'fr! I- liJ:",dj-ii ~ f

• Cover