Suzuki RE5
Anyone ride this bike before?

 

Hello love313

Do you own this bike? Man that's the cleanest I seen!

No, I never rode or seen on of those in person, I wish I did!!

 

A local guy just bought one. In MINT condition. Lucky bastard.

 

I have one, for a mid 70's bike it really rides nice! Not the most powerful but certainly less vibration than anything else out there.

 

Two '76s, two '75s. I have a '75 currently, "converted" to '76 fare with the rare, optional Touring Kit (genuine Suzuki) and my '76 parts bike. The bikes are a blast to ride, though the center of gravity is a bit higher and further forward than other bikes I have owned and ridden (Yamaha 400 Maxim, Yamaha 650, etc.) At ~500cc, they can really scoot if they are tuned properly. They act a lot like a properly running GSL-SE (in principal, not power or torque output). When the power port opens up (kind of akin to the 6ports on an -SE), you can genuinely feel it. They are heavy suckers, though (more so than they appear at first sight, anyways). If you are tired or not paying attention, it's not that hard to loose your balance at very low speeds (goes back to that center of gravity thing). I'll have a bunch more pics of my RE5 up on my site in a month or two if anyone cares to see close-up shots of one.

The Hercules W2000s are much different, with an air cooled Sachs KM-24 or KM-27 (can't remember off hand, may be wrong altogether). I haven't ridden one, just seen a whole bunch of them (including some one-off factory bikes) at Sam's place (Rotary Recycle). Also got to see the only two Van Veen OCR-100s in the country- those are really unique. Built across the pond in the late '70s/early '80s. Custom designed frame built around a CoMotor (Citroen/Wankel/NSU joint venture) engine from the Citroen GS Birotor car. Sam told me those bikes REALLY move, beaten only by the Norton F1 (at least as far as rotary bikes go). There were about 10 rotary motorcycle manufacturers, many of them small start-ups from Eastern Europe and Germany with little to no real prodcution numbers. Very fascinating once you start investigating them... they're like a whole new world and many of them were very space-age considering when they were developed.

Neal.

 

very neat

 

Hey Neal, If you ever decide to sell that re5 you better let me know first. It would fit right in with my bike collection.

 

Max, you've got enough toys, don't you? Besides, once I get the complete '76 wiring harness and gauges in, and new tires (so they match), she'd probably be more than you'd want to pay. Most bikes with relatively low mileage and in good shape (not needing anything) seem to be going for ~$4500. They sell on eBay all the time for $2800-4000, but often are those bikes that have been sitting for a few years and need going through to be safe and truly rideable. Sam told me the Touring Kit only came on around 220 bikes, because the kit cost almost $800 back in '75, and he said the bikes alone cost around $2500, so not too many folks ponied up for the kit, roughly 1/3 the cost of the bike in the first place. She rides pretty well now, but I want the bike as nice as possible, so I think I'm going to have Sam go through my carb this Spring jut so it's perfect- and the tires. They're fine as well, but not matched.

I know a red truck I'd put my bike towards, plus some cash... *hint, hint*. You keeping my parts warm & dry 'til after the Holidays?

Neal.

 

Ya your parts are nice and tidy. I get my cast off my arm in 3 weeks so I'll start crating up your parts. I see the re5's on ebay now and then so I know what they go for. I was just hoping you would give me a smoking deal on it. hahaha

 

...but I'd need to at least break even!

Neal.

 

There are some cool RE-5 videos on You Tube. Nice Bike.

 

I'm working on a pretty clean 76 for a guy right now. The bike has trouble revving up. Those bikes are odd, and i'm not just talking about them being rotary powered. The gauges and tail light look like some sort of seventies disco log. When you turn the key a plexiglass cover flips open to reveal the gauges. Something I've never seen on any other bike.

 

Hello

It be cool to see some pictures of the odd features.

 

I'll try to get some today when I go to my shop.

 

How much smaller are the rotors in that thing? Anyone got a comparison shot?

 

If you're working on an RE5 with a flip up plexi cover and cylindrical taillight, it's a '75. The '76s got standard looking gauges very akin to the GT750 cluster, but slightly different (tach, speedo and warning lights are different, but look similar). The taillights and turn signal lights are different between '75 & '76, as well as the colors offered. '75s had Firemist Orange and Blue, then later Firemist Red. The '76s were almost all black, but blue was offered on early '76s. There are several other differences, but those are the most obvious. I don't own a '75 anymore, or I'd post pics of all the differences. If you're having trouble revving, check that the throttle cable isn't binding up anywhere in the sheathing, and that the carb is tuned properly, If the bike has been sitting for any length of time, you probably need to rebuild the carb.

The rotors look very similar to a Mazda 12A rotor, both in appearance and size. I'll try to get a pic taken today and posted up to my site.


Neal.

 

Here's a few pics I just took comparing a Series II RX-7 12A rotor and a 1975/76 Suzuki RE5 rotor. The RE5 engines were of course a single rotor setup, with a common rating of 500cc, though I know their specific rating is slightly different (I want to say it was 497cc), just can't find my book right off. On the right is the Suzuki RE5 rotor, the Mazda rotor on the left. Very close with the 12A rotor on it's own being rated at 573cc, hence the close sizing between the two. You'll have to excuse the crudeness of taking the pics on the back of my couch with a pillow as the backdrop, but it was the only place I was able to find with sufficient lighting. The pillow acted well as a sharp contrast to help see the detail of the rotors. The Suzuki rotor is coming out a bit fuzzy for two reasons- first, it has some very small pitting and corrosion which reflected the light, and second, I am currently working with an outdated 2.1MP camera, so it doesn't pick up much detail in the first place. Getting a much better camera this month. Sorry I don't have it yet.

Neal.