The hyperwave of overkill has been broken upon our shores for more than a year now. Cylinder overkill (numbers), size overkill (capacity), weight overkill, complexity overkill and certainly pricing overkill. You might be buying more for your money but you’re paying more for the “privilege” of riding.

And one question is constant. Just when is enough, enough? Probably never. As long as people continue to think they can handle the machines of the dream culture “more” will always be associated (not always correctly) with being better.

Among the muscle machines it’s the one ­litre flash bikes which provide the ultimate trips. The prod-based sporting bikes are perhaps the best for all-round riding in Australia. The roads here are still the roughest of the western world and the open spaces beckon the throttle hand and lure the urge for maximum ground speed in a manner which all riders must reckon with.

In the realm of fast riding on unforgiving roads and appalling highways most of us need relatively nimble machines. The giant shaft drives are strictly open plains country tourers, although the converted take them anywhere. For most though, the urge for an all-round bike, one capable of easy city use day-by-day, a fast traffic light session, a chase around the boulevard, a Sunday country backroad trip and the occasional long distance sports cruise, are the critera.

And the territory is now split, for no prince rules where once King Kawasaki brooked no newcomer pretenders whatsoever.

The inevitable emergence of machines to challenge the King brought improvements — frames, suspension, wheels and tyres to match the power and brakes to cope with riders from experts to the not-so-hot. The stakes are high. Rider survival and the all-important bonus of the controlling image of go-for-it muscle bikes.

To answer the challenge Kawasaki brought out the chunky, angular, cafe-oriented Z1-R and has followed that up with the Z1-R Mk 2. But the force of the Kawasaki following had been channelled to more conservative lines. Much of the wailing powerhouse statement that was the Z900 was dissipated by the time the Z1000 arrived. The market was alive to the Suzuki GS1000 and the range of competent megabikes such as the CBX1000 and XS Eleven, a fact forced home on the slow-to­-react Kawasaki company with the advent of the fiery CB900FZ Honda.

Kawasaki had to revamp the favourite. Enter the Z1000 Mk 2.

The image of the Z1-R was not successful in the USA and the small tank made it difficult in Australia. But it sold well. And the look was sufficient and Suzuki, another ultra-conservative company (when compared with Honda and Yamaha) went for a new look in the 1000 range by introducing the European-inspired GS1000S. All at the time Honda was dropping the advanced Europe/Australia-only CB900 on to the scene.

These three sports bikes have enormous potential in all facets of riding; the ability to scamper around town, blow holes in the atmosphere between traffic lights, drop mono wheels at a single surge and yet cruise all day in the open at speeds in excess of the real ton without raising a sweat (or an oil drop).

The three represent the Trad and the Bold, the New and the Old, the Innovative and the Conservative. They are the most natural on the Australian open road.

The latest, the Honda CB900FZ, the road version of the successful RCB long distance road-racers, is unadulterated European slick, with 16 valves, light weight and prod race performance. The bike is not sold in the US, leaving the CBX and the super-sport 750 to do the sales trip.

The GS1000S Suzuki is also European-­oriented and was not originally destined for the US market. Dealers there requested it. Narrow bars, tight suspension and all.

The Z1000 Mk 2 carries the legacy of the original Z900 which changed the face of the superbike stakes around the world, and certainly changed the face of production racing and long distance racing. Although a significantly altered machine from previous big K 1000s, it is still the most traditional of the three and the one with the styling and image to shoulder the general market, including the giant US scene. It’s a tough image for the others to crack. Kawasaki has the name and the numbers. Its engines are regarded as the most rugged of the lot.

In the general comparison of the three we did not consult performance and specification figures. This was a ride and report situation, seat of the pants. The “what bike to buy” decision is hard, for the three are all strong products. All have distinct personalities and in the final rundown brand loyalty and imagery will as often as not determine the money drop.

We’ll just say what we found and what we saw in each of the three one-litre machines.

There is a marked return to the macho look of the early black Z engines on the Mk 2. The finned sidecovers, polished cases and black cylinders and head look the part. The engine is stronger than ever, with thicker cases, a heavier crankshaft, better balance within the engine to lessen primary vibration and a more powerful alternator (now dry, the same as the Z1000ST shaft drive model, which will please many owners who want to run a decent headlight insert and accessory spotlight).

In going for improved performance (the power increase is real) the Mk 2 has 28 mm carbs (up from 26 mm) and a four-into-­two exhaust system which not only looks better and works better, it also sounds better. The airbox is larger and there is a new pointless ignition system. The bike is also helped by shorter gearing (two more teeth at the rear) which gets things moving quicker. It’s the same gearing as the earlier Z-1 model.

The dohc engine has some head work to help things along but is remarkably similar to previous models. Solid, dependable and as tough as a rhino. It is not the smoothest, but all three bikes have mild vibration which whips the mirrors into uselessness on the highway.

One is familiar and used to the Kawasaki feeling. The engine is lumpy and loud and the strongest of the three in the mid-range. With the standard bars, the high US-style ones, the Kawasaki is the best and easiest round-town bike.

The Suzuki GS1000S is next in the town stakes. The engine is similar to the Kawasaki; there is remarkable similarity in the two designs, despite the Suzuki displacing 997 cm3 against the Kawasaki’s 1015 cm3. The Suzuki is lighter and quieter than the older Kawasaki design and while the two engines are virtually identical, the Suzuki feels like a Suzuki and nothing akin to the lumpy, rougher pulsatings of the Kwaka.

The engine is all polished with only a small “Suzuki” logo in black on the sidecase to break the light silver effect. The dohc engine has the smaller 26 mm Mikuni carburettors and also is about the last of the superbikes to retain the simple and effective battery and coil ignition with dual contact breaker points.

The engine is a fraction down on power against the new Mk 2 Kwaka and certainly against the best of the 900 Hondas, but the bike is light and the sheer balance makes up for top end power. The Suzuki engine also produces more torque over a greater range than the other two engines.

Long, superbly finished trumpet pipes run along each side of the “S” model, using a four-into-two system like the Kawasaki. The Suzuki’s pipes are a raunchy part of its overall character.

The gearboxes on both bikes are also similar. The “S” gets a higher first gear with all ratios similar; a 4.77:1 top ratio against the Mk 2’s 4.92:1. The Suzuki produces its maximum power at 8000 rpm as does the Mk 2. The Honda on the other hand, with its long ­stroke engine of 69 mm, against the Suzuki’s 64.8 and the Kawasaki’s 66 mm, revs harder, easier and with more power than the two conventional-valved engines. With aspiration through 16 valves, it punches out around 62 kW (against the Suzuki’s 53 kW and the Mk 2’s 56 kW) at 9000 rpm, 1000 rpm more than either the Kwaka or Suzi. The Kwaka can be revved over the redline, but on the Honda that is a big no-no.

It’s obvious the CB900FZ is the racer of the Honda range. In theory the long stroke should provide more torque and yet on the dyno the 900 has the least amount of the three one-litre bikes. In addition, the curve is a racing one. Little happens until around 4000 rpm — when everything starts to happen.

The engine is the same configuration as all the Japanese megabikes, a four-cylinder dohc with a five-speed gearbox. While the Suzuki and Kawasaki use the 26 mm and 28 mm needle-slide carbs, the Honda has the giant 32 mm constant vacuum Keihins with an accelerator pump (the Kawasaki has a booster pump for hard, sudden hard acceleration) to feed the cylinders.

The Honda has a four-into-two exhaust system similar to that of the CBX and a transistorised ignition (pointless) with mechanical advance mechanism. Coupled with the strongest power-to­-weight. ratio of any bike around, it sports superb ground clearance. Like the CBX, it offers lean angles of 43 degrees!

Internally the 900 gets gear ratios much lower overall than either of the other two machines. First is an off-the-line-with-the­-wheel-in-the-air 13.3:1, with shorter ratios right through to fifth which is 5.28:1 (which sort of gives you the idea that Honda wanted the bike to get moving from the line). This it does, although not especially faster at all revs or in all starts, (such as third and fourth gear roll-ons and the like) than the other two. On the open road, the Honda always feels like it needs another gear.

The three frames are basically full double cradle designs using mild steel. The Kawasaki’s is the oldest but it has been substantially strengthened and braced, which means a more rigid feeling to the bike and surprisingly, better damping of vibration through the frame. Much of the steering head gussetting and bracing on the Mk 2 frame is the same modification that serious owners and riders have made in the past. The Kawasaki and the GS1000 get roller bearings to support the swingarm while the Honda has pressed-in bushes. The Kwaka and the Suzi have ball bearings at the steering head while the Honda gets tapered roller bearings, the best of the lot.

The Honda has the shortest wheelbase at 1515 mm with the Mk 2 next at 1520 mm and the GS1000S a long 1550 mm.

The Kawasaki wins the fast steering stakes award with a steering head angle of 26 degrees and only 87 mm of trail. The CB900 and the GS1000S are similar, the Suzuki having a rake of 27 degrees and 116 mm trail while the Honda has 27.5 degrees rake and 115 mm trail. The wheelbase measurement emphasises the design difference between the Suzuki and Honda. The GS is a long, cruising measurement against the racey Honda’s 1515 mm, with the Kawasaki in between.

Two of the three bikes run “mag” wheels, which are really cast alloy wheels and in fact heavier than alloy rims and spokes. But these are the vogue and we live with them. The Suzuki’s are five-spoke, polished silver with black lining. The rear is an 18 inch, the front a 19 inch. The Kawasaki Mk 2 has seven ­spoke cast wheels, black with silver high­lights, and again 19 inch front and 18 inch rear.

The Honda 900 has the 19 and 18 inch combo also but uses the rugged Honda Comstar style in which the alloy spokes are rivetted to an alloy rim and cast hub. They’re perhaps not so neat in appearance as the others, but have certainly proved extremely tough.

Brakes on all three are triple discs. All work well, the Kawasaki having the best general riding feel, the Suzuki the sharpest when pressed. The Honda has the most lever travel and no adjustment for various-sized hands, which is an annoyance.

In all though these brakes represent the state of the art from Japanese mass-­produced motorcycles. The stopping distances from 100 km/h in dry conditions are extraordinarily similar. Both the GS Suzuki and Honda can stop in 37.7 metres and the Kawasaki in 39.3 metres. These, like all test braking figures, are those attained by expert riders; average riders would be well over the 40-metre mark. The front wheel can be locked up on the Honda more easily than the other two but in all cases the brakes will lock either wheel in panic pressure situations.

The gradual improvement in suspension from Japanese manufacturers during the past couple of years has removed much of the harsh choppiness from the front end over rough Aussie roads, but in return the longer travel and the softer ride is, like the BMWs, one which creates major changes in steering geometry under brakes, often accompanied by substantial nose dive.

Like just about everything, it is a compromise situation: rider wrist comfort at moderate speeds against more accurate steering stability when braking.

The long-running Kwaka has the more conservative suspension, with the same 36 mm diameter fork tubes with improved damping and (would you believe it?) softer-rated springs. Travel is 130 mm. The Honda gets 160 mm travel with a firmer spring rate but it is still far too soft straight off the showroom floor. The S model Suzuki has 145 mm travel and like the rest, one-way fork damping that verges on cushy, but the Suzuki also offers air adjustment. The springs are 25 percent stiffer than the previous standard GS1000 and the recommended air pressure is up to 13 psi.

The toolkit contains a small pressure gauge but actually changing the air pressure on the road or at a garage is no simple chore. In any case the whole air pressure bit is a cop-out. What Norton Roadholder forks had in the early ’60s — two-way full oil­damped forks and strong springs — is the answer to accurate control of the front end on rough roads and under hard braking.

To make the point we measured a 1968 Norton fork spring against the previous Z1000 fork spring and the S&W improvement kit replacement spring. Now, the Kawasaki 1000 is a lot heavier than the 1968 Norton Commando yet the Norton spring was 45 percent stronger than the standard Kawasaki, and still 20 percent heavier than the S&W spring!

However, the Suzuki forks offer the most comfortable all-round use and by upping the pressure the front can be made racing firm, as long as you remember the air is really just proving the fork seals seal and making the air do the job that strong springs and proper oil damping, both ways, would do more efficiently.

The rear suspension has more variation across the three. The Kawasaki suffering with dated units with single rate springs that simply cannot cope with the weight and our roads. A change to better units is the answer for owners.

The Suzuki has dual rated springs with five pre-load adjustments on the two-way oil­damped units, which have four settings for rebound damping. Compression damping is up 10 percent on previous GS models. The Honda has the interesting wide-bodied FVQ dampers, dual rate springs with five pre-load adjustments; and three rebound damping rate settings and two compression damping settings at the top.

The Kawa has 90 mm travel, the Suzuki 103 mm and the Honda 110 mm. The Honda wins in terms of overall use with the Suzuki right there. Perhaps the Honda is better for hard chargers at the firmest settings.

While the ground clearance figures for the three bikes in a static position show both the Mk 2 and S models equal at 165 mm with the Honda 155 mm, the truth of the matter in riding is that the Honda has the best ground clearance of any road bike available. The bike is beautifully designed for riding clearance. The Suzuki is also excellent while the Mk 2 is slightly better than average. Good riders will eventually scrape things on all three bikes but one is nearer the edge to do so on the Honda.

Weight of the three machines demonstrates the modern design of the Honda which sneaks under the GS at 232 kg to 236 kg, while the older Kawasaki is a hefty 248kg. But the Kawasaki engine, while the heaviest, is also the one most likely to run the longest without general maintenance and that is a factor riders must consider.

Bare specification gives little idea of what the bikes are actually like to ride in terms of comfort, riding position and controls. The Mk 2 has the tacho/speedo set-up from before, slightly raised bars and switches from the previous Z1000. All quite okay to use and acceptable. The tank holds 17.5 litres and is wider at the rear where it joins the seat than seems necessary. Seat height is the lowest measurement of the three at 813 mm, but the wide, squared edges make it seem higher in riding at rest. The footpegs are slightly too far forward compared to the other two.

Experience has taught that the Kawasaki does the job on long rides without being super cosy. But on rough roads at speed in standard trim the rider will find himself tired at the end of the trip. There is physical effort required to ride the Mk 2 fast.

The Suzuki has the racing look; more so than the Honda, with its white/blue racing colours and the unusual handlebar fairing, with the two small wings along the base. Instrumentation matches the Z1-R Mk 2 with fuel gauge, oil temperature and clock inside the fairing console. The handlebars suited most riders although the fairing doesn’t offer hand protection, which should be one of its major purposes.

The long Suzuki has a deep, well-formed seat and an excellent riding position. Seat height is 851 mm, but it doesn’t seem that high. The only hassle with the controls is that the light on-off switch and high-low switch are parallel and work in the same way (forwards and back). With thick gloves on it’s too easy to nudge both switches from high to low and from on to off, rushing past an oncoming vehicle in total darkness!

The short Honda looks low and sleek, but to the public eye not as dominating as the big Suzuki. The bars are the expensive forged duralium, with neat switches and excellent “aircraft style” instruments, the same as the CBX. Seat height is a low 815mm, but the slim, severely curved seat looks really bad for long trips.

However, the Honda is one of the easiest bikes to ride for long periods we have come across. With the rearset footpegs, low bars, excellent balance and slim tank, the CB900FZ represents to the rider what it is all about — going fast and hard. The bike is made for fast riders and is super-comfortable for long, fast trips.

During the test period the bikes each clocked up more than 3000 km, often with pillions and gear. The Suzuki easily won the pillion comfort award and it also carries gear more easily due to its sheer size. The fuel consumption varied depending on how each was ridden but the Honda was by far the thirstiest under all conditions.

The Honda can go as low as 8.9 km/l, the Suzuki 11.7 km/l and the Kawasaki Mk 2 11.6 km/l. However under all-round use during the test the average consumption was better than expected:

* Suzuki GSl000S: 20 litre tank will give 250 km (13.1 km/l).

* Kawasaki Mk 2: 17.5 litre tank will give 220 km (12.5 km/l).

* Honda CB900FZ: 20 litre tank will give 200 km (10 km/l).

In one run, the GS covered 790 km in 6.5 hours, including five stops covering an hour and giving a travelling average of around 122 km/h. Taking the hour out the average running speed came close to 140 km/h. This was without real hussle, indicating the enormous high speed cruise potential of the big one-litre machines. And the small fairing definitely helps keep the neck muscles from going away too early. Cruising speed during the run was between 160 and 180 km/h at around 7000 rpm. The only problem was the two black metal rear view mirrors which vibrated themselves into fatigue and fell off the fairing.

Fuel consumption at that rate was down around the 10 km/l mark, but still greatly superior to the Honda and the Kawasaki at those sorts of speeds. And very comfortable throughout, on a par with the Honda and again superior if travelling two-up.

There were numerous starters for the triple one litre comparo. After all, running down the Great Ocean Road is never boring, never tiring and the chance to get it together with the fastest of the current showroom bikes attracted lots of attention.

The regular test riders from Victoria made the grade and with a wide arc through central Victoria we all ended up coming into Lorne down the Colac road in light but steady rain, making things very, very slippery.

The complaints centred around the Honda power and the Kawasaki steering. The latter was overcome easily. It seems Billy The Kid (remember the Guzzi Strada and CBX ride to Sydney) had taken the Z1000 Mk 2 for a week or so and to ensure his lady could touch the ground had dropped the forks 35mm through the yokes. That resulted in a rake of about 25 degrees, virtually no trail and no ground clearance! Early the next morning we located the problem and cured it.

In real rapid riding with the bikes set up correctly it was the pilots which made the difference. General observations gave the GS the best ride/brake combination with easier power to use but the Honda proved a rocket for those capable of mastering the high rev power range and the somewhat variable steering combined with the light front end.

The Kawasaki, with the broadest torque, steady brakes and extra weight, could only be ridden with the rest by two of the five riders. But the Kwaka’s strength is as much in its predictability as any absolute.

In sharp, decreasing radius turns, some with off-cambers and others with fallen stones, where power had to be eased off, even brakes applied hard while heeled over, the Honda proved the easiest to live with, the Suzuki just a tad behind (the long wheel­base giving it a slow wallow), while the Kawasaki tried to heave itself upright under hard front braking. Again, this is pushing harder than we think the great majority of riders go. Hard enough for one brand new GS1000 (privately owned) to finish severely damaged in a ditch after miraculously missing giant boulders while running off the final part of a downhill S-bend series near Port Campbell. No real damage to the rider.

In open country such as the Jerilderie Plains, with wide, flat WFO corners and the usual humps and dips from the semis pushing the bitumen around, the GS occasionally set up a tank-slapper weave reminiscent of the early Kwakas. That is at the 180 km/h figure though, and only when decelerating slightly. Trailing throttles in fast corners do not suit any of these bikes.

Traction on the Suzuki was excellent. The lower-revving Mk 2 is also good and the Honda iffy in the wet — surprising considering that with the long-stroke engine it should have the widest spread of power. It doesn’t. Sure, at 9000 rpm it has The Power but down around 6000 rpm the Mk 2 and GS eat it.

The Honda is quite surely a racer with a powerband that steps things up over 6000 in a rush. The other two have smoother power and torque curves. The big Kawasaki has a tingling feeling which in some quarters is translated as vibration, but obviously these folks have never sat astride an old Triumph or Norton Atlas. The Suzuki blurs the mirrors and the Honda does the same. But damping of secondary vibes has been well managed with the Honda, which includes small torque rods in the handlebars to ensure riders don’t feel anything.

All three bikes operate effectively on the standard Japanese tyres but changing to the new-breed Europeans such as Continentals, Pirellis, Avons and even the US-made Good­years and Dunlops would be advisable for optimum performance.

In terms of standard lighting the three bikes proved only reasonable. The Honda was dreadful until an optional QI insert was fitted at Honda Australia. That should be mandatory. The new GS Suzuki S lacks the depth on high beam which the GS1000 I rode last year demonstrated, so an insert there would be the go, and the Kawasaki could also do with one to be accomplished for night work.

All three bikes need careful setting up for maximum comfort and performance. The Honda needs stronger springs in the forks and heavier oil, perhaps a change of brake pads to stop the long lever travel, an insert headlight and lowered gearing for owners who want the thing to last. All three rev too hard in top gear.

The same applies to the GS which is pulling 5000 rpm at 120 km/h and buzzes at high speed. The softish suspension needs firming up from scratch and there is a harshness in the rear units at speed. Brakes and steering are the easiest of the three to live with, and certainly the GS is the best for two-up riding comfort. A headlight insert, better rear view mirrors and it is a ripper.

The Kawasaki has a bulletproof reputation. It needs rear units, a headlight insert and is ready for long-term use. The rider feels the engine more than the other two and the stepped seat offers an alternative position for the pillion, compared with the Honda and the plush Suzuki.

In terms of performance, the top end with standard gearing showed the second Honda we had (the first was tired and not up to test purposes, raising questions as to the comparative consistency of the FZs) was the fastest at 220 km/h, the Suzuki next at 218 km/h and the Mk 2 no slouch at 210. In highway use the Honda and Suzuki performed best at upper revs but in the mid rev range, such as top gear over­taking moves from 100 to 130 km/h, the Kawasaki always got the jump, with the GS following.

That is around the 6000 rpm mark, so really, apart from the real speed freaks, the bikes are all about the same out on the open road.

Conclusions

The S model Suzuki sells for $3399, the Honda for $3226 and the Kawasaki Mk 2 for $3195.

In hard facts, the GS is the best for regular pillion use, fast touring and excellent all-round handling. The Honda is the one for the real scratcher who can afford the regular and more detailed tuning (more valves) and the cost of parts for the Honda, which is more than the others by a long shot. The Honda is the racer’s one, with no compromise for the city whatsoever.

For those concerned with longevity, with proven ruggedness and with a tougher, more low-key finish, the Kawasaki Mk 2 should be looked at. It is neither racer nor tourer but a rugged piece of iron which will do the job adequately but without the finesse of the others. It offers unique solidity, less maintenance and less costly parts.

In handling, the other two are ahead.

So we left the Great Ocean Road and, like how one rides the road, the choice is yours. Half of our riders went for the Suzuki, a couple for the Honda and one personally preferred the Kawasaki. Each is a distinctive, capable machine.

Two Wheels, January 1980

Suzuki GS1000S: The Ride to Understanding

The constant one-bike-to-another trip that is a matter of course at Two Wheels is essential for comparative values. But our recent switch from Europe’s best sporting superbike –Laverda’s thundering 1000 Jota — for Japan’s top machine, the Suzuki’s GS1000S, ranked as the most telling switch ever. Here’s why.

A rider — any rider — faced with the choice of a Laverda Jota or the Suzuki GS1000S would have to rationalise that the Japanese product is the more practical, and hence most sensible machine, of the two.

The progress to that conclusion is not easy. The quantity and strength of the intangibles are blinding. Logic pales even in the face of bald facts and figures, as nowhere can the Laverda outdo the Japanese speedster, even though there are several areas in which the GS outperforms the Jota.

And if the ageing parent who spluttered over his scotch needed further evidence of where world motorcycling is at while he watched on the Edinburgh Tattoo television coverage the famous Royal Artillery motorcyclists ride out on shiny Suzuki SP370s, then the GSl000S is it.

Not that the point hasn’t been made by Two Wheels before. In last month’s “Muscle Act” round-up of the 1000 cc superbikes, product quality was oft-stressed: Perhaps bikes had peaked within the parameters of cost-efficient mass-production. It’s a right-on point to ponder in back-to-back GS/Jota considerations. The sharply differing philosophies behind Japanese and Italian musclebikes are spelled out here, as are labor-intensive “added character” costs.

One gets the impression Suzuki would never have built a 1000 without the intense competition of other factories, whereas for Laverda 1000 ccs was essential. The Jota is mean and macho, the GS1000S is competent and nice.

Both bikes are bloody fast!

For many riders — this tester included — the Suzuki will seem bland compared with the soul-stirring Jota. The Laverda has so much character it practically redefines the word, but deciding to pay more than a grand extra to get that character (and Jota exclusivity) is quite another matter, particularly when there are other penalties (such as less comfort and little “tourability”) attached to the Italian.

Perhaps it’s a pity the GS is as good as it is? The Laverda’s impeccable high-speed handling can no longer be used to justify the extra bread riders wanting the Bologna-built Jota have to shell out.

Since Two Wheels’ test of the original GS1000 tourer in September 1978, there have been several variants of the model. The H, E and N all incorporate small variations to suit particular sections of the market. Our test bike was a GS1000S, the latest packaging alternative for the 1000 and slanted towards the cafe racer type of bike buyer. The model is aimed directly at Kawasaki’s highly successful Zl-R, recently updated with a Mark 2 version.

Our test GS1000S was top Sydney racer Neil Chivas’ production bike. The model had covered a lot of hard miles and endured the odd slide down the road but still handled and went very well. Small-sized Pirelli Phantoms were fitted front and rear and we were impressed by their grip under all conditions. Unfortunately, they rendered the speedo nine percent optimistic instead of the usual four or five percent. All the speeds and fuel consumptions quoted here have been corrected to true figures.

Suzuki has increased engine power slightly for the S by going to 28 mm Mikuni carbs (up 2 mm). Claimed power is up 6.9 percent to 69.4 kW (93 hp) although our test bike’s rear wheel power was only 4.4 percent up on the top figure for our previous test bike. Dry weight is also up slightly at 238 kg.

Like Kawasaki’s Z1R, the GS1000S is a particularly good-looking mount in the flesh. A bikini fairing housing oil temperature and fuel gauges and an electric clock (eat your hearts out, Laverda owners!) as well as the mandatory speedo/tacho set, has been added to the basic GS1000 and the whole creation is finished in an eye-catching blue and white paint scheme guaranteed to get your average red-blooded American lady hot for a ride.

Judging from the feedback we received during the course of the test, Australian females are no different. The bike evoked comments reminiscent of our much-praised Z1R testbike of a year or so ago.

In spite of its attractive overall appearance (the good looking, but not light, alloy wheels help), the Suzuki can’t match the classic handsomeness of the well­-proportioned Laverda. The bike looks a trifle too fat from some angles. The paintwork is up to the standard of Kawasaki’s ice-blue Z1R.

The fortes of the GS1000S are a repeat of the GS1000’s – excellent frame, steering and handling, superb suspension (complete with air forks) and a fairly low weight in Japanese terms for its engine size. Comfort is the one area where the Suzuki really socks it to the Laverda and while the GS ranks up with the best of them on tour, the Laverda extracts much too high a price for its racer­-stiff suspension, particularly on Australian roads.

The Z1-R too, is quite unable to approach the sweet Suzuki’s bum-pampering ride. The GS is also extremely easy to ride (thanks to its fine steering), very forgiving when a rider gets out of his depth and will appeal to all big bike buyers except those insisting on shaft-drive.

Self cancelling blinkers and a halogen headlight (at last) are fitted on the GS1000S, but in most other areas it is identical to its touring counterpart. Smaller, flat handlebars are used on the sportster and we found these very comfortable for all types of riding. They’re just about perfect.

The Suzuki’s powerplant is a mildly tweaked version of the familiar GS1000 four, which in turn was basically a bigger GS750. Both engines have proved ultra-reliable; even though they haven’t been on the market as long as Kawasaki’s venerable big four, buyers can expect durability of a similar standard.

Running an oversquare bore/stroke of 70 x 64.8 mm, the powerplant displaces 997 cm3 and runs a compression ratio of 9.2:1. Like the GS750 and Z1000, the bottom end is all roller and gear primary drive is used. Carburetion is through 4 x 28 mm Mikunis, like the Z1R. They’re the old slide type without accelerator pumps although these are to be changed later this year. The engine exhausts into four headers leading to two well-tucked-in silencers which do a good job of making the engine note agreeable without robbing too much power.

Laverda could take a lesson here. The Jota pipes are just too damn rorty. Ignition is by battery/coil (agricultural?) triggered by breaker points, and lubrication is wet sump. The double overhead cams driven by an automatically­tensioned roller chain operate two valves per cylinder.

So much is the engine your “average Japanese four” it’s even a bit dated (no CDI and only two valves per pot) but it is a handsome mill as Suzuki’s casting is first class and the deep finning has an attractive shape. Mid­range performance is punchy and this, combined with moderate weight, makes the bike satisfyingly responsive in everyday riding. In short, we think the powerplant is well-suited for the bike.

Starting the GS was always easy (only electric start is available) and the engine only needed a brief warm-up with the choke on. Its running under these conditions was a trifle rough, as have been all recent Suzuki four-strokes, but once the choke was turned off the engine behaved impeccably.

While the GS is not as vibrationless as Yamaha’s XS1100, with its rubber-­mounted engine, we found our test bike very smooth, particularly in the 3000-6000 rpm range where one spends most of the time when touring. We thought the S smoother than both our previous GS1000 test bike and Kawasaki’s Z1000 Mk 2. In practice, what vibes there are never intrude on rider comfort.

Surprisingly, we achieved better fuel economy with the newer, hotter engine than from the tourer. Our best touring figure was an excellent 17.2 km/l (48.9 mpg), city riding returned 14.3 km/l (40.6 mpg) and hard riding 12.1 km/l (34.4 mpg), which isn’t at all bad when one considers the performance available.

The bike was overfilled with oil when we picked it up and was still overfull when it was returned although a small quantity of oil did dribble across the top cylinder head fin as a consequence of fast country runs. At no time was there any sign of overheating.

We hadn’t expected the S to be any faster at the Castlereagh drag strip than the GS1000, because even though its power was slightly up, so was its weight. But it was, by 0.1 secs over the 400 metres, and for that we think Suzuki can thank the Pirelli tyres on the test bike. The tyres helped in two ways. One, they gripped well and the GS came off the line very quickly indeed and, two, (probably more importantly) they were small-section tyres and lowered the gearing of the bike slightly. Even a very small change in gearing will pay dividends at the strip.

The S ran a best standing 400 metre time of 11.7 secs at 181 km/h and only the CBX has been down Castlereagh quicker (11.6 secs). The bike was dead easy to ride and times were consistent after a few “feeling out” passes. Unlike last year’s test GS1000, which went on record as having the first clutch we’ve ever wrecked at Castlereagh, we had absolutely no trouble with the S clutch. Its behaviour was perfect.

Although all our strip runs were wheelspin starts with the front wheel well and truly on the deck all the time, slightly less hard street starts would see the front wheel lift a few inches and be carried there for a spell, usually through first gear. Again the bike was perfectly controllable at all times. Maximum speed, the engine spinning into the red because of the lower gearing, turned out to be a true 223 km/h with the speedo showing nearly 240 km/h.

The dyno run was uneventful save for an extra cooling-off period for the tyres part-way through the run. Surprisingly, the bigger ­bore carbs not only bolstered the top end, they considerably improved mid-range power as well. The S, while no better than the GS1000 at 2000 rpm, records a power hike at every engine speed above 2000 rpm. Peak power is up 2.7 kW to a very healthy 57.1 kW (up near XS1100 figures, although the Yamaha is disadvantaged by shaft-drive power losses) at 8500 rpm. Peak torque is now 69.2 Nm at 7000 rpm compared with 61.7 Nm at 8000 rpm for the old model. The chart shows clearly the excellent torque spread of the S engine; in everyday riding the engine is very responsive from 3000 rpm upwards.

The collectors in front of the mufflers were already straw-coloured when we picked up the bike (Chivas is no slouch) and there was no more discoloration during the dyno run. The fairing and close proximity of the master cylinder, short handlebars and instruments made tying the front of the bike down difficult, but that’s hardly a criticism most buyers would be concerned about. All in all, it’s a most satisfactory engine, albeit without the brilliance of Honda’s new 16-valve 750 for example.

The S uses a perfectly conventional clutch and gearbox — ie wet, multiplate and constant-mesh five-speed respectively. Both worked very well on our test bike and we are quite unable to complain about any aspect of their operation. They were excellent. The clutch was memorable in that it would allow well-controlled slipping when needed yet still bite home hard when the lever was dumped.

Drivetrain freeplay — when the chain was properly adjusted — was less than on most superbikes. The internal gearbox ratios are well chosen and when the standard-sized tyres are fitted the overall gearing is ideal. As our test bike came, it was a trifle low­geared.

False neutrals? What are they?

The entire engine/transmission unit was always a pleasure to use and, when combined with the bike’s sweet road manners, even the most routine, mundane rides become highly enjoyable.

Suzuki’s sophisticated suspension, fine steering and top-class handling have done for Japanese bikes what Holden’s Radial Tuned Suspension did for Australian cars — that is, it forced competitor companies to pull their socks up. But even though Suzuki’s rivals have almost stretched their socks over their knees, we have not yet come across another bike able to provide the GS1000S’ mix of steering, handling and comfort.

The bike’s low weight, air forks, stiff frame and especially the sharp steering (which allows new riders to feel completely at home and in full command after only a minute or two in the saddle) give the S an all-round capability other bikes just haven’t yet matched. One has to ride the big Suzuki to appreciate what other bike owners miss out on; in turn it is difficult for them to imagine how much better the Suzuki really is.

On all types of roads, at all speeds, one or two up, the S is simply superior. It is fast, forgiving, comfortable and secure and to us that places the GS significantly above any of its rivals, nice bikes though they may be.

It also pooh-poohs once and for all that favourite bogey of Italian bike owners — that one must have hard suspension to achieve top handling. Watch a Duke or Laverda chattering and skipping on a bumpy corner and then put the GS through the same corner, 20 km/h faster, and see if you can even notice the bumps. The bike is so good it is downright embarrassing.

Ground clearance on the GS is good and comfort, one or two up, is excellent. Being one of those poor unfortunates afflicted by A.G.F.L.I.T.C. (a girlfriend living in the country), I make a lot of trips along the same country roads, which is handy for comparing test bikes.

My visit GS1000S-mounted was the most enjoyable trip I’ve ever made and I arrived particularly fresh and relaxed (that’s handy – Ed.) despite the high outside temperature and bug-laden air. My other favourites on this trip are the GS1000 tourer, GS850 shaftie, Z1300 Kawasaki six — a very nice tourer — and the CB750KZ Honda.

The GS takes any manoeuvres the rider cares to carry out in its stride; braking and changing lines mid-corner are accepted with not even a hint of protest. Flicking the bike about in S-bends is less tiring than on most Japanese one-litre machines and the handling of the bike in every way is exemplary.

We were curious to see whether the added weight of the fairing and extra instruments around the steering head had any adverse effect on the steering (it would have been a pity if the fine steering was blunted by the extra weight) and were pleasantly surprised to find very little. The steering is a shade heavier at parking speeds (it’s still light) but it feels identical to the GS1000 tourer once under way properly. All in all, ten out of ten.

Scrubbing off speed is accomplished with the triple-hydraulic-disc set-up found now on most big bikes. The units are identical to those fitted to the tourer 1000 which we praised as excellent in our test of that bike. Although we couldn’t quite achieve the same stopping distances with the S, the machine still ranks as an excellent stopper.

For some reason we couldn’t discover, the brake lever came closer to the handlebar than most before starting the front brakes doing their thing. This took a little adjusting to, but in every other way — stopping power, fade resistance, feel — the brakes were entirely satisfactory and well up the high standard set by the rest of the bike. The GS1000S’ stability under desperate braking was outstanding. You always felt the bike was helping the rider rather than testing him.

Two minor annoyances must be mentioned. The first is the two rear view mirrors which are attached to either side of the bikini fairing.

Being further away from the rider, their angle of view is relatively small, but worse is the fact that the rider’s arms obscure at least 30 percent of their area. A bit more work here for next year’s model, Suzuki. Mirrors are very important in city traffic.

The second gripe is the too-small-in­diameter handlebar grips. Numb hands were common touring (no, it wasn’t cold) from the tight curl of the fingers round the grips and some bigger grips would be far better.

Fuel tank size at 19 litres is reasonable for touring, but another three litres would be even better.

Servicing should be fairly routine for a four-cylinder bike, but the lack of electronic ignition means you’ll still be paying for points replacements and timing adjustments. CDI is rumoured for later this year too. The halogen headlight of the S is far better than the tourer’s tungsten unit. It’s still living in the dark ages.

Comfort for pillion passengers is excellent, the compliant rear suspension and plush seat coming in for particular praise. Passengers seem to fare as well as riders comfort-wise, which is excellent.

Suzuki’s updated 1000 hasn’t lost any of its original strong points and the refinements have been worthwhile each time.

It is unarguably Japan’s best superbike, and may well be the world’s finest.

By Col Miller. Two Wheels, February 1980.