The term classic is a bit overused these days. Every ad-man seems to be jumping on the bandwagon, you can get everything from soft drinks to deodorants with a classic label. In the bike world, however, classic has a fairly widely recognised meaning. it generally applies to anything that is post war and isn’t modern Japanese.
Although some traditionalists have trouble with the idea. there is now a definite Japanese class, the VJMCC regard anything over 15 years old as vintage. This isn't as unreasonable as it seems when you remember that the Vintage Motorcycle Club was formed in 1946 and was to cater for bikes made before 1930, then only 16 years old. In any event it makes an interesting exercise to compare models that were vying for our attention in the showroom 15 or so years ago.
By then the 500 class had been overshadowed in terms of sheer power and straight line performance by larger, more glamorous machines, but still held an appeal for those in search of a good, all round bike. equally useful on the urban motorway and the country lane. and capable of topping the ton on a fast A road.
The Daytona was the final incarnation of Trlumph’s smaller unit twin. Descended from the 350 Model 21 of 1957, it was launched in '66 to celebrate Buddy Elmore's win in that year's Daytona 200 mite classic aboard a 500 Triumph. The engine featured a new cylinder head and Bonnie type cam profiles. The cycle parts were also improved, with a new frame and excellent TLS front brake, fitted to all the Triumph and BSA twins in the late sixties.
By 1972, the basic design was 15 years old and could be traced even further back to the original Speed Twin of 1937. It was clearly time for a new model, but Triumph were on the brink of financial disaster and in no condition to invest in new designs. Given these limitations it’s hard to see how Triumph could have made a better job of the Daytona.
in contrast to Triumph, Suzuki were a successful, modern motorcycle manufacturer. A major player in the all-conquering Jap bike industry, they had the resources to design a thoroughly modern machine. In 1967, when the T500 was launched, Suzuki built only two strokes and they had the benefit of the vast knowledge and experience of Ernst Degner, the MZ works rider and engineer who had defected from East Germany in 1961 and joined Suzuki. With his help, they became a force to be reckoned with both on the road and the race track.
At the time, the T500 was the world’s biggest two stroke twin. It had been considered impossible to build such a large two stroke due to overheating problems causing seizure, but Suzuki succeeded in building an engine which has proved to be one of the toughest and most reliable around. The all-alloy motor has very large fin areas on the head and barrel to dissipate heat, aided by an efficient direct oil injection system. Other modern features are gear primary drive and a five speed box. Cycle parts are conventional, again featuring an effective TLS front brake.
On fairly new suspension the Suzuki was a reasonable handler, as it gets older and the damping deteriorates the handling becomes worse — but decent shocks, thicker fork oil and stronger fork springs sorts it out. The Daytona maintains its tautness for much longer, and suspension components are, anyway, much cheaper. Neither bike is particularly kind to swinging arm bearings.
Soon after its introduction, the T500 was rather overshadowed by the Honda fours and Kawasaki triples; for many years it was underrated, perhaps not helped by a relatively plain appearance, although it seems to be achieving classic status as its reputation for reliability spreads.
Both bikes seem happier on old A roads than modern dual carriageways. As you would expect from parallel twins lacking balance shafts, they both vibrate - surprisingly, the Suzuki more than the Triumph Fortunately, the vibration is never unbearable and both can be cruised quite happily at motorway speeds.
Handling and braking is more than adequate on both bikes; back road blasting an absolute delight, thanks to usable power and relatively light mass.
The Daytona’s frame is a great improvement on previous Triumph efforts — Triumph only gained a reputation for good handling in their later years, earlier things like Speed Twins used to waltz all over the place in bends. The handling was good despite the Avon SM on the front. The Triumph is very compact for a 500, more like a Jap 250, and the low seat height is useful for those short of leg.
Despite its apparent high state of tune for a British twin, the Daytona usually started up first kick and had bags of low speed torque. Even freeing the clutch proved unnecessary, a real rarity on a Triumph. This bike was obviously one of the good ’uns.
The bike is quite happy pottering down country lanes, minimal use of the good four speed box necessary. The real power comes in at 5000rpm, although it is a brave or rich owner who goes beyond 7500rpm — vibes and mechanical longevity limit power output from this point on.
It would be nice to report that the Daytona engine was oil tight, but of course it wasn't. It had the usual leak from the pushrod tubes, which has been the cause of more cursing, swearing and expenditure on instant gasket than any other mechanical failure in the history of motorcycling. I can’t take it any more, and when it leaks I just let it happen. The Suzuki was, of course, leak free, but then most of its oil disappears out of the silencers, so there's no excuse for leaks, is there?
The Suzy felt much more revvy on the road, it can be ridden slowly but really begs to be thrashed. It took a few more prods to start than the Triumph, the left side kickstart didn’t help, but once under way was very willing and great fun to ride. The gearchange wasn't up to the Triumph standard and several times I hit a false neutral between fourth and top. It was never bad enough to spoil the bike, but rather disappointing all the same in such an otherwise excellent machine.
Top speeds are similar, both bikes will top the ton ridden by a fat old bugger in a Barbour suit. Slim young blades in racing leathers will extract a few more mph out of them.
The bikes differed dramatically on fuel consumption. around 53mpg for the Triumph and nearer 30mpg for the Suzi. Well, that’s the trouble with big two strokes, especially when they were designed before the oil crisis. if you can live with the fuel consumption, the T500 is otherwise quite a cheap bike to run.
Disregarded for many years, they are still cheap, running bikes can be had for less than £200 and £500 buys a good one. For less than the cost of the Triumph, you can get one nice bike and another for spares. The prices, though, are rising fast as the classic Japanese movement gains popularity.
Daytonas are already regarded as classics, reflected by the asking prices. You are unlikely to get a runner for less than £500 and a good one will be nearer £1000. Excellent examples are often advertised at over £1500. In the classic world, though, these are still reasonable prices and a well kept example will, at the very least, hold its value.
Later Daytonas had. no chronic problems, they just wear out components as they build up the mileage, needing a rebuild somewhere between 20 and 30000 miles depending on how hard they are used — with a straightforward engine this is no great task. The Suzuki. as mentioned, is very reliable, although it’s well known, once 40000 miles are up, for gearbox malaise and leaking crank seals (in turn sucking out the gearbox oil and ruining all its bearings). Bikes with 75000 plus miles are not unknown, although they will probably have had the crank rebuilt at least once.
Spares availability for both models is good, with plenty of Suzukis in breakers and basic Triumph spares available from most British bike shops. Original tinware may be rather hard to find but both bikes can be kept on the read without too much trouble. To sum up, either bike would make a good, practical classic. Both have enough performance to make life interesting and both have the handling and braking to cope with modern conditions. They’re both easily fettled by the home mechanic and there are plenty of examples of each to choose from. As the old saying goes, you pays your money and takes your choice.
Bob Johnson