The CG125 was bought through my daughter, who in claiming I could fix anything, introduced me to a friend's father who had a dead CG on his hands. The bike was original, not too much rust, 9500 miles on the clock and plenty of compression.
The previous owner had fitted a new battery, points and plug, but this had failed to do the trick. There was a fat spark and petrol was getting through - it took only a little time to suss that the choke was the problem. Exactly an hour after taking delivery she was sitting there ticking over like a little sewing machine, a testament to the design integrity of Honda's OHV single.
Being six feet tall and 14 stone I had always ridden bikes of 250cc and above, and at first the CG felt rather small. But it was reasonably comfortable during the 40 mile a day round trip to the school where I taught, and the little gem of an engine made up for any other shortcomings.
That engine started first kick, warmed up quickly, ticked over evenly and pulled like a train no matter how low the revs dropped. My journey takes me from beside the sea, up to about 600 feet and back down again each trip. The CG, much to my amazement first time out, did it in top gear all the way. Only on days when the headwinds reached Force 6 did I have to change down a cog, but even then one was always sufficient.
One week, a colleague of similar proportions to myself had his four wheel box in for some drastic surgery and I offered him a pillion ride. He accepted, and apart from being a bit cramped on the seat, thoroughly enjoyed the week’s travel. Apart from the steering being a little lighter and the rear shocks bottoming out on a few pot-holes, the little CG took it all in its stride.
OK, compared to a sports bike it would probably come out pretty badly, but that misses the point. This is a nice, simple, straightforward bike that is aimed straight at commuter land where most of its owners wouldn't recognise the antiquity of its twin shocks, although at times they might begin to wonder at the lack of power of its small drum brakes and would probably be thankful that the rear chain is fully enclosed. The chassis is old tech and dubious under extreme use but adequate at up to 60mph.
Over two years I added 17000 miles onto the clock and it always returned a genuine 110 miles to the gallon. It never used a drop of oil between changes every 2500 miles and, apart from routine adjustment, only needed two tyres and a clutch cable. It never once let me down, not even a puncture.
One sad day, about a year ago, a boy came rushing up to the staff room at lunchtime. "Your bike’s on fire, Sir.” Somebody had pulled off the petrol pipe and thrown matches on the fuel. The little CG, despite all efforts, was burnt out.
After countless hours fiddling and adjusting, plus a lot of trial and error, I eventually cleared up most of the vibration. The motor always fired up third of fourth kick and the acceleration was much cleaner. It even pulled slightly better, but not a lot. I even managed to eliminate the clunk-clunk-clunk on the overrun. Mind you, I had to eliminate the tickover as well to achieve it.
I tried just about everything to get the gearbox to work properly - from different oil grades to double clutching. From the length of the gear pedal I reckon all East Germans must wear size 15 Jackboots. I have resigned myself to just kicking it through, convinced that some day the whole lot is going to fall out onto the road. Despite all this, however, I have covered over 7000 miles in a year without any major breakdowns. It has never refused to start in that time, nor has it failed to bring me home.
Comfort is quite good and even with a pillion there’s enough room. The suspension is stiffer than on the CG, less likely to bottom out, especially with a pillion on board. At commuter speeds the advantages that the MZ chassis is supposed to have over small Japs is not really apparent. I had never felt really unsafe on the CG and its nicer motor was always much more reassuring that the MZ lump that often sounded like it was near to death.
Economy is very disappointing. Even when ridden sedately it has never returned better than 60mpg, which drops to worse than 50mpg into headwinds or ridden hard. Every two gallons also consumes a third of a pint of Shell's best two stroke oil and you have to mix it in yourself.
If I had to buy a new one I think I‘d go for the Honda because I feel it is such a dependable motorcycle. If the MZ had a four stroke motor then maybe the equation would be different, but then it wouldn’t be an MZ, would it? Exactly the same rationale applies to buying a used one, although, to be fair, MZ engines are supposed to go on forever and spares are cheaper.
My end of year report goes something like this:
Honda: Reliability 10, Engine 10, Gearbox 9, Economy 10, Comfort 7
MZ : Reliability 9, Engine 4, Gearbox 1, Economy 5, Comfort 8
CG125: This little bike goes well, is ultra reliable even when neglected, has a superb engine and is exceptionally economical. Two minor complaints are that it’s slightly cramped for a large rider and the braking is only just adequate.
MZ250: This bike, despite its engine size, falls far short of its potential: While being reliable and comfortable to ride, its acceleration and top speed leave a lot to be desired. The gearbox is terrible and economy far below that of the Honda.
CG, go to the top of the class!
Davy McBride