First, and certainly least, came the G5, a mid seventies nightmare for many which must have put thousands off motorcycles forever. With a mixture of horror and amusement I recently saw an article in a glossy about them entitled Classic Jap. The machine is a classic only in the sense that so much bad design can be crammed into one bike, and a humble 250 at that. Though an equally vile 360 was made, no one bought it due to that extra 10cc costing a fortune at the insurance agents.
Principally, and it is best kept brief for the sake of my blood pressure, they are slow, vibrate, do not handle, are ridiculously heavy and thirsty, and were very badly made, holding records for the most rapidly dissolving silencers, crumbling seat pans, rattling camchains, seizing brake calipers and ebbing away of cylinder compression. The loss of compression, that leads to performance too asthmatic to burst through 60mph, also generates a monster problem with crankcase pressure. This is common to K series, G5 & CJ twins.
My own GS, which vibrated badly enough to blur the clocks, never mind the mirrors, was eventually driven (unintentionally) into the scenery one Easter with sufficient force to break the top frame headstock weld. The wreck was flogged and a huge sigh of relief heaved at finally parting from the worst bike I have ever owned. Much of the horror comes back as I write. The air cleaners are paper element, and cost a fortune (there are two of them). Top in the six speed box may have some purpose in the 360 but none in the 250, as it gutted performance whilst consumption remained very high, 50mpg at best. The electric starter rarely worked, though they do start reliably with a kick. The ignition switch is on the front frame tube, once it wears the keys fall out. Then there’s... oh hell, just take my advice and ignore ‘em.
My next Honda 250, a few years later, was an early Superdream, bought ridiculously cheaply when the 125 law came in. It was needed to relieve an XS750 which was too big and heavy in winter; living in the country, by no means all roads are gritted. Initial impressions of the 250N were good, and even now when everyone else is insulting about them, it has to be said they are a smooth, comfortable and above all reliable bike. Scarcely any faster than the preceding model, 85mph (eventually), and if anything they feel slower due to their quietness and lack of vibration. Handling is somewhat clumsy but certainly safe. Fuel consumption remained abysmal at around 50mpg.
Mine, an early silver one with a kickstart, was plagued by ill luck. I ran over a brick in the dark (headlamp a rather dim 45W) and dented both rims. Then a drunk uncle drove over it, breaking two indicators and denting the tank. Shortly afterwards, I fell off it in Newark on diesel oil and broke the other two indicators. I got nicked for riding it without tax and the front guard rotted between the fork legs. They all do that. Despite the fact that by this time it looked a wreck, it remained totally reliable, though the kickstart was more likely to produce results than the starter on very cold mornings. Chain life was fair and tyres lasted well, due in part to the craze at the time for the lads to buy brand new bikes and have Phantoms fitted new Bridgestones for a fiver were the result and kept costs down. These tyres were perfectly safe, just unfashionable.
With no prospect of passing an MOT I swapped the Superdream for an early XL250 with a new MOT. Japan’s first attempt at a big four stroke trail bike was not entirely successful, yet not a failure. 1970s XLs bear little resemblance to those of the eighties, though the general layout is similar. Most noticeable is the fact that, despite alloy rims, magnesium engine side covers and an obviously all alloy engine, it is a heavy bike And nose heavy at that, which combined with a wheel hugging front mudguard, makes it fairly useless at anything more serious than benign green lanes.
The engine was a four valve single, acceptably smooth with lots of torque, but not fast. Unlike the vertical twins, it was also reasonably frugal, returning around 65mpg. The bike was reasonable for modest road work, being surprisingly comfortable. Handling was good around town, with quick response from both steering and engine. However, it became extremely vague at anything over 50mph. It did not so much weave as wander - not helped by running it on used Avon Mudpluggers, though they gripped fine and never showed any signs of breaking up even after use on a motorway. Lighting was feeble, being six volt, and the brakes rather marginal, tiny SLS drums front and rear that struggled even with the modest velocity of the bike.
The magnesium engine covers corrode very rapidly and, particularly if the bike is used in winter, a coating of grease is recommended around the gasket line between them and the crankcase. All in all it was a good hack, fun in town but rotten off road, poor in a straight line and sometimes awkward to maintain. It went when a friend offered me some cash for it.
Next came an L-reg CB250K4 which I bought for £40. The K series are certainly the best of the vertical twins. Much smaller than the G5, they handle well, are far more robust and have a fine TLS front drum brake. Performance is not bad and on the 350 version really quite useful. Mine, however, was in a bit of a state. The pair of filter papers were clogged black, so the paper was cut away and replaced with thin foam, a dodge I have performed on numerous bikes with such filters.
It ran fine until one chin on the tank thrash up the M1 to Leeds with a tail wind. As neither speedo nor rev counter worked I can offer no figures here - suffice to say that afterwards it used a pint of oil every 100 miles and hit 65mph on a good day. The oil did not come out of the exhaust but from the breather on the back of the rocker box. A length of green garden hose was run from it along the frame rails and vented on to the road behind the rear number plate.
The seat was held on with a couple of bungees, the paint was primer and the lights wired to come on with the ignition, as the switch, a big Bakelite thing on the headlamp shell was knackered. One side panel fell off so I threw away the other, only to have a mate find the first in the street outside his house.
Its most alarming trick was to stick at full throttle in damp, cold, winter weather, which required an extremely graceless riding style to be employed using the kill switch. You really should try it some time, perhaps on a big Kawasaki. Eventually, it went up in flames one Saturday, so I sold it to a passing scrap man for £20. I had cleaned it the night before with paraffin....
The best 250 Honda I have owned to date, and still own now over six years after buying it, is a CB250RS. The two main problems of earlier bikes, rust and poor economy are things of the past. The RS has plastic guards, seat, indicators, headlamp shell, etc, and returns 75mpg. It is very light at 276lbs and is faster than any of the vertical twins, though not by much.
Reliability has been excellent. In over 30000 miles it has had five chains, three gearbox sprockets, four rear tyres and one front. A pair of fork seals, a set of caliper seals and a rev counter cable. Silencers and rear shocks are original, as is the rear sprocket and every light bulb on the bike. Its light weight can work against it on motorways and in crosswinds where it needs a bit more road than most. I changed to unleaded a couple of years ago and it has had no effect on performance or economy.
Servicing is cheap if fiddly. The air cleaner is washable, the oil filter a grossly inadequate gauze strainer under the right hand engine cover which is a right caper to remove and refit. Plug life is poor, 5k at best, and the tappets are an acquired art as the exhaust rockers are held on to the valve stems by a spring which makes it difficult to judge the gap correctly. Transmission is harsh and snatchy below 4000rpm. Cylinder heads crack between plug hole and exhaust valve seat at high mileages - a mate’s has just gone at 58000 miles.
My most recent Honda 250 was a VT, a machine of mind scrambling complexity for a 250. Water cooled, DOHCs, four valves per cylinder, hydraulic clutch... at least its performance made up for its complexity, in a different league to the other 250s with 90mph a matter of course and the ton possible with a bit of effort. The steering is light and despite a 16” wheel not twitchy, although at low speeds it could catch you out if you changed direction too quickly.
The Pro-link rear end was a marvel, it could take a bumpy country road, that had CXs all over the place and BMWs skipping, flat out without any drama. Fuel consumption of 62mpg (unleaded) given the performance is very reasonable. Starting is immediate though warm up slow. A good grab rail is provided for passengers who would otherwise be thrown off the back, although performance is inevitably blunted by the extra mass. The bike needs 6000 revs before it produces the goods, but once past this point the tacho cracks around to 12000rpm making for much left foot effort. Throw in a very sharp steering response, to make it no fun at all with a hangover or in slippery conditions, but utterly tremendous down the country lanes when you're in the mood.
After a while, a minor domestic crisis forced a sale, and in a choice between my RS, R80 and the VT, the VT lost, not through lack of ability but acute paranoia at the thought of all those gubbins and the dire financial consequences of a blow up. Take your pick. A mate ran a CJ250, basically a slimmed down G5 with five speeds, for years - it was dull but reliable and handled OK. Certainly, a better prospect than contemporary XS250s which are nearly as dreadful as G5s. The 250 Honda I have never experienced is the CBX single - wouldn’t mind giving one a try. Of the ones I have owned, though, there is a clear winner - the CB250RS.
Jon Everall