SuzukiSavage.com - Print Page

SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl
General Category >> Rubber Side Down! >> big singles
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1240063358

Message started by stillborn on 04/18/09 at 07:02:38

Title: big singles
Post by stillborn on 04/18/09 at 07:02:38

I was just wondering how the savage compares to other singles like the SR500 or older BSAs. Are they all on the same plane preformance wise?

stillborn

Title: Re: big singles
Post by bill67 on 04/18/09 at 07:21:55

My wife had a 1978 sr500,I think the s40 is torquer and a little faster,different riding position

Title: Re: big singles
Post by Phelonius on 04/18/09 at 09:57:55

Having previously owned and ridden a Matchless 500 single back in the day, sixties, and back in some not so distant days, seventies and eighties, owned and ridden 2 SR500 singles, I can speak from experience. In stock trim, the matchless was as fast or faster on top speed as the Savage-S40. The Savage-S40 may have a tiny edge in accelleration. The SR 500 was a tiny bit less on top end and a tiny bit less on accelleration.
In cornering, the Matchless has it hands down with the Sr500 a close second.
In braking, the SR500 with its' disc brakes was the Quickest stopper. with the Savage-S40 a very noticable bit less able. The Matchless with its' drum brakes was made to go, not stop.
Riding position was best with the Matchless, and second with the SR 500. Savage -S40 with its'cruiser position does not give the ability to transfer body English neuances as well as either, and makes standing up on the pegs more difficult over rough surface.
Gas milage is about the same for all of them with riding habits being the determining factor.
All three had too small a fuel tank although the matchless was the largest capacity.
Both the Matchless and the SR500 used a separate oil tank and a dry sump system which made changing oil easier. On the Sr500 the bike frame was the oil tank, a system I do not approve of anymore.
While it does to some degree act as an oil cooler, if you get contamination such as metal particles in the oil, cleaning the inside of the frame is impossible without taking the bike completely apart so you can shake it with solvent inside.
The Savage -S40 has far less vibration than either of the others and is more maintainence free than the others.
Verdict, If you want to canyon race, choose the Matchless or the SR500. If you want to put long miles with little trouble choose the Savage -s40
Matchless REQUIRED that you know the starting drill concerning manual spark advance and manual compression relief. Also you had to understand theubiquitous Amal carburator and its'tickler button.
SR500 merely had manual compression relief to deal with.
Both were kick start only.
All three are very handsome looking machines.
Does this answer your questions?

Phelonius ;)

Title: Re: big singles
Post by LANCER on 04/18/09 at 12:43:13

I have been blessed with with my current '96 Savage that has been "breathed on" a bit; a '78 SR500 bone stock during my time with it (should never have sold it); and a '56 BSA Gold Star DBD model which came right off the flat track racing circuit ..... the entire electrical & ignition system consisted of a mag + wire + plug .... fiberglass 5 gal tank, racing cam, 1 1/2" GP Amal Grand Prix carb, and a set of bars and grips to hang on to because you absolutely needed to hang on for your life. It was an ANIMAL of a bike, geared to top out at 110 mph because on the flat tracks that was all you could do on the straight-a-way before you had to broad-slide into the next turn, but getting from 0 to that 110 was a wild freaking ride ! ! ;D
Performance ? ? Gold Star all the way.
I found the SR and the Savage to be pretty darn equal power wise with the Savage having a small edge on low end torque. The SR stopped a little quicker and cornered a little better because of the better fork angle. The overall riding pleasure ... love both of them.

Title: Re: big singles
Post by stillborn on 04/18/09 at 22:25:32

Well it probably doesn't matter now. I went and sat on a savage today and the wife said it looked like I dwarfed the bike... ohwell.

stillborn

Title: Re: big singles
Post by LANCER on 04/19/09 at 03:25:31

4B4C5154545A574A56380 wrote:

Well it probably doesn't matter now. I went and sat on a savage today and the wife said it looked like I dwarfed the bike... ohwell.

stillborn

Does that really matter ? Do you like the bike and will it fit your need for transport and fun ?

Title: Re: big singles
Post by Phelonius on 04/19/09 at 14:34:28

If it is fun to ride, go ahead and dwarf it. I dwarf all the bikes I ride. Doesn't bother me a bit.

Phelonius