|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> The Cafe >> Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savage /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1366664025 Message started by paulmarshall on 04/22/13 at 13:53:45 |
|
Title: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savage Post by paulmarshall on 04/22/13 at 13:53:45 The Suzuki LS400 Savage is starting to find its way onto this site.It has been around just as long as the 650. I know this because I own a 87 LS 400.The 400(650 little brother) is identical to the 650 in many ways except for alterations to the engine, to reduce the stroke and bore so the Savage could enter the Asian market. A few of these machines found there way around different parts of the world due to personal importing, Which is why these machines are very rear in some countries. I don't know if they are still produced new or when the last one rolled off the assembly line, But these will be things we will find as we invite more 400 owners to the site. Predominantly I would imagine this site catered for the american market, Which all that is available to you was the 650. Now as the site spreads around the world it begins to evolve, and we can either stay as we are or evolve with it. P.S. Please feel free leave a reason for your vote if you can. LS650/400/S40 SUZUKISAVAGE.COM |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by bill67 on 04/22/13 at 14:10:59 What mpg to you get with the 400? |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by Serowbot on 04/22/13 at 14:11:26 I'll vote yes... sure, why not?... It shares 98% of the same parts... ... and, we do get members looking for info with them... We never exclude LS400 members, or turn them away... ... but,... (big but)... The name, title, and logo of this site, belong to the owner of this site... It is entirely his decision... (and he may not want to include the LS400 for many reasons,... including just keeping the title looking tidy)... We might then also have people wanting the RYCA listed as separate,too... We're all Savagers here, none the less... ;)... |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by paulmarshall on 04/22/13 at 14:18:53 6B7D6A776F7A776C180 wrote:
Could this proposal be put before the owner if the vote warrants it., And The site name should only cover the Savages that roll off the Production line. Of course the site is welcome to all. I found this site when I was still running the 400 donk. Answered all questions except info on the engine. |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by paulmarshall on 04/22/13 at 14:20:39 4C47424218192E0 wrote:
Good question. I don't know as I run a 650 in my 400 frame, But someone who currently owns one might have the answer. |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by SALB on 04/22/13 at 14:27:23 I say yes, but call it the "baby savage"! ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by bill67 on 04/22/13 at 14:31:46 79687C6564687B7A61686565090 wrote:
Good question. I don't know as I run a 650 in my 400 frame, But someone who currently owns one might have the answer. [/quote] My wife had a 1980 400GN and got in the high 60s on trips. |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by verslagen1 on 04/22/13 at 15:02:46 It really depends on the 400 owners, are they a group that'll support themselves? At the moment, I think we can count on one hand the 400 owners. And there are alot of question we 650 owners can't answer for you. Owners manual and other references, differences and similarities. All need you guys to fill in the details. Once we get some info, we can add to the table of contents a 400 section. Or a whole new table. |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by Yonuh Adisi FSO on 04/22/13 at 15:46:43 I vote yes. For a few reasons. 1: Like stated before it shares many of the same parts as the 650. 2: It was manufactured as an LS just as the 650 was so I consider it a little brother of the 650. 3: If we separate the 400 as a different bike entirely why not separate the S40 boulevard as well because it is under a different badge? If we did that that would be silly wouldn't it? So yes, I consider the LS400 a Savage just as we consider the S40 a Savage. |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by WD on 04/22/13 at 16:32:11 Let them in, the more the merrier. Just don't let the original Suzukis that carried the name in... I don't like 2 stroke bikes. |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by bill67 on 04/22/13 at 16:49:31 I had a GT 550 and GT750 I like 2 strokes.I did get in a bar fight once with some Harley guys once because they didn't like them. |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by paulmarshall on 04/22/13 at 17:21:04 3B3035356F6E590 wrote:
I too had the 550. 2 stroke 3 into 4 exhaust. Great handling bike for the times. |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by paulmarshall on 04/22/13 at 19:37:56 According to this site the 400 was produced for the first 2 years of manufacture. Not alot more info im affraid. http://www.motorcyclespecs.co.za/model/suzu/suzuki_ls400_savage%2087.htm |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by jcstokes on 04/22/13 at 21:24:25 I voted yes, because the Savage 400 is the lineal ancestor of our bikes. Bill 67 I think there was an English Savage 400 owner who has just got mobile posting in RSD, he might be able to answer your mpg question, however his answer will be in litres, or imperial gallons if he's an older person. |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by wambr on 04/22/13 at 21:33:39 6A6164643E3F080 wrote:
I guess until that only I can answer this question... on his Savage 400 I developed a speed of 140 km/h, the so-showed speedometer |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by wambr on 04/22/13 at 21:47:07 7E7767607B7F7167140 wrote:
I answered the question just above...Yes I'm used to measure the values in the metric system of measurement, but I often count metric units in gallons, feet, miles, I'm still not that old, and my brain is still working :) |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by wambr on 04/22/13 at 22:01:43 203324253A3731333867560 wrote:
I voted of course "Yes". 1. I'm the owner of the Savage 400. :) 2. I fully agree with the arguments given you, guys, for the benefit of that Savage 400-"baby " Savage". 3. it seems to me Verslagen1 rights - probably asking would be open here on the website the section about our "babies". so it would be probably easier to find a specific (for 400) information, without interfering with the owners of the "big Savvy" and of course, a lot will depend on us... PS I beg pardon, wrote what may be too much of a separate messages p.p.s. thankful Paul Marshal for a vote... |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by Serowbot on 04/22/13 at 22:05:52 If Suzuki comes out with a 900cc Savage,... I'm totally against including it... I have enough envy... :-?... |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by paulmarshall on 04/22/13 at 22:51:59 35232F2030420 wrote:
I guess until that only I can answer this question... on his Savage 400 I developed a speed of 140 km/h, the so-showed speedometer[/quote] My 400 boogied along too.I think my top speed was something like yours. |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by paulmarshall on 04/22/13 at 22:53:30 5E485F425A4F42592D0 wrote:
Mate its us on the 400s that envy you 650 riders. Thats why I replaced my 400 donk with the 650. |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by paulmarshall on 04/24/13 at 13:25:56 Any NO voters like to comment there reasons. :) |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by 12Bravo on 04/25/13 at 05:40:14 A sub section for information specific to the 400 would be a good idea in my opinion. |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by cigarandcoffeeman on 04/25/13 at 08:42:04 Hello, As an owner of a 400, changing the site name means nothing to me, though what would be good would be a separate sub section dedicated to them. I myself have struggled finding information for the 400. Changing the site name, (such as ls650/400/s40) may bring more people to the site, since it will show up in Google etc,if someone was specifically looking for the 400, luckily i stumbled across this site by accident and it has helped immensely. Here in Great Britain-England-united kingdom-UK (don't get me started), the savage is a rare beast, you have as much chance of finding a 400 as you do a 650, i had a 650 (loved it, nearly died on it, had it inked into me as not to forget it) tried to find another, failed but found a 400. which by the way is a 96 model. MPG i reckon is good 50s at a guess, (never let the tank run lower than half) but i could be wrong, i don't thrash my machine, Top speed has been 65mph, with no more after that, and i thought it was was gonna blow! |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by WD on 04/25/13 at 09:31:08 Here's info on the original Suzuki Savage, the TS250...http://www.suzukicycles.org/TS-TC-series/TS250.shtml |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by Dane Allen on 04/25/13 at 11:59:17 7761766B73666B70040 wrote:
Wow, 900cc Savage!! Would it still be air-cooled? How about the carbs, would it be fuel injected? Would it keep the wet-clutch or would it need a separate transmission? What if they just took the 650 and did a v-twin config for 1300cc's? Wait, that v-twin idea sucks, 900cc single thumper it is!! Ohh MAN!!!! That would be awesome!! And put the rocker arms to the sides so the adjustment covers weren't right under the frame. And don't mess with anything else except the Versy mod and give him a $70 per bike royalty. I'm getting my financing pre-authorized in the event this isn't just a dream... ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by rfw2003 on 04/25/13 at 12:11:35 Well here's my take on it, It's still an LS series bike so therefore it should be consider one. Lets take a look at it from an automotive vantage. Lets say the Ford Mustang It comes with 3 different engines depending on what you order, the V6, 4.6L V8 or the Special editions with special badges the 5.4L V8 engines, Yet they are all still Ford Mustangs. R.F. |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by LostArtist on 04/25/13 at 12:43:15 I voted no, I've been feeling like an a$$ recently >:( |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by paulmarshall on 04/25/13 at 12:47:15 565258505E4256525757423B0 wrote:
Can you please reply with your Frame number so I can check on your year of manufacture. I have never seen a LS400 outside of the following years. 87-89 |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by paulmarshall on 04/25/13 at 12:50:04 05263A3D083B3D203A3D490 wrote:
Valid reason. Hope you feel better soon. :) |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by paulmarshall on 04/25/13 at 13:07:42 5041554C4D41525348414C4C200 wrote:
Can you please reply with your Frame number so I can check on your year of manufacture. I have never seen a LS400 outside of the following years. 87-89[/quote] You got me thinking about the year of your bike, so I began a search and come up with this site;http://motorcycle.donkiz.co.nz/used-motorcycle/suzuki-savage_ls400%7C1.htm First page all 87-89, Same for second page. Opened third page to find to my amazement LS400s in later years, 90-93-95 models. Welcome additions to the Savage Family. :) |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by WD on 04/25/13 at 17:09:22 392D3C797B7B784B0 wrote:
No they aren't, last real Mustang left the line in 1969... ::) ;) |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by rfw2003 on 04/25/13 at 17:53:51 1B084C0 wrote:
No they aren't, last real Mustang left the line in 1969... ::) ;) [/quote] I'll give you that one as I do agree with that. ;) |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by MMRanch on 04/26/13 at 21:05:15 I suppect the 400 might be the better motor ! Sometimes at low speeds in the upper gears that big piston is ruff on the crankshaft . I doin't abuse those situations but a "softer" push might keep a feller from downshifting sometime. Kinda like "completing a low speed turn in third gear " , might make a person ( 650cc ) downshift on down to second. |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by paulmarshall on 04/27/13 at 12:59:44 524052404D5E515C571F0 wrote:
It would be soooo much simpler to not split the engine, But according to another member boring it out to 96 will produce the following. The 650 is 94mm x 94mm = 652cc The 400 is 87mm x 67mm = 398cc Bore the 400 would make it: 94mm x 67mm = 465cc 96mm x 67mm = 485cc 400 top and a 650's crank would be 87mm x 94mm = 559cc If I am going to spend money on maxing out for more power, Starting with a higher and stronger compression makes sense. |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by wambr on 04/27/13 at 20:57:08 Paul, I'm correct you a Savage 400 cylinder size 88mm and stroke 65,8mm and the working volume of the engine=396 cm3 and I think the thickness of the walls of the cylinder sleeve insufficient to bore up to 96 mm |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by Serowbot on 04/28/13 at 10:27:25 1C0F4B0 wrote:
I think I owned that one,... it didn't get very far... ;D... |
|
Title: Re: Should the LS400 be recognised as a true Savag Post by WD on 04/28/13 at 11:07:07 Neither did my last one, a 66 with a 6 cylinder engine... Hmm... think that one was cursed from the word go... :-? |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |