Suzuki GN125 Reviews from United States of America - Page 2 of 2

1982 Suzuki GN125

Model year1982
Year of manufacture1982
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2009
Acceleration marks 5 / 10
Roll-on Performance marks 5 / 10
Handling marks 6 / 10
Braking marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 4 / 10
Comfort marks 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.0 / 10
Distance when acquired4450 miles
Most recent distance4750 miles
Previous motorcycleHonda CB400T2 Hawk

Summary:

Nice frugal commuter / beginner bike

Faults:

The bike had a difficult to diagnose ignition misfire.

Replacement of the stator / pickup assembly cured it.

The starter had a worn output bearing and worn brushes.

I replaced the igniter module, coil and plug cap in trying to fix the misfire.

The carburetor needed to be replaced due to severe old gas blockage.

General Comments:

The bike was a 'basement find', which I bought to fix and resell. I replaced the chain, tires and carburetor after repairing the starter myself. It took a while to find the bronze replacement bearing for the starter, but that has performed well.

The stator replacement was the last item to replace; it did not test out-of-limits per the repair manual.

I've been getting over 75mpg with the bike, even with the misfire. I look forward to seeing the fuel mileage now that it's making full power.

I've been able to get the bike up to 70mph (indicated), but that was with a tailwind. 63-65mph is typical, maximum. I don't ride it on any roads posted for over 55, and recommend keeping it mostly on routes labeled for 50 and under. There's no real acceleration available above 50mph.

The bike is a little small and light for me, but its speed range and fuel mileage make it a useful nice-day commuter. I'm glad to have helped save this little classic and keep it on the road.

Would you buy another motorcycle from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 23rd March, 2009

1996 Suzuki GN125

Model year1996
Year of manufacture1996
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2005
Acceleration marks 2 / 10
Roll-on Performance marks 2 / 10
Handling marks 7 / 10
Braking marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.1 / 10
Distance when acquired9600 miles
Most recent distance12100 miles

Summary:

It's reliable, light, slow, and stable... but did I mention slow?

Faults:

Front fork seals leaked when I bought it, cheap fix.

Needed a new horn.

General Comments:

This bike has been amazingly reliable. I've used it for more than it was intended for, riding it at 55-60 mph over a long period of time.

The bike also has no power. No wheelies, not even in first. Not a good commuting machine. Keeps up with city traffic okay, but even at 50 mph the bike begins to feel strained. Against the wind, 4th gear is required to maintain 55, putting it very close to the red-line. Despite this, I've never had any engine problems.

It's very light and can be driven by anyone. I've taught a few friends to ride on it without any problems. Acceleration is stable and controlled, but very slow.

Would you buy another motorcycle from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 11th June, 2005

24th Jul 2010, 10:46

Sounds like you had your foot on the back brake.

Average review marks: 6.4 / 10, based on 5 reviews