TW200 Forum banner

1 - 20 of 59 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
OK,
I have read so many posts about the 87' being the fastest TW200 made,
Tommy?
Is there any truth to this?
I now have a 97 and a 2003 both bone stock and I can tell you the 2003 starts easier and the 97 is cold blooded and likes to be really warm,
The 97 has a slightly punchier exhaust note as well,
Other than that,
They feel about the same,
Is there some truth to the 87' being peppier?
Or is this just a perpetuating urban legend ?
Anyone here with a 87' that can verify the claims?
Thank you all,
Peter B
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,932 Posts
Pete, they actually are.

OK,
I have read so many posts about the 87' being the fastest TW200 made,
Tommy?
Is there any truth to this?
I now have a 97 and a 2003 both bone stock and I can tell you the 2003 starts easier and the 97 is cold blooded and likes to be really warm,
The 97 has a slightly punchier exhaust note as well,
Other than that,
They feel about the same,
Is there some truth to the 87' being peppier?
Or is this just a perpetuating urban legend ?
Anyone here with a 87' that can verify the claims?
Thank you all,
Peter B
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,873 Posts
I know my '87 is faster than my '99. Don't know why, but I know it's true.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,048 Posts
[in-doo-bi-tuh-buh l, -dyoo-]
Spell Syllables
* Examples
* Word Origin


adjective
1.
that cannot be doubted; patently evident orcertain; unquestionable.
Origin of indubitable
Expand


2. Only the ones that J.J. Works on..
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,932 Posts
They had to tone them down in 88 for the common people because they were "widowmakers"... in 87. :p

I actually am surprised at how fast they really are. I have lost 60 lbs in the last 3 months and my bike just gets faster almost daily. It is actually surprising me. Just how fast is this bike??!!?? What if I lost 100 more lbs?? I am not kidding when I say this either, but it wants to wheelie off the lights now with very little effort. It almost comes up by just twisting the throttle... :eek: I'm starting to think I'm riding a "SuperBike"!!!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,048 Posts
Our beloved TW is an ultra-dual sport bike, not a super bike, let's not get carried away here LT.

They had to tone them down in 88 for the common people because they were "widowmakers"... in 87. :p

I actually am surprised at how fast they really are. I have lost 60 lbs in the last 3 months and my bike just gets faster almost daily. It is actually surprising me. Just how fast is this bike??!!?? What if I lost 100 more lbs?? I am not kidding when I say this either, but it wants to wheelie off the lights now with very little effort. It almost comes up by just twisting the throttle... :eek: I'm starting to think I'm riding a "SuperBike"!!!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,048 Posts
Well put and 100% accurate! My TW is a time machine as well. It takes me back almost exactly 30 years every time I hop on. The 1987 model was in part designed by Delorean after he ran out of stainless steel and just after the back to the future movie was released in July of 85. Some say this is the primary reason for its speed but history shows it was really just a kangaroo project that was responsible. The time machine functionality was just a side effect from an experiment gone wrong and has been included in every model since, although it seems to exist in the earlier models as well to a small extent. No one can really explain why, exactly why, the 87 models are as fast as they are, there are theories sure but end of day no one really knows. It could be the ignition some say. I'm also thinking it could be the color scheme that year.

Don't no about the 87...but my 98 is the fastest way I found to go back 30 years...its not about the speed...just a good ride on a awesome bike....no matter what year it is..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,942 Posts
I'm also thinking it could be the color scheme that year.
The 1987's came in two color schemes. A red frame and a blue frame. I have owned two of each color scheme and will have to say that the blue ones are definitively faster than the red ones. I believe that it has to do with the yellow fork boots on the blue ones ;).

100_2103.JPG
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,094 Posts
The 1987's came in two color schemes. A red frame and a blue frame. I have owned two of each color scheme and will have to say that the blue ones are definitively faster than the red ones. I believe that it has to do with the yellow fork boots on the blue ones ;).

View attachment 30275
Now that is a beautiful '87 TW !!!!1
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,932 Posts
Our beloved TW is an ultra-dual sport bike, not a super bike, let's not get carried away here LT.
I wouldn't even call it an "ultra" nothing, but I really had no idea how fast these are and still don't yet; just sayin...it's starting to get a bit surprising... :p
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,932 Posts
Of course the 87's had racing cams in them and larger valves and a 4 barrel carb too... :D
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,131 Posts
The ‘87’s speed is “reputed” to be higher, though trying to find the evidence for this is like trying to find the Holy Grail. According to Yamaha, every variation by year has exactly the same amount of horses – despite them using at least three different carbs on the things and the possible variations on setting across the range (and there are quite a few) …….

Jim_carb_20.jpg

As to littletommy’s claims of “wheelies off the lights” – either he’s got Helium in the front tire, or he’s on his way to the doughnut shop.

On the standard gearing of 49/14 if you get any TW to an indicated 70 (downhill) you’re onto a winner. The trouble starts when people mess with this ratio, the commonest being 50/14 – but let’s be honest – do some of you even know what sprocket ratio you’re running ?

Then we move onto “Octane” – although the humble TW will run on 87, is it actually “optimal” at that rating ? – do you even know if your local gas station has any way of testing the octane in its tanks ? – or is it a case of only being responsible for supplying “at least” 87 ?

Rider weight – tire pressures – altitude – weather conditions – engine and carb condition - all come into play to further complicate the issue.

If you want to know the reason so many people buy the ’87 model, it’s simply a case of looking at numbers. They sold thousands of the things, over 3000 in the first year. The trouble with that, is the model (the TW) refuses to die. Most other bikes will have been ridden until the engine collapses, but many Tdubs are still low miles after 30 years of production. It’s like the BW models – nobody usually rides them that far. They may end up looking scruffy, but that just serves to lower the price, and price is the next issue.

Now we have a bike that’s “hey, cool, that looks like fun”, that’s as common as bird droppings, that everybody goes for because it’s so cheap (about $700 for a “beater”). So they buy the bike, then find out they’ve bought a “pig in a poke” (look it up). The tires are as old as the bike, the wheel bearings and brakes and most of the cables are shot, and on top of that, either the PO has told porkies about the state of the CDI and stator, or he’s blamed the fault on the gummed up carb with the words “clean that out and it’ll run fine” ringing in your ears as you load it onto the trailer. You high tail it home, getting a bottle of seafoam on the way, only to find out it’s a bit more complicated than that.

Another thousand bucks later, and now you’re into it for $1700, and it still looks like a “beater”.

And if you don’t believe me – littletommy, what’s your bike worth ?- put a price on it (even though we know it’s not for sale).

The reason I’m saying all this, is for the benefit of all the “anonymous” readers on this site, who will simply read the title of the thread, and go down this same rabbit hole.

We know we’re having a laugh – but they don’t .

Yes, the ’87 is “reputed” to be the fastest – by a very slim margin, and completely unprovable at that. It’s also the most unreliable year of manufacture, with a “one off” electrical system that has some very expensive gremlins in there. Some of us have had no problems (stored inside, ridden regularly etc) – but some of us have wished we’d have spent our money on something better.

With the ’87, it’s a gamble as to how it’ll turn out - but the odds are stacked against you.

Still feeling lucky ? ;)
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,932 Posts
The ‘87’s speed is “reputed” to be higher, though trying to find the evidence for this is like trying to find the Holy Grail. According to Yamaha, every variation by year has exactly the same amount of horses – despite them using at least three different carbs on the things and the possible variations on setting across the range (and there are quite a few) …….

View attachment 30277

As to littletommy’s claims of “wheelies off the lights” – either he’s got Helium in the front tire, or he’s on his way to the doughnut shop.

On the standard gearing of 49/14 if you get any TW to an indicated 70 (downhill) you’re onto a winner. The trouble starts when people mess with this ratio, the commonest being 50/14 – but let’s be honest – do some of you even know what sprocket ratio you’re running ?

Then we move onto “Octane” – although the humble TW will run on 87, is it actually “optimal” at that rating ? – do you even know if your local gas station has any way of testing the octane in its tanks ? – or is it a case of only being responsible for supplying “at least” 87 ?

Rider weight – tire pressures – altitude – weather conditions – engine and carb condition - all come into play to further complicate the issue.

If you want to know the reason so many people buy the ’87 model, it’s simply a case of looking at numbers. They sold thousands of the things, over 3000 in the first year. The trouble with that, is the model (the TW) refuses to die. Most other bikes will have been ridden until the engine collapses, but many Tdubs are still low miles after 30 years of production. It’s like the BW models – nobody usually rides them that far. They may end up looking scruffy, but that just serves to lower the price, and price is the next issue.

Now we have a bike that’s “hey, cool, that looks like fun”, that’s as common as bird droppings, that everybody goes for because it’s so cheap (about $700 for a “beater”). So they buy the bike, then find out they’ve bought a “pig in a poke” (look it up). The tires are as old as the bike, the wheel bearings and brakes and most of the cables are shot, and on top of that, either the PO has told porkies about the state of the CDI and stator, or he’s blamed the fault on the gummed up carb with the words “clean that out and it’ll run fine” ringing in your ears as you load it onto the trailer. You high tail it home, getting a bottle of seafoam on the way, only to find out it’s a bit more complicated than that.

Another thousand bucks later, and now you’re into it for $1700, and it still looks like a “beater”.

And if you don’t believe me – littletommy, what’s your bike worth ?- put a price on it (even though we know it’s not for sale).

The reason I’m saying all this, is for the benefit of all the “anonymous” readers on this site, who will simply read the title of the thread, and go down this same rabbit hole.

We know we’re having a laugh – but they don’t .

Yes, the ’87 is “reputed” to be the fastest – by a very slim margin, and completely unprovable at that. It’s also the most unreliable year of manufacture, with a “one off” electrical system that has some very expensive gremlins in there. Some of us have had no problems (stored inside, ridden regularly etc) – but some of us have wished we’d have spent our money on something better.

With the ’87, it’s a gamble as to how it’ll turn out - but the odds are stacked against you.

Still feeling lucky ? ;)
There are so many of them out there, some with problems, many without. I've been lucky so far. I am running 15/50 on the sprockets; I run only non ethanol gas in it; I run 22 front and 25 in the rear. (I'm a fat boy and only really do the street right now) No helium and no donuts lately and yes; it really does want to come up; I can only imagine when I lose more weight. It honestly is a bit surprising. I probably have 4 or 5 grand in it and it is still worth only a buck more that what they cost new in 1987. ($1,599 new) Worth now; $1,600 I really can't complain one tiny bit. If the CDI ever does go out; I will just have to get one... but so far; so good. :) The only thing I can think of is that the carb is snappier in those early years...
 
1 - 20 of 59 Posts
Top