jaan Posted April 24, 2008 Report Share Posted April 24, 2008 Your opinion about Suzuki RL250 or Suzuki Beamish? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleanorbust Posted April 24, 2008 Report Share Posted April 24, 2008 I had a Beamish rl250 (red and silver model) for a year or so in the 70s. Good points: maintenance-free motor (a boon at the time), plush suspension Not so good points: petrol tank prone to leaks at rear; very thin side cases on motor combined with lack of bash plate leading to damaged cases; frame prone to buckling at plates below steering head; perhaps not as easy to find grip as its competitors Overall I do have fond memories of the bike. Quite a few people bought them but didn't seem to hang on to them for long. Would probably make a reasonable twin-shock ride if you can find a decent one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieboy Posted April 24, 2008 Report Share Posted April 24, 2008 I had a go on a mate of mine's 250 Beamish a few years ago.I like it,nice power,good suspension and well finished.The only negative I thought was the rake is very shallow,bit of a barge to get it to turn tight.Great over rocks in a straight line though.I don't know what the spares situation is like? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02-apr Posted April 24, 2008 Report Share Posted April 24, 2008 I agree with much of what Cleanorbust says but I got my best ever result on a red and silver one so I liked it's performance. A bit later I had a yellow 250 and, though it had a motor built solely for trials (unlike the adapted trail bike motor in the early model) I'm not sure I remember it being a better motor. It was definitely flat by modern standards, and even those of the day, with the 325 even flatter. Super puller, I recall a test of the 325 where the torque graph showed why - peak torque was virtually at tickover but perhaps not for today's twin shock sections and riding styles? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon v8 Posted April 24, 2008 Report Share Posted April 24, 2008 I started competative trials in 1985 on an early RL250,the silver engined one.It was very well made,very reliable and gripped well - but the flywheel would take you to the end of the earth ! Much better with the extra "saucer" weight removed.The only comment I would make now is that its not a patch on my Ty250 twinshocks which I compete on now - the steering/handling are in a different league,and I think the motor is more forgiving too.The chrome plated frames look smart when in good nick but if any mods/repairs need doing it can be a problem. Having said all that they are a great bike,well in the spirit of twinshock trials - unlike the converted Yam/Fantic monos that seem to be creeping in.If one is on offer at the right price go for it.(If you don't like it it will sell,unlike say a JCM that parts are a problem for.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony283 Posted April 24, 2008 Report Share Posted April 24, 2008 I rode the Beamish Suzukis in 1977/78 and although they looked the business they were a bit "tin and tinsel". The side cases were very thin. Very popular in the South when Brian Fowler was winning everything on them in the sand and mud, but they didn't much care for rocks with the angled shocks of the day they tended to hop and not keep the rear in contact. Not as good as a Majesty or later TY for that matter, in my personal opinion. Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lee harris Posted April 24, 2008 Report Share Posted April 24, 2008 I was riding a ty 175 in 1980 when a mate bought a beamish. Loved its looks, much more powerful than the yam and I wanted one but had no cash. There were a few of those red bikes also then, er 125 fantics...didnt think much about it at the time. When I packed up in 1983 everybody was on 200 fantics and the 240 was a boon. Matey had to virtualloy give his beamish away to buy a 240....... 25 years on and now with lots of fantics in the cellar, I swapped a 200 fantic for a 325 beamish at the dartmoor two day...always wanted one and never did have one so why not? It was the biggest mistake I have every made. Ask Greeves was ribbing me on here and I know why. Heavy, sluggish, naff turning...nice welds on the frame though. With the on off power of my fantics I could not get used to the beamish in turns at all...a bit like an oil tanker. Close the thottle and count til 10 for it to slow down. A flywheel as big as a 4 bedroomed house! I swapped it in the end...for another 240..(which then puked the crank but thats another story) Summary. Great looks and quality, nostagia all the way. if you want to RIDE trials, by a fantic 200 or 240 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaan Posted April 25, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2008 Would probably make a reasonable twin-shock ride if you can find a decent one. Beamish Owners Club Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beamish owners club Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Lee Harris - how rude! The Beamish is an iconic bike! They are an acquired taste and have 'interesting' handling characteristics it's true! The 325 was a big mistake and was developed after pressure from the works riders who saw the Spanish bikes going bigger on engine size but they hadn't taken into account the superior engine capabilites of the Japanese engine. Once they had produced the 325 it had to be sleeved down to a 250 to make it usable! In truth, all the foregoing is true, you only have to look at the field of serious twinshck riders - spot a Beamish? But aesthetically there was noting prettier and most Beamish are garage queens now, only the die-hards still fight them round a modern day course! Of their era they were great but only a couple years later you had the Fantics and the Honda which are a whole different animal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickgoodwin Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 (edited) Hi, This is my first post here. I have to agree with what has been said here. Back in about 1980 Jack stites brought me back a White and blue 325 from england and i was riding a sherpa at the time the 325 felt long in the tight stuff but was very light, great for the big ups but found myself back on the sherpa. just didnt care for the engines rev and the bikes handling. But it was a good lookin machine. Wished I stilled owned it...Not to ride but to look at. Edited June 21, 2008 by RickGoodwin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterb Posted June 23, 2008 Report Share Posted June 23, 2008 Well, I had a brand new RL250 when they first came out in the UK, after a few years of riding Bultaco's, I think it was either 1976 or 1977. Was a light bike at the time, petrol tank split at the rear, cases very thin, lots of backlash in the gears, did not grip well and did not handle well over rocks. Not enough power low down for me, was better with a very thin head gasket and a little more ign advance. Was pretty awful really. I tried to make it go like a Bult, but after 6 months of trying, sold it off and bought another 325 Bultaco. Having said that, there is an RL250 out here in NZ, owned from new that does go well but still has those handling problems. It has proven to be very reliable over the years. Bye, PeterB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swooshdave Posted June 23, 2008 Report Share Posted June 23, 2008 (edited) Was a light bike at the time, petrol tank split at the rear, cases very thin, lots of backlash in the gears, did not grip well and did not handle well over rocks. Not enough power low down for me, was better with a very thin head gasket and a little more ign advance. Was pretty awful really. There's a guy here who has one Suzuki and is clamoring for another one. To each his own I guess. At least people are making those Kawasakis somewhat ridable. Edited June 23, 2008 by swooshdave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.