Tl1000r

  • Thread starter Thread starter egypt_rider
  • Start date Start date
One of my riding buddies owns both an R and S model.. he loves em both, but says the R will drop the S after 200 due to gearing. I might be able to hook you up with his email in a PM if you are interested in asking him some more detailed questions.
 
Its a torque monster! Its not called The Widowmaker for nothing hahaha.

Unique styling, Crazy sound and Engine whine. The sound of it with aftermarket exhausts is crazy.
 
I heard one go by me years ago. Not sure what exhaust it had but it sounded like a sonic boom. The sound was and is still to this day the best motorcycle sound I've ever heard. I think big v twins sound how bikes should sound... Oh crap I might be in for a HD in my future....
 
I was after the TL1000 myself. But went for the RC51. Both sound mean but the RC just seemed a better fit. Be careful! The torque is addictive!!
 
I had a 97 TLS and loved it! Amazing machine with gobs of torque, jaw dropping sound (with pipes) and great style.

You will likely want to do a couple things to it if it's still stock; rear suspension is crap, pipes are a must and the fueling is snatchy (but that can be fixed for cheap with a Yosh Box).

The ONLY reason I got rid of it is that I've out grown the sportbike riding position... so I replaced it with another liter-twin; KTM Super Duke.
 
I've Caught myself looking them up on kijiji and cycletrader a lot lately. Maybe once the VFR is paid off, IF I can find cheap insurance, Jevco wants $3500/yr lol.

The only bad things I've heard is they are thirsty bikes and a work out in the twisties. Most Owners threads I've seen on other bike boards they get raved about.
 
You won't get bored by riding a 90s litre bike. I prefer the YZF750.
 
Yes they had good torque back in the day, I prefered it over the CBR929 I traded it for, but the Newer litre bikes (2003+) Ive had are far superior. I had a SV1000 (2005), and after 4 months sold it, I have much fonder memories of the TL1000
 
Dont know about the newer ones but there is a great article about them from the mid to late 90s models. Its in a UK Mag called Bike, January 2008 issue page 54 to 58 There was a lot of problems with the swingarm design which made the bike into a tank slapper. In June 12th 1997 Suzuki did a recall on them for the issue and added a stearing damper. They also had ECU failures and Oil sight glass was miss placed which alowed too much oil to be added and the engine had blow back issues into the air box and caused a problem with the fule injectors.
 
Brit Biker said:
Dont know about the newer ones but there is a great article about them from the mid to late 90s models. Its in a UK Mag called Bike, January 2008 issue page 54 to 58 There was a lot of problems with the swingarm design which made the bike into a tank slapper. In June 12th 1997 Suzuki did a recall on them for the issue and added a stearing damper. They also had ECU failures and Oil sight glass was miss placed which alowed too much oil to be added and the engine had blow back issues into the air box and caused a problem with the fule injectors.
Click to expand...

The swingarm is mounted low in relation to the countershaft (there's a term for this, but I can't remember it) which, if the chain is adjusted too tight, can cause the swingarm to "bottom out" effectively making a hard tail bike. Adjust the chain properly and this is never an issue (it would have to be quite over-tightened to cause this).

ECU's were replaced under recall so any bike you find now should be sorted.

Keep the oil level half way up the sight glass and you're golden.
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom