I've never found any of the 750 frames lacking in what they were meant for. Most handling issues are down to set-up/maintenance... and tyres and their pressures.
Take to a race track on a GT and you're bound to run into shortcomings.
Short, brace-less swinger was fitted to GTs only afaIk. Reckon it was mainly to keep the wheelbase within limits in conjunction with the flat steering angle.
piet
Take to a race track on a GT and you're bound to run into shortcomings.
Should actually be other way round, Paul. The later frame positions both the engine and seat a bit higher than previously. Lots of subtle changes to the SF1> frames; wheelbase, steering angles, etc. Main stand lengths alone are testimony to different heights.Depends how you ride.
The handling becomes more accurate until the final SF1/2 type frame. The frame progressively got nearer the engine and as it did, handling became more precise. Not to mention the brace across the swing arm behind the engine. The swing ram was more flexible before that.
When I ride my S after my SF2, I feel as though I'm perched higher up.
The disc brake SFC is another world altogether. Low and rigid.
Paul
Short, brace-less swinger was fitted to GTs only afaIk. Reckon it was mainly to keep the wheelbase within limits in conjunction with the flat steering angle.
piet