In considering the purchase of a post vintage era bike, I am wondring if there are any disadvantges to seeking out a water cooled era bike over that of an air cooled machine. I am not talking about performance so much, as there are seperate classes to accomodate both. I am more concerned with the delemma in locating parts and/or finding water cooled bikes whose internals havent been wrought through years of sitting with water in the radiator
Water Vs Air Cooled
- Thread starter duke
- Start date
On a Honda, only the right side cover and radators will give you corrosion problems as well as hose fittings. No water routes through the crankcase and the cylinder is thick aluminum so it doesn't corrode through very quickly. The first gen bikes had a few magnesium parts in the cooling system. There will probably be a lot of scale build-up. Pinholes can also be fixed with epoxy. The cover is still available, I believe. If not, I believe a 1987-91 cover should retrofit onto the older watercooled bikes. That retrofit will also give you a removeable clutch cover.
zoommx
~SPONSOR~
- Apr 23, 2001
- 282
- 0
82 and 83 CR250's had mag clutch covers. Those are what corroded so bad with coolants. Since those CRs are right side chain drive, only the 81 clutch cover will work as a substitute. It is aluminum, and the hose fitting position can cause interferance with the exhaust, especially on the 83 exhaust. The only other issues I know of with water cooled from that era are the Yamahas with radiators mounted in front of the forks. Hoses run through the steering head can leak and cause corrosion of steering bearings.
