Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2016 21:49:00 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2016 22:05:00 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2016 3:16:16 GMT
"People buy superdreams as workhorses, no-one thinks they are worth restoring to pristine condition".I remember reading this very article in 1997 (still have it) thinking the above statement was a load of old stinky b*llocks......very typical of the SuperDream slating bike press. 
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2016 8:00:04 GMT
Yep four pages with next to no real information just hearsay , innaccuracies and it would appear bias . The 400 not significantly faster than the 250 , poor reliability etc , dissapointing .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2016 8:42:07 GMT
It's the same old inaccuracies repeated at regular cycles and it does seem unique to these bikes. For a start both the 250 and the 400 are always judged together, with the less than stellar performance of the 250 to the fore. They are missing the point of the bike- Honda adapted a design to fill a market gap in specific countries to suit the 250 learner laws. And they sold in their tens of thousands. And everybody waxes lyrical about the 400/4 which was a gorgeous bike of its time- but it was as heavy as the 400 SD, had 6HP less, and actually handled worse......
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2016 12:00:57 GMT
For a very long time in the nineties, month after month it used to say this in the UBG:
"Whisper it......but the 400N was a better bike than the 400/4 it replaced".
But they changed all this as the 400/4 rose in credibility (further with age) and the SupeDream fell into the old workhorse bracket. Just goes to show by the 'whisper' thing - no one wanted to admit what the SuperDream really was for some odd reason - a fantastic bike.
It was a victim (in the biking press) of its own success.
|
|
