Japanese build quality - 2nd best manufacturer?

[EuropeanNC30R...]

It's fairly well agreed upon that Honda have the highest build quality among the Japanese companies. I was wondering who people think are second best?

[Frost]

Difficult one this, yam make great engines which i have seen tuned to hell and rarely seen one blow.
Suzuki seem to make everything to a pretty high standard.
Kawasaki are still a bit behind as far as build quality is concerned.

I would say yamaha, with suzuki just behind.

[Sparks!]

Suzuki's corrode in the winter and I don't really think that much to the finish of them.

Kawasaki have improved a lot with the latest bikes, but still not quite good..

Yamaha have a very good finish, the plastics are a bit flimsy but so are all plastics... the metalwork is good finish and doesn't seem to corrode much at all really! Especailly if looked after they will stay looking like new for ages. (But so will anybike if properly looked after, just with the Yam's it's easier to keep looking new!)
____________________
Current Toys: 06 Yamaha WR250F | Nissan 350Z GT | Tech 4 Homes

[Ste]

Kawasaki clutches break.

Suzuki gearboxes break.

Yamaha chains break. (and Luke's Yamaha R6 engine is died as well)

My next bike might have to be a H*nda to see what they're like. Although my last effort to use a Honda ended with me with a broken brain so that wasn't a good start really.

[Frost]

It all depends on who looks after the bike. Its easy to see which is traditionally the higher build quality as it really starts to show through when a bike is 10 years old, however build quality on newer bikes is hard to judge.

[Stew]

I vote Yamaha, only because my bike is ten years old and is still in pretty good shape. Only problems have been with a couple of rusty fasteners which have sheared.
Never owned a Suzuki or Kawasaki but have heard loads of stories about suzukis suspect finish particularly when used in winter.
Modern bikes should all be pretty good though, so long as they are properly maintained and given a clean once in a while.

You are correct on honda's build quality though.
____________________
"Unlike public school you don't need to have your arse up and your head down to go a long way...."

[iCraig]

Well having owned 2 Suzuki's I can honestly say as long as you keep em clean and all in check and use plenty of wax-oil through the winter then corrosion isn't a problem, I currently own a 13 year old GS500 and it doesn't look it, ok there is some corrosion but not alot.

As for Kawasaki, I think there the worst of The big 4, I owned a 1998 Kawasaki ER-5 (it was just three years old when I had it with 14k on it) It had major rust on the swing arm, had to have new shocks after only 14k!! Needed to have 2 new rectifiers!! and 3 Net Batteries and 5 Speedo Cables!

Maybe I just got a lemon but I wouldn't touch another ER-5 in my life, I just hope my new (to-me) ZZR600 is better, well thats when I get it and if it passes(d) its MOT today!

As for yamaha, having only owned one of there scoot from new, that was well put together and didn't let me down one, plus when I sold it, it still looked brand spanking new! But having been on a ride out yesterday with Helen's bike springing a fuel leak and me hearing lots of problems with electrics on R1/R6's etc maybe there not that good after all.

As for Honda, they certainly know how to put a bike together, I owned a CMX250 Rebel in 2001/2002 it was the bike that replaced the ER-5 before I got my first GS500, and that thing never let me down, nothing fell off of it, or needed replacing in the 10 months I had it, just a quality bike! .

[/b]

[craigT19]

I don't think you can say there is a best build quality and a second etc...it all comes down to how there looked after? surely the only way to test would be to but 4 brand new bikes in a field and see which one lasts longest


in my experience yamahas build quality is shocking!

The best bike they ever made was the FS1e

my grandads xjr1300 started corroding all over the place when it was only one year old...and it was stored in a heated shed through the winter.

The exhaust started to change colour exposed knuts and bolts started to go etc and it had only done 4k miles..... And look at the problems both Korn and R6 stu have had with relays etc burning out.

Honda were ok.....i would say there the best "generally" my nsr did nothing but slowely fall apart

As for kawasaki? there are still 10 year old gpz's floating around...most of them are in resonable condition...would this not point to good build quality? My friends 3 year old er5 (that is his winter bike) has no rust at all, apart from on the aftermarket can he fitted, altho my ninja is showing corrosion on parts of the engine and the brakes.

And suzuki's are also generally good...but they have problems with there paint on newer bikes
____________________
Bikes owned :- 2001 nsr125, 1999 zx6r, 2006 yzf-r1, 2009 xmax 250, 2012 yzf-r1, 2015 MT-07
Current bike : - 2016 MT-10
BCF member pops. sadly missed 1945-2003

[Kickstart]

Hi

Very difficult to tell really. They all have seperate problems. Generally Kawasaki seem good for the main parts of the bike, but seem to suffer serious corrosion problems with the brakes and fasteners. Honda cannot design a charging system to save their lives, and have only just mastered cam chains.

It is also difficult to tell between different types of bikes. Stuff like the XJR is not really designed to be cleaned easily, yet most race reps will still look pretty good as it is difficult to see the bits that can corrode.

Personally I would not be too certain that Honda build quality is particularly better than the other Japanese makes. For example, check the frame paint on any steel framed CBR600 and you will find it corroded.

All the best

Keith
____________________
Traxpics, track day and racing photographs - Bimota Forum - Bike performance / thrust graphs for choosing gearing

[iCraig]

Anyone remember Honda's Build Quality from the 70's/80's?

Now that was bad!