New CSC TT250/Hawk BETTER than 1970s Japanese bikes?

[Megadan]

Originally Posted by enewmen

I'm just surprised the clone bikes are not using new techniques and materials to make the clones better than the originals.

I'm not. Most of these bikes, especially the Hawks, are built as cheaply as they can be made. It's not about innovation or integrity, but about churning out thousands of bikes for cheap.

Don't get me wrong, I still love the Hawk for what it is, and it can be an incredibly reliable machine as long as you are willing to put in the work to do the initial PDI, keep up on the maintenance, and work out a few bugs along the way.

[enewmen]

Originally Posted by Megadan

I'm not. Most of these bikes, especially the Hawks, are built as cheaply as they can be made. It's not about innovation or integrity, but about churning out thousands of bikes for cheap.

Don't get me wrong, I still love the Hawk for what it is, and it can be an incredibly reliable machine as long as you are willing to put in the work to do the initial PDI, keep up on the maintenance, and work out a few bugs along the way.

I did some more checking and reading between the lines. This is what my tiny brain came up with: It seems the clone bikes have reliable components (which can also be upgraded). What's lacking is assembly. So common problems are wire/cable routing, screws coming off, bearings needing grease, etc.. So if the owner is willing to go through this level of detail, route all wires/cables correctly, add Loctite to screws where needed, make sure all nuts/bolts have correct torque, make sure all moving parts are well lubricated, etc. Then the clone should last for tens of thousands of miles. Even the CG engine is built well if it does not overheat. Do you think my casual observations are correct? Thanks!