Starting the hunt

NightBiker07 · Post by **NightBiker07** » September 5th, 2011, 9:53 pm

After reading a few threads, it seems like what i want is a 1990+ motor, correct?

it seems like the 89 is very similar, except the clutch is more narrow. Has that been a major issue?

I ask because an 89 popped up locally that i may be able to get for a decent price, BUT if the narrow clutch can be problematic, I will definitely keep looking.

I am definitely wanting maximum parts interchangeability, which seems to come from the 90-01 motors. I dont want to have an issue in 5 years finding parts for an older, less produced motor. If I go through the trouble to build one of these monsters, I dont want to shoot myself in the foot.

freeride588 · Post by **freeride588** » September 5th, 2011, 11:20 pm

I think that 89 - 01 are the same except for the tranny 89 - 93 are close ratio trans and 94 - 01 are wider ratio.

NightBiker07 · Post by **NightBiker07** » September 5th, 2011, 11:37 pm

freeride588 wrote:I think that 89 - 01 are the same except for the tranny 89 - 93 are close ratio trans and 94 - 01 are wider ratio.

Not according to these pics, provided by Roosty. The 89 seems to have a one-year only case, and a narrower clutch. I was mainly curious about the narrow clutch being a problem. But now that you mention the tranny, I will probably focus on finding a 94+ bike. I forgot about the trans differences.

freeride588 · Post by **freeride588** » September 5th, 2011, 11:43 pm

Huh i thought they were the same but i guess not but i would definitely go 94+ so as bob says you can go faster then 48 miles per hour.

coley13 · Post by **coley13** » September 6th, 2011, 12:00 am

93 tranny is wide ratio? isnt it ? the early ones are too.

freeride588 · Post by **freeride588** » September 6th, 2011, 12:12 am

coley13 wrote:93 tranny is wide ratio? isnt it ? the early ones are too.

Im pretty sure it 94 and up but im wrong constantly in my daily life so this may be no different

hoofarted · Post by **hoofarted** » September 6th, 2011, 6:38 am

93+ is wide(r) ratio

freeride588 · Post by **freeride588** » September 6th, 2011, 7:48 am

hoofarted wrote:93+ is wide(r) ratio

Like i said constantly wrong

Tharrell · Post by **Tharrell** » September 6th, 2011, 10:03 am

freeride588 wrote:
hoofarted wrote:93+ is wide(r) ratio

Like i said constantly wrong

Don't feel too bad.
I'm right there with ya

Post by **AlisoBob** » September 6th, 2011, 10:09 am

People act like that HRC gearset ( Or the Mad Man Eng. copy) is the "Holy Grail"

Dropping high gear from .79 to .75 aint much.....

Rhino89523 · Post by **Rhino89523** » September 6th, 2011, 10:30 am

I have been running a 1992 Trans for years, it will still make your eyes water when its wide open, never had a problem keeping up with people.

Kuma · Post by **Kuma** » September 6th, 2011, 12:16 pm

I never had an issue with the clutch being a doisk shy in my '89 running in the sand with a paddle, it awaays was a runner too. if you're still looking at the '89, some of them have the mag side cover so beware of that.

Tharrell · Post by **Tharrell** » September 6th, 2011, 12:31 pm

Desert, dunes, and fire roads are the only place I can see a 500 at WOT for very long. My '92 is a close ratio and I'm seldom in high gear.
Wear goggles, your eyes are gonna water!

BannedCR500Riders.com

Starting the hunt

Starting the hunt