1967 Suzuki X-5 Sting Ray 200 - 4-Page Vintage Motorcycle Road Test Article

Description

1967 Suzuki X-5 Sting Ray 200 - 4-Page Vintage Motorcycle Road Test Article
Original, Vintage Magazine article
Page Size: Approx. 8" x 11" (21 cm x 28 cm) each page
Condition: Good
Like most Americans, we have been
conditioned to think in “bigger and
better; upward andonward” terms.Thus,
when Suzuki was rumored to be pro-
ducing a smaller version of their suc-
cessful X-6 Hustler, we were less than
enthusiastic about the prospect. Especial-
ly, as rumor indicated that the new model
was simply an X-6 with small cylinder-
bores and one set of gears removed from
the transmission. Going from 250cc to
200cc and from a 6-speed gearbox to a
lowly 5-speed was not our concept of
progress.
Rumor had the essentials correct to the
extent that Suzuki’s new X-5 was a
200cc 5-spceder. Everything else proved
to be wrong. The new Suzuki was not a
reworked X-6; it was an entirely new
model. And it was not, as we had
feared, a retrograde step. Indeed, the
X-5 strikes us (now that we have become
better acquainted with the bike) as neither
a step forward or back. Rather, it should
be considered a step off to the side.
Obviously, with 50cc less engine dis-
placement, the X-5 cannot match the
all-out performance of the X-6—which
has become a kind of standard against
which all other 250-class motorcycles
arc measured. On the other hand, the X-6
is a trifle highstrung, with its power lo-
cated up there at the top of its rpm-
range. Keep it buzzing, or the power isn’t
there. The super-enthusiast isn't bothered
by that, but the sedate Sunday-tourer
prefers a bike that is less sensitive.
Right there is where the X-5 comes into
the picture. It is not exactly a 500 rpm
slogger, and performs very well for a
200—but compared to the X-6 it is a
Grandma’s Delight. The X-5’s engine
pulls well from almost any speed; you
turn-on the tap, and away it goes. Very
responsive and agreeable to whatever it
is you are trying to make it do.
Nothing in the specifications tells us
why this should be the case. The X-5
engine’s compression ratio is slightly
lower (7.0:1, compared to 7.3:1) than
that of the X-6, but the carburetors
are only 2mm smaller (in throat size)
and maximum output for both occurs at
7500 rpm. But somehow the X-5 has a
rather flat power curve leading to the 23
bhp maximum while the X-6’s 29 bhp is
mostly concentrated up on a peak.
General layout is the same for both
models, but the X-5 has a slightly more
graceful appearance. The suspension sys-
tem consists of the usual telescopic forks
up front and those swingin’ arms at the
rear. The frame is of tubular steel, in
the familiar duplex-cradle pattern. Quite
conventional, and entirely satisfactory.
Lots of aluminum has been used in the
X-5’s engine. The 2-piccc crank/trans-
mission casing (which separates horizon-
tally) is a pair of light-alloy die castings,
and the cylinders are sand-cast from alu-
minum. Iron liners are inserted into the
cylinders and in theory you can remove
these and install replacements, or take
them out for porting work. In fact, the
cylinder liners are installed at the factory
12650-6709-04