LAVERDAS: TOOLARDY?

Here’s a little rant. I’m not sure why I’m feeling so defensive about it, so I apologise as I imagine very few people really even care. I believe that most people respect Laverdas in many ways: looks, power, handling, racing heritage, sound, quality, etc, etc. Even so, I’ve always wondered how and why the Laverda triples got their reputation for being ‘heavy’. Even the recent SFC1000 article in RC153 mentioned it, and more than once. So I thought I’d do a little research to see exactly how the Laverda compared against bikes of its day.

Cycle magazine of March 1973 shows a Laverda 1000 3C as 519lb with a full tank of gas (early drum-braked/fibreglass tank model). In the same issue they test the Yamaha TX750 and show it as 518lb with a full tank. They also test the Triumph X-75 Hurricane which measures 468lb full.

A little later in the decade, the 1975 3C was 495lb dry, and the 1976 3CL was 543lb wet. Various magazines and internet searches give these weights: * BMW R1000RT 518lb dry * Kawasaki Z650SR 486lb dry * Kawasaki Z1000ST 561lb dry * Suzuki GSX750 508lb dry, 562lb wet * Suzuki GSX1100 535lb dry * Yamaha XS1000 576lb dry *Moto Guzzi Le Mans Mk1 465lb dry *Honda CB750 481lb dry *Kawasaki Z1 900 510lb dry *Triumph T160 502lb dry *Benelli 750 Sei 518lb dry, 562lb wet *Ducati 860 GT 506lb wet *Suzuki GT750 482lb dry *1973 Harley-Davidson Sportster 492lb wet

I know that British twins of the time were reckoned to be light and agile and they are in fact lighter than the Laverda. However they are for the most part 650cc, 750cc and in the case of the later Nortons, up to 850cc. Not 1000cc (OK, 981cc). I’m not trying to cherry-pick bikes here, just listing a sample of the machines tested in old magazines. Most are heavier than the Laverda 1000. Even the later triple models like the RGS and SFC are in truth no heavier than other bikes of their time, and in fact lighter than many!

The Laverdas’ heavy clutch might not have helped the overall impression of heaviness. I haven’t extended the clutch lever down at the cases the way some have, as I shudder at cutting the case – yikes – but with a bit of bindfree routing from the handlebar through the frame and around the carbs, as well as a regular lube/oiling schedule, it can be quite liveable… until you find yourself in a traffic jam anyway.

But I suppose I won’t be able to put this issue to rest as even current owners of the machine continue to view them as ‘heavy’. Alas. Steven Troupe, member 11,170

I suspect an awful lot of ‘perceived weight’ has to do with a bike’s centre of mass, and its width. The brand-new Triumph Bobber is far from featherweight (500lb dry) but it’s massively more manoeuvrable than, say, an original Sprint 900. Frank’s old Sprint carried its mass quite high and I always felt quite tottery on it, but the (heavier) 1200 Bobber seems to have better innate balance. Rowena