Honda Cr125r
HONDA CR125R
CYCLE WORLD TEST
News Flash: Honda Discovers 21 in. Front Tire.
Honda isn’t known for making major design changes on a yearly basis, so the 1980 CR125 is somewhat of a surprise. The 125 was new for '79 but didn't get the raves Honda expected. Most riders liked the engine and brakes but complained about the 23 in. front wheel, the claw tires and the shakey front end. Additionally, the bike had little resemblance to the machines the factory sponsored riders were competing on.
Buyers will find little to criticize on the ’80 CR. It has changed visually and mechanically. First, the 23 in. front tire has been shelved, replaced by a regular 21 in. The Claw Action tires have also been scrapped and replaced with a more ✓ conventional tread. Still designed by Honda and built by Bridgestone, they work better this time around. Honda brochures carefully avoid the 21 in. wheel, preferring to talk about other improvements instead, but we feel the front wheel is the most
important change to the bike. The weird wobble is gone and so are tire replacement hassles.
Changing the front wheel diameter required a different frame and the new one is a double downtube design. The rest of the frame is very similar to last year; large main backbone, triangulated with a smaller tube and heavily gusseted around the steering head, engine cradled by the down tubes, backbone ending at a tube running between the top shock mounts, no rear loop and minimal triangulation in the area under the seat.
The double downtube frame add to the
rigidity of the frame and it may not: Honda changed from a single to double and Yamaha from a double to single for 1980 and both claim strength advantages.
The rear of the bike has taken on the look of the factory racers. The swing arm is a banana shape that places the shocks farther forward and more vertical. But unlike the factory bikes, the production bike uses steel instead of aluminum for the arm. The arm pivots in needle bearings and the hollow pivot bolt also mounts the rear of the engine.
The shocks are also new for '80. They are shorter than last year to fit the new forward position. They have aluminum bodies with finned piggyback reservoirs and dual springs. Two rebound adjustments are possible by removing the springs and turning the shaft. We didn’t like either setting. Honda is proud of the shocks and point out things like the DU bushings; made from a blending of Teflon, lead and bronze. The DU bushings are used to prevent binding and drag around the shock shaft. Air/oil separation is performed with a reservoir bladder rather than a piston as used bv most makers. Although the bladder is the proper approach, the Showa shock has overdone it. The bladder uses up most of the area inside the reservoir so little extra fluid capacity is gained. The bladder approach is good since a bladder reacts easier and faster to small bumps, but it should be smaller or the reservoir larger.
Forks are Showa leading axle jobs that contain a damping cartridge like before. The big changes are the addition of travel (11.8 in. total), air caps and the use of DU bushings at the top of the fork slider and on the lower part of the stanchion tube. We question using the Showa cartridge because it offers no apparent benefit and takes up space that could be better put to use by increasing oil volume.
The red 125 motor looks much like it did last year. Tip-off is the increased finning on the center port cylinder and radial head. Honda has been using chrome plated cylinder bores for several years. Their claims have been better cooling, less weight, less distortion, more horsepower. Guess what? The increased fin area is needed because the ’80 125 has a steel lined bore and 2.5 hp more than last year—with the same porting! A larger carburetor—34mm replacing a 32mm—probably adds a little to the claimed power increase but not all of it.
Anyway, back to the increased finning. Heat transfer is slowed w hen it has to travel through different metals, across gaps between steel and aluminum bondings and the slowed transfer of heat means the engine runs hotter and distorts more. So, a steel bore cylinder needs more fin area.
A large reed is placed between the carburetor and piston. It has six petals made from stainless steel with stamped-in strengthening ribs. Word has it the ribbing was inspired by Mother Nature; many
winged insects have very thin wings that are ribbed for strength. Honda’s engineers simply copied the design from a mosquito’s wing. The CR piston has had another ring added for a total of two. Another surprise after using a single ring for a long time. The six-speed transmission is unchanged from last year, as is the clutch and most other internal parts.
The little CR has an aluminum kick starter that looks unchanged. Wrong. It has had grease seals added to the pivot
point. The seals keep mud out, grease in. Forget about the kick lever sticking in, it can’t happen. However, it is a little awkward to use; it is short and mounted high on the engine, and the operator’s boot hits the top of the right footpeg at full bottom.
Honda is the last of the Japanese giants to switch to plastic for the fuel tank on motocrossers. The tank is nicely shaped and holds 1.7 gal. of premix. It has a large filler, a plastic cap with vent tube and solid mounts. In fact, the rear is retained by a> Steel cable. Fenders are also plastic; the front properly shaped, the rear on the short side. Rear-set side plates have finally become standard and add a modern look.
The new CR has a reshaped seat. It fits the frame and general styling nicely and offers more padding at the front where most riders spend their time.
General control layout is good; the bars are the proper shape and width, hand levers are easy to operate and reach, the brake pedal has a ribbed top and adjustable height, and the aluminum shift lever is the right length.
The fold-up kick stand is history. It has been replaced by a prop type that can’t be taken along, but can’t come down and cause a crash either. Most motocrossers like the idea, since they remove the frame mounted ones anyway. Trail riders won’t like the idea, but 125 motocrossers make lousy trail bikes so it shouldn’t be much of a problem.
We raced the little 125 a couple times. Second place in the highly competitive pro> class was as good as we could do on it and the rider took many chances to finish that well. The rear shocks, as good as they look, aren’t right. Cold, they have too much rebound damping, warm they are just about right, hot the damping disappears and the springs bounce the back of the bike around. And a pro rider will get them hot in seven or eight laps around a rough course. Adjusting the damping to the stronger rebound position compounds the problem while cold, and doesn’t help when hot. They work fine through large roller and gentle bumps but quickly become confused when pushed fast through short deep bumps, the kind most MX courses develop by the time practice is over. The front tire also slows a fast rider. It skates on hard ground, but doesn’t work too badly in mud.
Otherwise, the new CR is hard to pick apart.
The forks soak up small and large
bumps without a whimper and the air valves offer a lot of adjustability. The brakes are excellent, stopping quickly and chatter-free. The frame doesn’t twist or flex, nor does the swing arm. Seating position and general layout are correct for normal sized 125 riders and the mid section doesn’t protrude or interfere with the rider’s knees. The distracting wobble, characteristic of the ’79 CR is happily gone. The ’80 stays straight and stable with the gas or brakes on. Steering is still quick and the bike has a nimble but positive feel. The front wheel still skates, a problem with the tire design or rubber compound, rather than geometry or wheel size like before. Replacing the front tire with a Metzeler or Pirelli will solve the problem. (A choice not possible with last year’s 23 incher.)
The little Honda will pull an RM125T two to three bike lengths in a drag, a nice advantage to have in the start straight. But the Suzuki will pass the Honda back be-
fore the end of the moto if the track is rough. The Suzuki shocks are far superior to the CRs and the CR will be doing giant tank slappers while the RM motors past under control.
The horsepower increase is noticeable and a good power spread has been maintained. It’s still a very small engine for the amount of power extracted and requires rider awareness and quickness. To go fast around a track, the rider has to be ready for the corners ahead, use wide lines and shift constantly. The six-speed transmission cooperates with the engine; gear ratios are good, shifting is smooth and positive and the clutch isn’t needed when shifting. The clutch has the same traits as last year. Engagement is sudden and instant. This is unnerving to non-125 riders, but actually beneficial to 125MX racers, most of whom ride with one or two fingers on the clutch lever, ready to tap the lever and return the engine to max power if it starts to fall off. It works, and means the rider won’t have to shift quite as often. Fanning the clutch in certain corners will make a 125 blast out of the corner, and the instant type clutch is best for it.
HONDA CR125R-80
$1329
Honda’s 1980 CR125R is a super little bike. It has excellent power and excellent forks, great frame, good brakes, and a neat swing arm. It is also heavily flawed by shocks that promise performance but deliver bucks and boings. A good set of •aftermarket shocks is going to set the CR owner back another $250-300. And without them he will have a hard time being competitive on the race track.
Is the rest of the package worth the total investment of the bike and replacement shocks? ($ 1329 plus $300, about $ 1650 plus tax.) Considering the rest of the bike’s merits, all the test riders said they would buy one. G¡
