Motorcycle Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
84 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I found this locally for sale.
I have to have this bike.
The guy is coming over in 30 minutes.

61144
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
84 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Bought the bike. It's as stock as I remember them with 7200 miles showing.
The gas tank has the old factory stickers still on it that I will attempt to remove but the bike rides like brand new.
 

·
Retired twice: Navy and as a govt contractor
Joined
·
12,005 Posts
An 86 with 7200 miles and it runs great? Either you are the luckiest man on the planet or a lot of work has recently been done to it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
84 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Yes, no leaks at all and it does run great. I bought it from a guy that bought it for himself and he did a little work on it and replaced the tires. But it runs like new.
The only problem I see is a little rust here and there but I can clean that up. I also will have the original seat redone as it has a couple of small rips. What the hell, after 34 years you cannot expect the leather to last that long.
I have had lots of bikes over my lifetime and just always liked the power, weight and looks of the Rebel 450.
This one popped on Craigslist and I bought it right away.
The guy has to move out of his rental due to a divorce sale of the rental he was in and needed money.
He told me that he really regretted having to sell this bike.
I paid him $2400 for it and I figure if I keep it in nice shape it won't devalue.
I have had over 20 bikes in my time. Just keep changing on a whim.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
358 Posts
Interesting model, the CMX450 was only made for two years. 38 HP at around 9000 from the SOHC 447cc, 360degree twin engine. Not what we think of as a cruiser type engine, with it's short stroke, high revving design, but styled as a cruiser. The specs say the fork rake angle is 58 degrees, but there is no way that number is correct, probably some tech writer wrote it wrong once and the scribes have faithfully copied the error for the last 30+ years.

Looks like a fun bike to ride, and I'll bet it is pretty scarce. Thankfully it was complete and in good shape as purchased.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
84 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Without researching, it seems to me that a friend bought a brand new 450 scrambler in the mid 1960s, maybe late 60s?
He loved the bike.
Quick research showed a 1971 CB450 almost like mine from 1971.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
358 Posts
Quick research showed a 1971 CB450 almost like mine from 1971.
If you look a bit closer you'll see that the CB450 was quite a different design than your newly aquired CMX450 Rebel.

Your CMX is a 447cc twin with 75 x 50.6 bore and stroke, making 38 hp at 8000 rpm and driving a 6 speed gearbox. It was only made in 1986 and 1987. I'm thinking that its Single Overhead Cam engine has more in common with the CB400T Hawk and offspring of that model, than with the bike you posted a picture of.

The CB450, which was made from 1965 until 1974, was very advanced when it was introduced, making a claimed 43 hp at 8500 rpm from 444 ccs. It is a Dual Overhead Cam engine with 70 x 57.8 bore and stroke. Early models had 4 speed gearboxes and later ones, 5 speed. The Honda CB450 was a serious wakeup call to the British motorcycle industry in 1965, and could basically run with the 650s.

Honda made a lot of different models in the 350 to 500 range over the years. If you are looking for potential parts interchange sources for your Rebel 450, I'd focus on the SOHC models. This chart might be helpful: Template:Honda motorcycles (1980s) - Wikipedia
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,052 Posts
The real difference with the CB450 was how the valves were closed. The SOHC bikes were never high horsepower for their size. Rather they were good all round about town bike. The Kawasaki and Suzuki 450, and my XS400 Yamaha make more power. To do that they rev quite high.
UK
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
84 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
I always liked the middle weight bikes. Lighter and handled much better for local riding like I do.
For a time, seemed that all manufacturers were only making up to some 250cc and then much bigger bikes.
Now I see that they have returned to the middle weight classes.
I thought about a new Rebel 500 but I thought they were over priced.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
358 Posts
The small and middle weight bikes don't get much sales volume love here in the US, other than the dirt riders. City hipsters seem to prefer scooters. In UK the 250s are propped up by their legal status as learner bikes. Elsewhere, legal lines are drawn at 400 ccs, which supports models below that capacity. In the US, there's none of that, and a lot of folks are convinced they need a liter of engine, or more, to ride to the bar on a Saturday night, let alone venture out on the expressway.

But, the rest of the world is a different story. In asia, and India, the vast majority of bikes on the road are well below 250 ccs. Those folks are, on average, physically smaller, but they also value something that slips easily through congested streets and gets 100+ mpg. A 500 cc machine is considered a big, loud demonstration of flagrant machismo. Royal Enfield even named one of their models that. The 350 version had a whopping 18 hp. Royal Enfield Machismo-350 Specifications, Features, Mileage, Weight, Tyre Size
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
84 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Loved small Bikes. My first was a 1959 Triumph Cub. 200cc twin if I remember right. I was 15 when I bought it. A little later while in the Army at Fort Huachuca, AZ, I bought my first new bike, a 1967 Honda 305 Scrambler. They were so
popular on base that there must have been over a 1000 of them on base. In Tucson if I remember right you could buy the Honda for just under some $700 and the GIs loved them.
1959 Triumph Tiger Cub.jpg
1967 Honda 305 Scrambler.jpg
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top