Kawasaki Z 1000 MKII

By 1979 the one-time 903 Kawasaki was into its second year of Z1000 life, at 1,015cc, and displayed more than a few changes  sufficient, anyway, to justify Kawasaki calling it MKII.

In the engine the alterations were designed to boost power by 10bhp, to a peak of 93bhp at 8,000 rpm. Carburetor size had gone up 2mm to 28mm, the air-filter box had been modified, the silencers tuned; the crankshaft was rebalanced, with bigger journals, and the cams were made a little more fierce.

To deal with the extra power the chassis was strengthened around the headstock, and the steering geometry altered by a degree or two. Suspension remained entirely conventional, without multi-adjustment or air-assistance. In the event that is, on the road  the big four was beginning to show its years when compared with contemporary designs from Suzuki and Honda. Kawasaki's reputation in the 'superbike' field was slipping. It was only fully restored with the advent of the fuel-injection GPz 1100 in 1981.

Road Test

WITH THE arrival of Kawasaki's six-cylinder behemoth, the role of company flagship is no longer a burden for the factory's one litre fours. But the Big K has not allowed its long serving thousands to languish outside the limelight without proper development just as well considering the classy con tenders other manufacturers are fieldir\g in the 100 cm3 arena.
Two versions are now available of what, last year, was Kawasaki's "cooking" 1000 a shaft-driven model to appeal to touring freaks and a chain driven variant with a strengthened frame to satisfy boy racer types.
Both models have numerous detail improvements and our Mark Two test machine (the chain drive job) makes a better all rounder than either last year's Z1000 or Z1 R (an up-dated Z1-R is in the pipeline, by the way).
The bike
The most obvious change to the Z1000 for the Mark Two model is its appearance the new bike sports Kawasaki's new, angular corporate styling. Cast alloy wheels, triangular sidecovers, plastic tailpiece and matt black engine give the Mark Two a very Z1 R ish look (without the fairing of course).

The discs are drilled in a radial pattern to reduce brake squeals and sintered metal pads, said to give a much better wet weather performance, do the hard work inside the calipers.

The Mark Two is also considerably changed in the engine from its immediate predecessor. It's also slightly tweaked; Kawasaki claims a marginal power increase (two percent) over the Zl-R for an output of 69.4 kW (93 bhp). They're lazy horses though —
they slow the bike up fractionally! The engine also now has electronic ignition (a good move) and an emission control system which allows fresh air to be added to the hot exhaust gases just before they leave the head. No air pump is used, the velocity of the spent exhaust gases past the orifices sucks the air in through small one-way valves, so the power loss should be small, if any.
The frame, too, has received attention.

Mark Twos come with double-walled sectioi for the front downtubes from the steerii head (to improve rigidity in this area) ai four needle roller bearings support tl swingarm, as on the Zl-R. Damping in tl rear shocks is heavier this year and tl front fork springs are a shade softer (bo steps in the right direction). New silence and a more stepped seat round out t package.

One or two items which were showii their age also made the transition from c to new, the result is that the Mark T\ soliders on with instruments which we modern eight years ago (this applies to t vertical bank of idiot lights too), a tungst headlight and a very mediocre horn. But you want to warn wayward pedestrians y can always turn the blinkers on and achie your aim with motorcycling's first quad phonic, 100 watts per channel blink buzzer. Guaranteed to put grandmothers their graves 10 years early, this sadistic I tie device emits more noise from its ti central (just under the speedometer) < than most 747s can pump out on take-c Even the patented TWO WHEELS blinl buzzer muffler (a Bandaid stuck over I hole) scarcely muted the sound output of

this little baby which, unlike the Honda system, can't be easily turned off. Really Kawasaki, 180 decibels would have been quite enough!

In most other ways, the Z1000 Mark Two follows closely the well-known pattern set by the big K's heavyweight tourers over the past five years or so, which is to say it offers honest overall value without necessarily being brilliant in specific areas. We expect the Mark Two will prove every bit as dependable as its rock-solid forerunners.

Engine
In terms of fundamentals the engine has changed little from last year's model — the across the frame four still displaces 1015 cm1, uses a roller bearing crank, gear primary drive, wet sump lubrication and a dohc head which breathes through four Mikuni slide carburettors and exhausts into a four-into-two-system with a balancer pipe. The carbs this year have 28 mm chokes (26 mm on last year's Z1000) but remain without an accelerator pump.

Thankfully, Kawasaki has at last given the big A to ignition points (the Mark Two comes with a fully transistorised, electronic triggering circuit) leaving Suzuki as the only Japanese manufacturer still fitting fiddly, mechanical ignition triggers to its big road-burners. Also debuting on the Mark Two is the emission control system we described earlier. We fervently hope this device isn't a forerunner of more power-sapping and fuel-wasting, clean-air additions to future motorcycle engines: Surely motorcyclists do enough for the environment by leaving their cars at home!

The motor's crankcases, cylinder block and head are finished in what Kawasaki terms a "matt black" (although it's glossy) and highly polished or chromed bolt-on covers (for alternator, ignition sensors, cambox ends etc) are used to set off the predominantly black powerplant. Only the centre section of the clutch cover is polished, the remainder being left black to help the monstrous cover look less of an eyeful on one side of the engine. Well-chromed headers (which kept their right color all through the test) do their bit too in emphasising the engine's handsome lines, but we reckon the front mudguard should be painted in the color of the bike (like the Zl-R's) rather than chromed.

Starting the one-litre four (even using the funny foot crank still fitted) presented no troubles although guessing the right amount of choke needed for a sensible fast idle did. Kawasaki has still not corrected the oversensitive fast-idle linkage on the carburettor bank. Neither has it fitted a neutral override to the starter motor lockout: You get a big fat nothing when the button is pushed unless the clutch lever is pulled in at the same time. The safety principle is all very commendable but our Mark Two had enough in-gear clutch drag (before the plates were freed) on cold mornings for the starter to pull the bike off the sidestand irrespective of the lever being in.

While we're on starting, the Mark Two comes with an excellent owner's manual (97 pages — all in English!) which has a good explanation of the reasons why four-stroke bike engines should be warmed up slowly and ridden gently until they reach normal operating temperature. Many riders would

extend their engine's lives considerably if they digested these paragraphs, which are of course equally valid for brands other than Kawasaki.
Once running, the Mark Two's engine warmed fairly quickly (unlike Yamaha's XS11) to normal running, and, like all modern Japanese engines, never showed any signs of becoming overly hot no matter how hard it worked. The bike proved particularly smooth at higher speeds (over 160 km/h in top) though elsewhere in the rev range it vibrated typically (but not intrusively). The irritating rattle of the mirrors in their plastic cowls at particular engine speeds remains, and our pillion passengers complained of footpeg tingles when the engine was working around its redline.

Compared with its other Japanese rivals the Mark Two's engine is not quite as quick to follow throttle commands (particularly when the throttle is backed off) as it might be. We don't think the emission control gear has any part in this characteristic; last year's Zl-R (we've ridden two) displayed the same trait.
One area of engine performance which has changed significantly (worsened we're sad to say) is fuel consumption. Last year's Zl-R and Z1000 had fairly meagre thirsts for their performances — our road test Zl-R averaged 14.8 km/1 (42.1 mpg) but the Mark Two 1979 model has no hope of returning figures like these.

Our test bike averaged 12.6 km A (35.8 mpg) with a touring best of 13.9 km/1 (39.5 mpg) and a hard riding worst of 10.7 km/1 (30.4 mpg). These results make the Mark Two a shade thirstier than most 1000-1100 cm3 bikes and even the CBX is only a little heavier on fuel. We wonder if the economy premium was part of the price for the claimed extra three horsepower.
Unusually for a Kawasaki, our Mark Two also used a pint of oil during the test. Dragstrip running or full-throttle, high-rev work on the street would produce a blue haze from the left hand silencer in spite of the 3000-odd km the bike had covered. Our testbike had been an evaluation bike for the NSW Police and we wonder how carefully it was run in. It wasn't as strong as our test Zl-R on the dyno (we found that curious in view of the factory's higher claimed output) and dragstrip times verified the dyno figures for the machine. A few drops of oil also weeped past the camcover gasket.

Performance
Like all of its predecessors, the Mark Two had no trouble coping with dragstrip demands and was easy to control to boot. Fitted with the new Pirelli Phantom tyres (which Kawasaki put on half way through the test to replace a pair of worn Metzelers) we managed a best 400 m time of 12.1 seconds, 0.1 sees slower than the Zl-R and XS1100 and 0.3 sees slower than Suzuki's GS1000. Out of eight runs we only achieved 12.1 seconds once (the fifth pass) but 12.2 times were readily obtainable once familiar with the bike.

As with the Zl-R, gearchanges were at just under 9000 rpm. Top speed was 217 km/h at 8400 rpm, just a whisker below peak power revs.
On the Stewart Car Company dynamometer the engine produced power curves very similar in shape to last year's test Zl-R, the same smooth power build-up being evident although it tailed off rather faster past 8500 rpm. Peak power, 52.6 kW at 8500 rpm, was 1.8 kW down on the Zl-R (and 2.1 kW down on the GS1000) and generally the Mark Two's readings were 0.5 to 1.2 kW below the Zl-R's. The torque curve shows a drop in the 2000-3000 rev area compared to the Zl-R, due, in part, to a slight miss that crept in around 2500 rpm and took the edge off the Mark Two's low-speed running on the dyno.

The Z1000 Mark Two is a lusty performer regardless, lacking none of the feel of the grunty mid-range performance expected from a big roadster four — it's just that other Japanese one-litre bikes can do fractionally better even if it's impossible to pick in a seat-of-the-pants evaluation.

Transmission and clutch
Overall gearing has been lowered slightly (six percent) from the Zl-R's by changing the final drive ratios, and first gear, while still good for 95 km/h at 9000 rpm, is now perfect for effortlessly fast street take-offs without the mass of clutch slipping that marked a spirited getaway on a Zl-R (especially up a hill or when two-up).

In our Zl-R test we found little to complain of in the transmission area except that we thought the gearing was a trifle too tall. That has now been remedied and the transmission, clutch, internal ratios and overall gearing are now entirely satisfactory.
Superbike "clunk" is still present the first time one engages first gear after a cold night and Kawasaki's worthwhile device to allow positive selection of neutral (you can't shift from first to second while the bike is stationary) is retained. Strangely, it has been dropped for the Z1300 six. The clutch on our testbike behaved perfectly and excessive drivetrain freeplay was never a problem.

Handling and suspension
It is unfortunate the Z1000 Mark Two has to be compared with the Suzuki GS1000 for no tougher opponent in the arts of handling, steering and suspension exists. Kawasaki has improved the ZI000's steering and suspension (which we preferred to the Zl-R's) and the Zl-R's handling (better than the ZI000's) and the whole package is present on the Z1000 Mark Two.

The double-walled frame tubes around the steering head have eradicated the last remnants of the uncertainty of earlier models, and the return to a 19 inch front wheel has put a stop to the Zl-R's tendency to follow longitudinal road irregularities and to stand up when braked mid-corner. Also, the adoption of four needle-roller bearings for swing-arm support defeats any thoughts this member may have had about becoming less than totally rigid (Gosh!).
Although both front and rear suspensions are modified for 1979, neither the forks nor the rear units can provide the well-controlled compliance of Suzuki's air forks and shocks.

The forks have a little too much internal friction and not enough travel and the rear units remain slightly oversprung. The end result is that the Mark Two transmits a little too much road shock to the rider and the bike itself can become unsettled (especially at the back) on tricky road surfaces like truck-braking corrugations. However, the bike is significantly better than its two predecessors and nearly as good as Yamaha's XS1100. It only really seems wanting when matched against the GS1000. The same applies to the Mark Two's steering (which is quite good really — and better than the XSllOO's) — it just can't equal the precision and finesse of the big Suzuki's steering.

Despite weighing in only one kilogram lighter than the Zl-R, the Z1000 Mark Two feels lighter to ride and tossing the bike about in S-bends is quite easy.
Two-up riding on the Mark Two was secure and fairly comfortable (given the suspension) but the pillion's part of the seat slopes forward too much. This, combined with the fairly slippery seat covering, meant our test passenger had to do a fair bit of pushing herself back up the seat every time the bike braked. The Kawasaki prompts close rider/pillion relationship but the strain of having to brace against braking is bad news for the passenger.
Pillions also noticed the pegs (which are well-located) vibrating too much when we were in a hurry. The rider himself fares better and we have no complaints about that seat (or riding position) although we think the earlier non-stepped Z1000 saddles are better overall. Ground clearance, one or two
up is quite good, even though some competitors provide more.

Braking
We found the brakes on the Mark Two very much to our liking (having ridden some rather spongily-braked Hondas lately), the three discs with all-hydraulic operation (and lacking the Zl-R's cable/hydraulic front units) provided very controllable, powerful stopping. Feel at the controls was excellent on our testbike.

A major aspect of the Mark Two's good brakes are the new all-metal disc pads which provide the model with far better wet weather stopping than any bike out of Japan since disc fever hit us. Heavy rain during the test provided ample opportunity to assess the components. There is still a slight delay when the brakes are applied initially, but it's a fraction of the usual one. At the strip the Mark Two managed very respectable crash stops and we had no problems with fade.

General
If there's one concession Australia needs which is yet to be heeded by Kawasaki it's the matter of tank capacity. The overly small reserve fuel supply — 1.9 Litres — is inadequate for a moderately thirsty bike in Australia. And the tank holds only 17.8 Litres anyway, which doesn't give a very good touring range although it's much better than the Zl-R's. Three and a half Litres would be the minimum sensible reserve
capacity. On one occasion (during a petrol shortage, naturally) we ran the bike completely dry in only 185 km by underestimating the tank's reserve capacity. Be warned — about the range and the frustration!

We think also that the steering lock should be combined with the ignition switch. It's primitive in this age to have to go hunting for it elsewhere.
Just about everything else on the bike is okay. Switches are standard Kawasaki and posed no problems, the hazard lights are a worthwhile fitting (they have their own separate relay to handle the extra load) and the finish of the bike is very good. New blinkers are used but the tungsten headlight lingers on. That's also a strange one — the Zl-R's QI unit would've been nice. And the engine's polished alloy covers still tarnish a little too readily for our liking. Maybe on the Mark Three . . .

Conclusion
The Z1000 Mark Two is a very good-looking motorcycle, considerably improved over either the Zl-R or the Z1000, which also happens to come with probably the most durable engine in motorcycling. Its suspension can't quite match that of its chief rivals, but its brakes certainly can in the wet. The Mark Two promises a long life and gives reasonable value for the dollars invested, in spite of its diminished fuel economy.
It's not state-of-the-art — it is strong run-of-the-mill.

Source Two Wheals Magazine 1979