Honda Shadow Riders | Page 8 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Honda Shadow Riders

Just got back from a ride on my 750 Shadow Spirit C2 after just getting it back on the road.
Neat how you don't forget certain skills like swimming and bike riding.
Looked at the registration and insurance certificate and the bike is actually a 2007 not a 2009 as I thought.
I'm 5' 9" and the bike is a perfect fit.
If I pick up a bigger bike for touring next summer I think I'll keep the Shadow.
I can't imagine a better "around the GTA" bike.
Keeps up with traffic on the 401 and 407 and very nimble in the many intersections and side streets in the city and suburbs.
It's practically a new bike with less than 200 km on it and it's worth more than I'd ever get for it on a trade-in.
Not many 2007 Shadows around with that little mileage.


Nice. You have some pics?
And they went to shaft drive by then, right?
 
Nice. You have some pics?
And they went to shaft drive by then, right?



My 2007 750 Honda Shadow Spirit C2 bike includes a weatherproof Garmin 660 ZUMO GPS (can be seen in photo just to the right of the left mirror) that will run in the pouring rain and is hooked in with the bikes wiring, passengers back rest & luggage carrier and a clear plexiglass bug shield.
In my opinion she's a looker and can hang in there on the 400, 401 & 407. Less than 100 km on the odo at this point in time. She's been a "shed queen" for most of her 7 years.
Great "around GTA" bike (handles like a dream), extrememly easy on fuel, less than 10:1 compression ratio so you don't need to burn expensive high test gas.
Not my first choice for a touring bike but she'll do it with no problem with 1-up and your luggage.
If you like to pack the little (some soap opera + chip & dip moms aren't so little anymore) lady and the kitchen sink on a trip I'd be looking at something bigger.
 
Last edited:
[QUOTE=
Great "around GTA" bike (handles like a dream), extremely easy on fuel, less than 10:1 compression ratio so you don't need to burn expensive high test gas.

Does this mean that I've been wasting $$ on 94 gas in my bike? The previous owner said that's all he ever used, so I continued.
 
Great "around GTA" bike (handles like a dream), extremely easy on fuel, less than 10:1 compression ratio so you don't need to burn expensive high test gas.

Does this mean that I've been wasting $$ on 94 gas in my bike? The previous owner said that's all he ever used, so I continued.

I think the actual compression ratio on my bike is 9.6:1 or thereabouts.
Don't see why I'd need high test gas.
I'll fill the tank with high test and run it for a while on high test before I put it in the shed for the winter but in the meantime she's running smooth on the regular 87 octane fuel.
If she was "pinging" I'd know it.
My bikes a lamer compared to some probably because of the lower compression ratio but there are certain advantages in being a lamer.
I've been out of the saddle for 3 decades but I've owned a few motorcycles in my time on terra firma.

**Disclaimer: I'm not recommending that you use regular gas in your motorcycle. I'm just telling you what I use in mine. I live with the consequences of my choices and you with yours.
 
Last edited:
duplicate post - sorry
 
Last edited:
Bump to this thread for some advice....
As previously posted, I have been running 94 octane from Petro for the last 5 years. It seems that the recommended octane is 89. Would it be bad for my bike to drop down to 89 or 91? I know the cost savings will be negligible, but if I have been throwing away money, and it won't hurt it, maybe I will. Advice on how to proceed?
@Pricedo, I read what you posted, just wondering if the switch back would be bad.
 
Seems seems too wishy washy. Shore it up with some research (pro tip: read the manual) and if in fact 89 is the recommended octane use that. Not only were you throwing money away, you might also be making less power at the higher octane. I know might seems wishy washy but there you go.
 
Seems seems too wishy washy. Shore it up with some research (pro tip: read the manual) and if in fact 89 is the recommended octane use that. Not only were you throwing money away, you might also be making less power at the higher octane. I know might seems wishy washy but there you go.


That's where I got it from. Was reading through the manual and saw it. Will drop back to 89 next fuel up.
How does the higher octane make less power?
 
How does the higher octane make less power?

Contains less British Thermal Units than than lower octane gas. It's counter intuitive.
 
Contains less British Thermal Units than than lower octane gas. It's counter intuitive.


Now I have no clue on whether to take your previous advice seriously or not.
 
Now I have no clue on whether to take your previous advice seriously or not.

I think it's commonly understood that using higher grade petrol than spec'd is a waste. You need lowest octane just this side of pinging, detonation and pre-ignition. As an example, diesel fuel has much lower octane and much higher BTU rating. I don't normally give these matters a lot of consideration so we might need a cleanup in aisle 152. Or google it yourself.
 
I think it's commonly understood that using higher grade petrol than spec'd is a waste. You need lowest octane just this side of pinging, detonation and pre-ignition. As an example, diesel fuel has much lower octane and much higher BTU rating. I don't normally give these matters a lot of consideration so we might need a cleanup in aisle 152. Or google it yourself.


Unfortunately, I didn't know that. But thanks for the advice. And Google? No way would it entertain me as you do.
 
It's infotainment to you sir. Now go get yourself an icecream.
 
My first bike was the Phantom, it was a great bike, just the wrong bike for me.

16884880460e03cc1b7a35d4b3a12a70.jpg

Can't do this!
 
That's nice but the real concern is did the Phantom throw a shadow like a Shadow? If not gtfo.:D
 
Bump to this thread for some advice....
As previously posted, I have been running 94 octane from Petro for the last 5 years. It seems that the recommended octane is 89. Would it be bad for my bike to drop down to 89 or 91? I know the cost savings will be negligible, but if I have been throwing away money, and it won't hurt it, maybe I will. Advice on how to proceed?
@Pricedo, I read what you posted, just wondering if the switch back would be bad.

Joe,


If the manual calls for 89, then rock on. But if you get a little sputter or hard starts after sitting a bit, top up with some high test or treat with seafoam or the like.

Lower grade fuel typically contains ethanol which can attract water.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joe,


If the manual calls for 89, then rock on. But if you get a little sputter or hard starts after sitting a bit, top up with some high test or treat with seafoam or the like.

Lower grade fuel typically contains ethanol which can attract water.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks. I'm gonna drop to 89, if I find issues, I can always go one notch up to 91.
Unfortunately, haven't been on the bike for a couple weeks, so no fill up yet.
 
Thanks. I'm gonna drop to 89, if I find issues, I can always go one notch up to 91.
Unfortunately, haven't been on the bike for a couple weeks, so no fill up yet.

It's not a big deal but, if you kinda of know you're gonna park it for a bit, keep the fuel tank topped up. And put it in the battery charger for good measure.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Back
Top Bottom