XJ900 Diversion vs XJ900

There is a '99 XJ900 Diversion for sale these days one hour away form my place. The bike has the full fairing and hard saddle bags, only 11,000 kms (I wonder if the seller forgot the last digit). The color is not very exciting (dark green), but I'm a little bit tempted.

What are the main differences between this Diversion and the old Seca 900 lie mine? Lots of improvements? there is a lot more plastic on it, with the full fairing, I wonder if it makes the general maintenance a lot harder?

 

It's the "next generation" motor like in the Seca II/600 Diversion. The cylinders are slanted forward more, it has a slightly different valve cover and uses a different bucket hold-down tool.

Surprisingly, it's still an 8-valve motor and most of the "improvements" are in the areas of brakes and creature comforts.

 

WHat about the full fairing compared to the bikini fairing I have on mine?

Does it make the bike more stable at high speeds? Does it deflect the wind more effectiently at cruising speed? Is in a PITA when time comes to do maintenance?

Are front forks better and stiffer than mine?

 

Hummm, no more answers to my question, should I understand that there is no early Seca900 owners here who actually rode an XJ900 Diversion? Neither XJ900 DIversion owners who rode early Seca900 before?

 

Pretty much the same animal.

Yamaha addressed the High-speed handling issue by redesigning the way the Front Fairing got mounted. (Improved frame-mounted bracketing).

Added a Belly Pan for looks.

 

What kind of high speed are we talking about? 160 km/h? 200? more?

 

Looks like 202 km/h (125 mph) top speed. I'm kind of surprised, seeing as my XJ650 is rated for 122 mph and it has almost 20hp less.

Here's a review: http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/biker ... 994--2004/

 

Thanks, I read this review yesterday! But I also wanted to have advices from the real people, lol!

Yeah, top speed seems a bit low.

I wonder at what speed the bikini fairing begins to be a problem.

 

I THINK that the stability issue starts around 115mph IIRC.......

Dave F

 

Been there personnally, Dave?

 

You really shouldn't be surprised by the close top speed. My 550 hit 117mph speed checked with radar and GPS on a road course. It has way less HP than either bigger bike. At a certain point the wind resistance becomes a serious issue with top speed, and lower revving bikes even with high HP numbers are less able to overcome that barrier.

I was curious about the whole '83 suspension set up with the XJ900RK also. Yamaha seemed to lay out some serious hardware for that first year and backed quickly away. Was there no way to stabilize the anti-dive, damping set up? Or were owners just clueless so Yamaha abandoned it in favor of a simpler set-up?

 

As I understand it the anti-dive was a early to mid 80's fashion thing along with 16 inch front wheels,it worked to some degree but never did live up to the promise.
I've got a 750RL and 2 900's and they have all been over 180k's [on a closed test track :roll: ]
1 has a fork mounted bikini,1 frame mounted and 1 is naked and I had no stability issues,that said there are to many variables in suspension,crosswinds and the like to know what could happen in different circumstances.And it wasn't for long stretches at speed.
I worked with a guy had a Diversion 900 but can't give you a comparison unfortunately.
http://www.mctrader.com.au/news-and-rev ... 72830.aspx

 

Also the 900 divi. is a rear mono shock setup. One came up the other day for $600, with a final drive problem . The listing lasted about 5 minutes on Gumtree before it was snatched up. If I,d only seen it earlier. Cheers, Murray

 

BUMP...

So nobody who owns a 900 (besides Gunnabuild) actually responded to this question, therefore I feel compelled to ask again....

Should one replace the 83 suspension with a newer simpler version OR can it be dialed in and relied upon?

 

Hi MercuryMan , in Oz , where we got pretty much the full run of the xj900,s , the non anti-dive forks on the 1985 xj900N were generally considered superior to the anti-dive forks . The 1984 model that I had , with the frame mounted faring had been converted to the non anti-dive before I got it . With the current xj900 project I,m putting together ,Ive replaced the anti-dive forks with ones I got off an ,85 xj900 from the wreckers. With the addition of one grade heavier fork oil they seem to handle better.( I also rebuilt the old Koni rear shocks with new seals and a heavier oil as well.),Replacing the original rear shocks with Konis was a popular,almost mandatory conversion in it,s day cheers ,Murray

 

Anti dive question already answered. I found the original rear shocks too soft for two up use and had somebody make up higher strength springs. Very happy with them now.

 

I've spent some time tuning the anti-dive on my '83 900RK. Never as stiff as I would like in hard stops and more air pressure in the shocks seems to do more then any tinkering with the anti-dives.

If you don't want to mess with the anti-dive mechanisms, you can always go ahead and take it out of the loop. Just change the banjo setup on the calipers to a single and fill and seal the anti-dive mechanism.

 

Why not just put a block off nut to block the anti-dive port?

 

Great information guys, thanks. I've been hoping to find a nice XJ900 to give me a 2-up and touring option vs. my 550 which is better for short hops. The warnings I've seen about the 83 setup had me concerned.

I must admit it's weird to hear about new tech (back in the day) that Yamaha introduced being roundly removed and dis-approved of, but I guess every Manuf. is entitled to make a mistake once in a while. No doubt replacing all those old hydraulic lines is more $$$ on the anti-dive bikes!

I think I may have found an XJ900, and so I might need to consider these mods in more detail....So how come Australia gets all the really cool bikes and they keep coming there, or Europe for that matter, and the US must scrap and pray for the Bitc$ing rides??! NOT FAIR!

 

When the anti dive forks on my 83 started leaking I decided to rebuild a set of 85 model forks that I had and install them as a trial and I have to say that I am happy with the results. The 85 model forks ran a heavier fork spring and were about 10mm shorter in total length which gives the bike better turn in when hooking into the twisty stuff but without feeling too heavy when just poking around town.



Anti dive seemed to be the fashion back then but it soon died out. My old Kawasaki GPZ750 had anti dive as well but from what i recall the more successful GPZ900 did not.

As for the diversion I read a write up in one of the bike mags recently which compared it to the earlier versions of the Xj900 (eg. 87 to 92) and it implied that the earlier ones were a better bike. However as mentioned by others on here we in AUS have had a much more comprehensive range of XJ's than what was released in other countries. My 85 model has a frame mounted fairing similar to that of the Diversion and as for handling i have not had any issues with the handlebar mounted fairing on my 83 even when I ran it on the race track at Broadford. In fact it is on of the features that I like most about it. Having said that if i found a Diversion for the right price I reckon it would make a great tourer. Many of them come equipped with panniers and top box.

For more info on what I Have done check out my thread-
http://www.xjbikes.com/Forums/viewtopic/t=39491.html