So you think your a Suzuki expert?

[PaulD]

Are there any T/GT500 experts / anoraks out there who can settle an argument for me?
A friend of mine is convinced that the early T500’s had their passenger footrests attached to the swinging arm and only on the later GT’s where they moved to the frame, where as I say they where always attached to the frame. My own 73 T500 has them attached to the frame.
He has seen a GT500B for sale which has the rests attached to the arm and I’m sure the bike has been fitted with the shorter 250 swing arm which was a popular mod done to the 500 race bike to improve the handling. So come on you experts help me out here.

[Zunspec4]

1975 T500M. Passenger footrests mounted on the swinging arm.



Cheers Geoff

[jabcb]

The swing arm part # per my printed parts manual:
61103-15810-019 for ’71 — ’74, which does NOT have the passenger peg mounts
61100-15830-019 for ’75, which has the passenger peg mounts

Per online parts manuals:
61103-15810-019 for ’68 — ’69, which does NOT have the passenger peg mounts
61100-15830-019 for ’70 & ’76 — ’77, which has the passenger peg mounts

The question for the super expert: are the swing arms otherwise identical?

[PaulD]

Ok so we have established that the swingarm mounted footrests are indeed a genuine Suzuki thing but is there a definite date when one succeeded the other? which was used first etc. I would have thought that the swingarm mounted footrest system was used first but I have a 73 T500 with frame mounted footrests and the 77 GT500 my friend is thinking of buying :this one: https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre ... 2593810356" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
has the footrests mounted on the swingarm? Notice the different silencers? I’ve also found that the silencers are different for each set up having clearence in them to cater for the swingarm mounted footrests movement.

[grumps]

The guy advertising that bike is the same one I bought my GT380 from. From what I saw when I visited that 500 is a lovely bike

[titan performance]

Nice set of pipes on that black GT !

[CarbsandCylinders]

My 72 had frame mounted passenger pegs.

[ConnerVT]

I had looked and asked about this a while back (2 years?). My best guess is that it started showing up on the 1975 T500 (In Japan, they started selling the GT500 in 1975), and was on all of the 1976 and later GT500.

Think the reference online to 1970 (which jabcb found) probably references it as a superseded later part.

Can't say for certain that the swing arm is otherwise the same, but many online references will list them as a replacement, so likely are the same.

[dollydog]

zunspec, i've got a 1975 reg t500 frame and swingarm, but the rear pegs are on the frame strange!
cheers, dd.

[ConnerVT]

Built in 1975 (1975 model year), or first registered/titled in 1975?

The 1974 and 1975 model years were offered in the same paint, so that isn't any help.

As 1975 was the last year (non-Japan) that the T500 was manufactured, they could be using whatever parts they have on hand. Suzuki is notorious for this.

[PaulD]

What totally confuses me (it don’t take much ) is why Suzuki would take what I think is a retrograde step and mount the footrests on the swinging arm on the later bikes? I would have thought the frame mounted footrests would be stronger not to mention weakening the swing arm and making for an uncomfortable ride for the passenger.

[ConnerVT]

If the change corresponds with the 1975 time frame, it would likely be from the model switch from T500 to GT500. The GT has a larger tank (from the GT750), and Suzuki may have felt the passenger pegs needed to move back some.

The GT500 was sold in Japan in 1975, then everywhere in 1976. Suzuki, known for using everything available in the parts bin, probably felt this was the best way to move the pillion pegs backward, and maintain a single part to maintain stock.