CCM GP 450......was it any good?

[andyfrizzle]

CCM GP 450......was it any good? Yes it was and it still is....

We have had ours for 5 years now.

We did 5000+ miles with ours around New Zealand earlier this year, on tarmac and gravel roads.



A few bolts rattled loose, but were easily tightened/sorted. Lost a bash plate bolt and a mudguard stay bolt but was carrying replacements.

A clutch cable snapped on last day of tour, but had a replacement already mounted so a quick fix.



Factory crimped hose clamps on fuel lines started leaking when we picked bikes up from shipper so replaced these for better clamps before starting our journey.

They were perfect bikes for our travels, but we weren't in a hurry and rarely rode at over 50mph. (80kmh is the speed limit for most open roads anyway).



I still consider it to be the best 'lightweight go anywhere' bike that has been made to date.

We still hope to have the bikes in another 5 years.

[chrisjk]

It is a great bike with, by now, some well known issues that can be addressed, albeit at a (reasonable) cost. It's a great shame that the bike wasn't developed further as a production model. I take my hat off to Christofer Ratcliffe the designer who is now running Langen Motorcycles https://langenmotorcycles.co.uk/.

I have zero knowledge of the facts of his departure from CCM but am prepared to speculate that CCM and Chris differed on their ideas/wishes for the future, which is why he is now out on his own (he'd also been with them for 8 years). I certainly wish him well.

The bike is in so many ways, EXACTLY what the people wanting capable adventure bikes that don't weigh a ton have/had been clamoring for, for ages!

[garyboy]

I said before on here .. when i tried Paulinbont's it felt really great ... i would love to have one as it seems the ideal dual sport ... but i have come to re-believe that 2 bikes are better then one




.. and why but a bike that needs sorting?

[andyfrizzle]

.. and why but a bike that needs sorting?

I don't think they need sorting, like all bikes they have weaknesses, something that will wear out or fail depending upon the way that the bike is used and maintained.

I have friends who have had different bikes from most of the major manufacturers that have had problems/failings/recalls. When it comes to the big 2 manufacturers, Honda and BMW, the forums and internet never seem to be quiet when it comes to failures.

No bike is perfect and without faults, the GP450 is no different.

Sometimes I think some owners voted with their eyes, liking the look of the bike, and weren't aware of its character. For example if you haven't ridden a large single you won't like the vibes (not too bad but definitely more than a twin or multi cylinder) on the CCM. Again if you want to ride for long distances at 70mph+ it snot the right bike. I keep of the main roads, and if its a long journey I get up early!

I think that CCM found out, the same as KTM, that there are lots of people that cry out for a capable lightweight go anywhere 'adventure' bike, but not as many are prepared to buy one when they become available.

Until a worthy competitor comes along I think the answer to the topic question has to be "Yes it was good, and the best of its kind available at the time"

[garyboy]

of course, I was referring to the well known fuelling problems
where the bike was put on the market with the known faults, and then cost a fortune to rectify.

but for the weight, at 125kg, and size engine, and ride feel, it is great.
but the husky 701 is only 145kg [(sure i read it was 165kg???) .. ah .. 156kg fully fuelled] .. and the reports are excellent ..

but bear in mind that the husky has probably got a more durable engine, because of its size? .. and can be ridden long distances on mororways and a roads.. see mr cone. . but dont mention the word `clutch`.

20 kg does not sound a lot heavier, especially for the power gain ..
but this range .. 120 -- 140 -- 165 .. is crucial to rideability `off road` as you all know.

(butt out you riding gods on massive adventure / dual-sport monsters that can ride them like mountain goats ... sickening .. lol ..)


Personally i think sub 120kg is good for `off road` .. while over 165kg is best for `road`
this is where the ccm450 excelled.. in being in that special goldilocks weight bracket .....
and.. had the feel of a British bike .. if you not tried a British bike, dont ask lol)

[Jak*]

Whilst the frame design was great and they bought in top quality suspension the rest of the bike left a lot to be desired. The large petrol tank would have been great but there was always a lot left that you could not get access to. I am glad that some people got lucky and have had good experiences, but a lot of us didn’t and the appalling attitude of the factory still leaves many bad memories. The stupidity of cost cutting by not using waterproof connectors and leaving wires running beneath the rear mudguard are just two examples.
Ultimately I think the factory knew it was a failure, which is why they didn’t carry on with the design when the supply of engines ran out and concentrated on making toys for the hipster market in the knowledge that most will not be ridden, hence no warranty claims. It was ironic really as the engine and fuelling were probably the worst bits on the CCM.
In my view Enfield have got far closer to what a lot of riders wanted for half the cost. In comparison to Andy’s trip, I did 4,500 miles round Europe this summer, including some dirt and gravel roads, a lot of days riding in high 30s temperatures, a couple of days exceeding 400 miles and a couple of days riding through continuous rain. One headlamp screw came loose, I adjusted the chain twice, and topped up the oil a couple of times (about a quarter of a litre in total). Although the CCM handled better off road I find that the Enfield’s engine and low centre make it a more enjoyable bike to ride.
I think the CCM is probably best consigned to the great list of British bikes that nearly made it and perhaps would have done if it were not for penny pinching and a lack of commitment to customer satisfaction. I also own a Triumph TSS which falls into this category. I suppose if I had been one of the lucky ones I would have a different view, as it is I just wish the Himalayan had come out earlier and saved me the money, misery and embarrassment of the CCM, which has the dubious place of being the most unreliable bike I have owned.

[PaulinBont]

I got rid of mine once I lost faith in it's reliability. Sadly, as has been mentioned, instead of persevering with the concept of a low, light Adventure Bike and sorting out the issues , the company went off in a totally different direction 'a la poseur, hipster ' market.

[catcitrus]

of course, I was referring to the well known fuelling problems
where the bike was put on the market with the known faults, and then cost a fortune to rectify.

but for the weight, at 125kg, and size engine, and ride feel, it is great.
but the husky 701 is only 145kg [(sure i read it was 165kg???) .. ah .. 156kg fully fuelled] .. and the reports are excellent ..

but bear in mind that the husky has probably got a more durable engine, because of its size? .. and can be ridden long distances on mororways and a roads.. see mr cone. . but dont mention the word `clutch`.

20 kg does not sound a lot heavier, especially for the power gain ..
but this range .. 120 -- 140 -- 165 .. is crucial to rideability `off road` as you all know.

(butt out you riding gods on massive adventure / dual-sport monsters that can ride them like mountain goats ... sickening .. lol ..)


Personally i think sub 120kg is good for `off road` .. while over 165kg is best for `road`
this is where the ccm450 excelled.. in being in that special goldilocks weight bracket .....
and.. had the feel of a British bike .. if you not tried a British bike, dont ask lol)

I think the KTM 640A is worth a mention--did 45k on mine with the only problem being a 15 quid fix on the inlet roller followers--apart from that everything original including brake pads---a bit viby, but 600 mile days were possible, 6 gallons of fuel, good luggage capacity, top suspension, and for a big single very handy offroad. Its interesting that so called "adventure " bikes are heading back in that direction on size and weight--and fuel capacity

[garyboy]

a mate of mine.. Tim .. has got a 640 .. had it years and swears by it (in a good way lol) .. and leads trails in Iceland with it too ........ so it must be a great bike


.. just checked ... 149kg dry weight ... sheesh ...

[andyfrizzle]

Whilst the frame design was great and they bought in top quality suspension the rest of the bike left a lot to be desired. The large petrol tank would have been great but there was always a lot left that you could not get access to.

Filling the fuel tanks is a simple case of patience while the fuel levels out across the three tanks. It is the only bike I have had that has this idiosyncrasy, but as we always fill up together its a case of moving the nozzle from one bike to the other as the fuel levels out. If you're in a pair (or more) it doesn't really take any longer filling up. I would class this as an idiosyncrasy rather than a problem. I think it was the KTM 950 Adventure that had to be filled through two separate fuel caps, not really a problem but part of that bikes character.

The stupidity of cost cutting by not using waterproof connectors and leaving wires running beneath the rear mudguard are just two examples.

Its clear that CCM used engines and electrical components from other manufacturers, and they all come supplied with the connector specified by the original manufacturer. CCM managed to combine these elements, with some adapter harnesses. I haven't seen waterproof electrical connectors used as standard by any bike manufacturer (and I am happy to be corrected, it would be good to see that some manufacturers care). I think that if custom wiring loom(s) were used (with waterproof connectors etc) it would have added another £500+ onto the customer price. I have my own opinions on the wiring, which in simple terms could be better, but its clear that they were working with pre-existing components.

In comparison to Andy’s trip, I did 4,500 miles round Europe this summer, including some dirt and gravel roads, a lot of days riding in high 30s temperatures, a couple of days exceeding 400 miles and a couple of days riding through continuous rain. One headlamp screw came loose, I adjusted the chain twice, and topped up the oil a couple of times (about a quarter of a litre in total). Although the CCM handled better off road I find that the Enfield’s engine and low centre make it a more enjoyable bike to ride.

When the Himalayan came out I took a keen interest. I thought 'If they had come to market before the CCM I would have considered one of those' until my wife sat on one (at the NEC) and remarked 'This is much heavier than the CCM, I couldn't ride this'. Keeping the peace is better than starting a war, so I agreed with her. In our circumstances we want two very similar (if not identical) bikes when travelling to reduce both the amount of tools/parts/knowledge/info required. We had looked at alternatives prior to getting the CCMs and our (my wifes) thinking was as follows, BMW G650X-Country ('Too heavy'), KTM 690 Enduro ('Too tall'), Honda CRF250L ('The seat is wooden'), Kawasaki KLX250 ('Too tall') and it goes on. Seat height was an issue, so the availability of a his and hers (seat height wise) was a big factor. I saw an early prototype of the GP450 a year or two before production started, and when my wife saw it at the NEC (again before production started) she liked the look of the bike and was enthusiastic about the low suspension option. After a factory test ride she confirmed that it was the bike for her. The decision was made.

I think the CCM is probably best consigned to the great list of British bikes that nearly made it and perhaps would have done if it were not for penny pinching and a lack of commitment to customer satisfaction. I also own a Triumph TSS which falls into this category. I suppose if I had been one of the lucky ones I would have a different view, as it is I just wish the Himalayan had come out earlier and saved me the money, misery and embarrassment of the CCM, which has the dubious place of being the most unreliable bike I have owned.

Its unfortunate that you had a bad experience. I think that the issues that some owners have experienced are not too dissimilar to those experienced by riders of all motorcycles. I have had friends that have had never ending struggles with problems on their Honda and BMW motorcycles, some of which were never satisfactorily resolved. The two most unreliable bikes I had were a MZ TS125 that ate big ends for lunch on a regular basis, and a Yamaha SRX600 that didn't like it when it was cold or wet, and repeatedly fractured wires in the electrical loom due to the vibes. I hope your Himalayan continues to provide you with years of trouble free riding.