KAWASAKI KE100 (1974 - 1998) Review

Kawasaki KE100 motorcycle review - Side view

At a glance

Owners' reliability rating:	4.8 out of 5 (4.8/5)
Annual servicing cost:	£10
Power:	10 bhp
Seat height:	Medium (31.7 in / 805 mm)
Weight:	Low (187 lbs / 85 kg)

Overall rating

Next up: Ride & brakes

4 out of 5 (4/5)

If you want basic transport, in a two stroke trail bike package, then the Kawasaki KE100 is arguably the template for the entire class. Starting life as the 100 G4 TR, it evolved into the KM100 and KE100, eventually killed off by looming emissions regulations in 1998. The lKawasaki KE100 has sightly dodgy brakes and electrics, but otherwise a tough, fun-sized trailbike.

Ride quality & brakes

Next up: Engine

3 out of 5 (3/5)

So long as you make allowances for riding a low tech, twin shock trailbike, then the Kawasaki KE100 does OK, either on or off-road. The Kawasaki KE100 rear shocks are renowned for their `bouncy castle' quality. Kawasaki KE100's skinny forks can pop their seals if you try serious off-road malarkey, or wheelies outside the chippy.

Engine

Next up: Reliability

3 out of 5 (3/5)

The Kawasaki KE100's disc valve two stroke single was considered lively back in the mid 1970s, but nowadays it's just an average performer, although the low weight of the Kawasaki KE100 ( just 95kgs wet ) means acceleration is reasonably perky. The Kawasaki KE100 gets vibey above 50mph and a bit noisy too.

Reliability & build quality

Next up: Value

3 out of 5 (3/5)

The 100cc Kawasaki stroker engines are tough and despite years of owner abuse, they can keep rasping along for decades, if you use some good quality two stroke oil. The Kawasaki KE100 chassis can suffer from rust, as the MX style mudguards allow bike and rider to be caked with crud if you do any wet weather riding.

Value vs rivals

Next up: Equipment

5 out of 5 (5/5)

For what a Kawasaki KE100 /KM100 would cost used, you get a top fun back lanes hack, or town buzzbox, without worrying too much about resale values, or spares. The Kawasaki KE100 engine was used in five or six different models during the 70s-90s, so there are plenty of bits to be had in breakers yards. Find a Kawasaki KE100 for sale.

Equipment

3 out of 5 (3/5)

The Kawasaki KE100 drum brakes are simply a liability on modern roads, they don't work at all well. Ditto the electrics, with the KE/KM100 Kawasakis suffering flat batteries if you insist on regularly using the indicators at night. On the upside, the Kawasaki KE100 's seat is wide, comfy and just big enough for two people to nip down to Thresher for a four pack of Kestrel lager.

Specs
Engine size	99cc
Engine type	2 stroke, single, 5 gears
Frame type	Steel cradle
Fuel capacity	9 litres
Seat height	805mm
Bike weight	85kg
Front suspension	none
Rear suspension	Preload
Front brake	tls drum
Rear brake	Drum
Front tyre size	90/90 x 19 in
Rear tyre size	110/90 x 17 in

Mpg, costs & insurance
Average fuel consumption	75 mpg
Annual road tax	£25
Annual service cost	£10
New price	-
Used price	-
Insurance group	4 of 17 How much to insure?
Warranty term	Two year unlimited mileage

Top speed & performance
Max power	10 bhp
Max torque	8 ft-lb
Top speed	65 mph
1/4 mile acceleration	-
Tank range	135 miles

Model history & versions

Model history

1973: KE125 launched.
1974: 100 G4 TR launched in UK.
1975: KH125 and KM100 appear in UK.
1975: G4 TR is repainted and designated Kawasaki KE100 .
1982: KM100 dropped.
1983: Kawasaki KE100 gets new exhaust, clocks, seat and rear tailpiece.
1988: KE125 dropped.
1990: Kawasaki KE100 has new paint, gets a mirror.
1996: More new colours for Kawasaki KE100 .
1998: Kawasaki KE100 dropped.

Other versions

KE125, 100 G4 TR, KM100.

Owners' reviews for the KAWASAKI KE100 (1974 - 1998)

5 owners have reviewed their KAWASAKI KE100 (1974 - 1998) and rated it in a number of areas. Read what they have to say and what they like and dislike about the bike below.

Review your KAWASAKI KE100 (1974 - 1998)

Summary of owners' reviews
Overall rating:	4.6 out of 5 (4.6/5)
Ride quality & brakes:	4 out of 5 (4/5)
Engine:	4.6 out of 5 (4.6/5)
Reliability & build quality:	4.8 out of 5 (4.8/5)
Value vs rivals:	4.6 out of 5 (4.6/5)
Equipment:	3.8 out of 5 (3.8/5)
Annual servicing cost:	£10

5 out of 5 Great first bike

16 September 2024 by Mr H

Year: 1984

My first bike and I loved it, apart from the plug fouling constantly!Rode it once for nearly 200miles straight apart from fuel stops and it didn’t miss a beat. Stuck to 50mph all the way as people said it would blow up at that distance! Caned it on the way home though.Not enough oomph for any serious off roading but had loads of fun with mates on similar machines down dirt tracks and quarries. I’d love another just for the nostalgia.

Ride quality & brakes 4 out of 5

Was good even for long distance although a little buzzy at higher speeds. Brakes were ok as far as I remember

Engine 4 out of 5

Removed part of the baffle which seemed to improve things slightly.

Reliability & build quality 4 out of 5

Keep the plugs clean and de-coke the exhaust once in a while. Apart from that an absolute doddle to work on.

Value vs rivals 5 out of 5

Serviced it myself for peanuts.

Equipment 3 out of 5

Indicators struggled a bit and there wasn’t much else.

5 out of 5 Miss my bike

15 July 2024 by Com075

Year: 1986

I miss this bike. So easy to work on and so reliable. Spark plugs fouled out alot but once I put a diamond plate in it never fouled again. Wish I still had it.

Ride quality & brakes 5 out of 5

Engine 5 out of 5

Reliability & build quality 5 out of 5

All fixes were quick and inexpensive. Could completely tear down and re assemble in a few hrs.

Value vs rivals 5 out of 5

Equipment 5 out of 5

Buying experience: Bought for 500

4 out of 5 Nice little thing. Fun with your pants still on.

28 July 2023 by Grassblade.

Version: Blue Seater

Year: 1985

Annual servicing cost: £10

Wasn't 'fast' but I found it one of the safest rides I had.

Ride quality & brakes 4 out of 5

Yes brakes were...well...you had to drive them properly...but you should anyway.

Engine 5 out of 5

I loved it. It was fun. Not as crackin' as my RD200...of course it wasn't. It was nice though.

Reliability & build quality 5 out of 5

Never let me down so how could I say any less?

Value vs rivals 5 out of 5

Pence that is....but then I did it myself.

Equipment 5 out of 5

It worked. The Vespa I chopped it in for didn't...garbage thing! Typical Italian rubbish...didn't 'want to' in the rain. It got a kickin' in front of a shop in St Albans one wet commute. The baby Kwaka just got on with it. Knobs an' all!

Buying experience: Back In The Day so Yes & Whatever.

4 out of 5

20 June 2022 by KamikazeLau

Year: 1994

A perfect machine to start

Ride quality & brakes 3 out of 5

Is hard to ride like every old enduro motorcycles with twin shocks, the brakes are good having on mind that are drums, i had disk brake bikes with worst performance

Engine 4 out of 5

Super simple and reliable, the old ones without nikasil are even better

Reliability & build quality 5 out of 5

Beautiful little and capable machine, super Easy to work on and cheap to fix, really simple and thats why it does so well

Value vs rivals 4 out of 5

The only bad thing Is the fuel consumption 23-24km per liter on city, Is high for being a 99cc, but still a two stroke

Equipment 2 out of 5

It doesn't have any 😂

Buying experience: First adventure machine, a go anywhere little beast. Why? I rode 13hs and she Made it without problem on the WORST weather for a 2 stroke, 40°c

5 out of 5 Cracking little thing

02 July 2013 by ranorthe

Mine's a 1991 model with 6K on the clock. Very comfortable ride, the suspension is surprisingly plush, perhaps a little wallowy on the tarmac but very nicely sprung for off road. The bike is physically tiny, not much bigger than a C90, which makes it very handy in mud and snow as you can just yank it about / pull it out of whatever it's stuck in. A rev counter would be nice. Performance is as good as any 100cc stroker. The disc valve intake arrangement gives a useable spread of torque, it's not necessary to rev the nuts off it the whole time. Acceleration is pretty good - realistic cruising speed is 50 MPH, I've seen an indicated 63MPH but I didn't spend long at that speed. Reliability is excellent, just set the points and decoke the baffle occasionally. There's nothing wrong with the brakes, they're no better or worse than any other drum brake commuter bike. The electrics are very good (for a 6V system anyway), the headlight is not particularly powerful but the indicators do actually work. It has a weird clutch lever pulls up the sidestand arrangement, but it works so it doesn't bother me. I had a TS125 (which kept breaking down) followed by a TS185 (which kept breaking down, then blew up), the KE is not as quick but it's a lot more trust-worthy.

Ride quality & brakes 4 out of 5

Engine 5 out of 5

Reliability & build quality 5 out of 5

Value vs rivals 4 out of 5

Equipment 4 out of 5