CA95 and CA160 differences?

aaron7 · Post by **aaron7** » Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:08 am

How can you tell the two apart besides engine/frame numbers?

Smithers · Post by **Smithers** » Fri Mar 26, 2010 12:08 pm

My CA160 would blow away your CA95 on the road.

The engines look different as well.

hahnda · Post by **hahnda** » Fri Mar 26, 2010 12:53 pm

Tanks are slightly different. The 160 has a larger tank badge. I think the tank pads also have a different pattern on them?

The 160 has its cam chain in the center, the Ca95 is on the side.

aaron7 · Post by **aaron7** » Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:04 pm

So why did they make two models if they were so much the same?

hahnda · Post by **hahnda** » Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:08 pm

The 160 came after the 150. The 160 engine base was also used in the CB160 and CL160.

wnbasac · Post by **wnbasac** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:23 pm

i see a lot of accessory parts for the 160 like rear racks and seat guards will they fit the 150?????
>
thanks lou

Spokes · Post by **Spokes** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:57 pm

The CA160 Seats, racks, tail lights, headlights, tank, side covers, battery, tool holder, tires, shocks, speedo are the same.

The wiring is a bit different as the condenser is behind the horn and the points are on the side of the cylinder head.

The mufflers ARE NOT the same! Big ebay error when you see mufflers that fit the CA95 and the CA160. I have the original mufflers on my CA160 and they mount differently than those on the CA95. The muffler itself looks identical.

The engines are night and day diffrent. The CA160 is way faster than the CA95. I will soon know if the engine mounts are the same. I have both bikes apart.

One goofy thing is I have a pair of plastic aftermarket asian Honda 150 badges that fit the 160. It's like putting a pic of your 1st wifes face on your 2nd wifes body.NOT...LOL

Smithers · Post by **Smithers** » Wed Apr 07, 2010 8:22 am

Haha wife swappin...

Anyhow yeah I can't wait to see a 160 engine in a Benly frame. This would be a HUGE upgrade for these bikes. If you really want to ride them around a 160 upgrade would be awesome. And they look the same so it's not like you're ruining the originality of it.

aaron7 · Post by **aaron7** » Fri Apr 09, 2010 6:18 am

Why is the 160 motor so much faster? What's different?

Smithers · Post by **Smithers** » Fri Apr 09, 2010 6:23 am

The engine feels a LOT smoother.. probably a result of better balancing, machining and the fact that the timing chain is now inbetween the cylinders instead of off to one side. Plus it's 10cc larger! It's like having a supercharger on it. No but seriously it's more powerful, probably a larger carb? I haven't measured it and I'm sure someone here knows. And the transmission gear ratios are different. Transmission is improved as well. I can pull up hills much easier on my CA160. I've also mentioned that I've been on the freeway doing 65 on my CA160. There is no way I could do that on my Benly. The engine would explode.

Spokes · Post by **Spokes** » Sun Apr 11, 2010 7:50 pm

Today I removed the CA160 engine from its frame. I have an extra empty CA95 engine case, so for kicks I tried to fit it in, It fits. So for now, it looks like the CA160 engine will fit the CA95 frame. BUT....The CA160 wiring harness is slightly different, the ignition coil, although still 6V appears a bit different as well, but mounts in the same location.

As mentioned in another thread, I will have both the CA95 & CA160 torn down to bare bones. At that point I can do some pics. So far from my perspective today, with the major exception of the engines, both the 1965 CA95 and the 1968 CA160 are pretty much the same bike.

Spokes · Post by **Spokes** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 8:04 pm

Got the CA160 broken down completely. Found a few more different aspects between the CA95 and the CA160.

1.) The CA160 chain tensioners are longer than the CA95.
2.) The sprocket hub and dampeners are slightly different.
3.) the chain guard that protects the swing arm from damage on the CA160 secures itself around the shaft mount. The CA95 chain guard just rests on the swing arm frame.

I wil be doing some comparison pics soon.

Brewster · Post by **Brewster** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 8:35 pm

Hey Spokes, check the front seat mount. I have a 150 and 160, I found the front mount is smaller on the 150.
Brewster

Spokes · Post by **Spokes** » Thu Apr 15, 2010 8:58 pm

Interesting. Both the 65 CA95 and the 68 CA160 seat mounts (the metal) on the frames are equal on mine. One difference on my 160 that it has rubber spacer and the CA95 does not.

Brewster · Post by **Brewster** » Fri Apr 16, 2010 6:58 am

That is interesting, my bikes both have the rubber and spacers. I will get my calipers and check, most likely I made a mistake.