theo wrote:
>
> On Mar 12, 9:20?am, atec 77 <"atec 77 "@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>
> > > Then there's all the ads in my early 70s copies of 2 Wheels for shops
> > > and people offering service.
> >
> > > Even in country towns!
> >
> > > So better sigh, count the grey hairs, and change the whine to "50-60
> > > years, in country towns"
> >
> > > (Because in those aforementioned 70s mags are ads for places
> > > announcing they've been in the motorcycle business for 20 years...)
> >
> > > Zebee
> >
> > When I was living in Unzud in the 1960's the local bike shop in Petone
> > had started just post war ?, the same owners until the retired around
> > 1970 and several of the larger shops in Wellington had traded from the
> > 1920's. I would expect the same in Au
>
> Pal & Panther in North Perth has been in business for three
> generations, since 1928.
>
> Theo
>
>

I came out here in 72. There were still a lot of the older shops around
that have now gone plus IIRC that was just around when things like the DT
started a new surge in bike sales. It's quite possible that relative to
the number of bikes on the road there were more w/shops and mechanics
around then than now. There are bgger ones now for sure, but they're
spread pretty thinly. Cheers

--
Posted at www.usenet.com.au

GWD wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:06:28 GMT, Lars Chance wrote:

>> *shrug*
>> You really love making these weird non-points and then backing down as
>> soon as they're queried don't you George?
>
>
> OK. The conclusion I drew from this thread is that arrogance mixed
> with lack of fundamental understanding is an all too common mix in
> back yard mechanics. I thought that I was clear enough but I am happy
> to repeat it ad infinitum if it makes you happy. Alternatively, you
> could take a course in reading 101 and save us both a lot of trouble.
>
QED

--
Elsie.

GWD wrote:

> I think the idea is to try to score points no matter how silly he/she
> looks. Might even succeed one of these days - you never know...
>
But you don't seem to have any points to score George.
You make a statement, I question it (and provide contrary evidence) and
then you just clam-up and make all these odd half-smart replies that
neither explain your original statement nor further your hypothesis.

And then you try to blame *me* for causing trouble!!
Odd. Very odd.

--
Elsie.

Lars Chance wrote:
> Nev.. wrote:
>>
>> (snip) some of the people in Ausmoto who I would consider to be far
>> more capable than myself at things mechanical, and who do much more of
>> their own handiwork on their bikes than I would ever attempt, have
>> also caused much more mechanical damage to their own motorcycles than
>> I have.
>>
>> So... you do the maths!
>>
> Provided you *do* do the maths that'd be a fair consideration.
> If you compare even a major mechanical failure every few years or-so
> with the cost of having *all* your mechanical work done at the shop I'd
> be surprised if the home handiworker still comes out behind.
>

Why would you have a 'major mechanical failure' every few years?

I've had 2 in 30 years and only 1 of those cost more than $500 to fix at
the shop (major being defined as bike won't go/not rideable at all).


G-S

Diogenes wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:18:29 GMT, Lars Chance
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>> Well there ya go. In some weird way we've decreased the ever
>>> decreasing circle without a fundamental orifice in view!
>>> I am in complete agreement with your last paragraph, and it neatly
>>> sums up what I've been trying to say for the past day or so.
>>>
>
>> But what possible "mechanical damage" do you imagine cleaning or
>> dismantling a brake-calliper could cause George?
>> Do you actually know what a brake-calliper is and what it does? It's a
>> very very simple device.
>> Has someone been telling you scary stories or something?
>
> Why are you picking on George, "Elsie" ??
>
> =================
>
> Onya bike
>
> Gerry

For the same reason kids used to stick crackers in ant hills I expect;
because all the frantic running around that results looks funny.


G-S

In aus.motorcycles on Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:09:03 GMT
Lars Chance <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>> In aus.motorcycles on Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:15:17 GMT
>> Lars Chance <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>> Provided you *do* do the maths that'd be a fair consideration.
>>> If you compare even a major mechanical failure every few years or-so
>>> with the cost of having *all* your mechanical work done at the shop I'd
>>> be surprised if the home handiworker still comes out behind.
>>
>> Don't forget to factor in the cost of your own time.
>>
> Does that count?
> It's like gardening; you should probably be subtracting the
> therapeutic-value you're receiving instead!

Yup it counts. As it should in gardening if you are saying "it's
cheaper to grow your own veges".


One of the things I note about getting a shop to do work on your bike
is they notice the deterioration in it.. They note things you have
gotten used to or things you did a bit sloppily.

Zebee

Lars Chance wrote:
>
> Odd. Very odd.
>

Now that's about as good a definition of George as I've seen yet


G-S

On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 13:48:51 GMT, Lars Chance wrote:

>GWD wrote:
>
>> I think the idea is to try to score points no matter how silly he/she
>> looks. Might even succeed one of these days - you never know...
>>
>But you don't seem to have any points to score George.
>You make a statement, I question it (and provide contrary evidence) and
>then you just clam-up and make all these odd half-smart replies that
>neither explain your original statement nor further your hypothesis.
>
>And then you try to blame *me* for causing trouble!!
>Odd. Very odd.

Er... blame you for causing trouble..? When have I ever done that? I
have exposed some of your little strawmans, and suggested your reading
skill is not as good as it could be, that is true. I have always been
a model of decorum and good manners though, and would never accuse you
of something you haven't done.
I know I will never convince you of this, and if past form is anything
to go by, you will continue to flog the carcase of this horse until it
has gone way past purification.
May I suggest you hop on that bike of yours and go for a ride? As we
all know, it has great brakes - they are personally maintained by you.



Bye

--
GWD

--
GWD

On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 06:55:20 +1100, G-S wrote:

>Lars Chance wrote:
>>
>> Odd. Very odd.
>>
>
>Now that's about as good a definition of George as I've seen yet

It's the company I keep

--
GWD

On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 13:40:51 GMT, Lars Chance wrote:

>GWD wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 09:06:28 GMT, Lars Chance wrote:
>
>>> *shrug*
>>> You really love making these weird non-points and then backing down as
>>> soon as they're queried don't you George?
>>
>>
>> OK. The conclusion I drew from this thread is that arrogance mixed
>> with lack of fundamental understanding is an all too common mix in
>> back yard mechanics. I thought that I was clear enough but I am happy
>> to repeat it ad infinitum if it makes you happy. Alternatively, you
>> could take a course in reading 101 and save us both a lot of trouble.
>>
>QED

OK I'll take it a step further. The question as posed by you resulted
in a few responses. Those responses included a few anecdotes about
brake failure.
As I said then, and I will repeat now, I was startled by the relative
frequency of stories about rotor collapse. I don't gaff about the
speed at occurrence or where it occurred, this failure mode should not
be as common as it apparently is, judging by the stories as told in
this thread. This only reinforces my belief that amateurs and brakes
are a dangerous mixture and I said this several times.
I have no idea why I have to repeat this, it is all in what has been
said before. My guess is that my opinion doesn't line up with some
point that you are trying to make (whatever that might be) so out come
the strawmans again. Alternatively, you have reading difficulty that
you need to address as I have also said before.

--
GWD