Depressing new bikes

On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 21:14:10 +0100,

Yupp, I reckon.

Yebbut, the only reason people bought them was that they were the
fastest thing they could ride on L-plates. If there'd been no
restrictions do you really thing people would have pissed around on
250s? And the 250/400 class only really existed to that those kids
who'd passed their tests could get bikes they were familiar with and
still be able to humiliate all their younger mates.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3 (slightly broken, currently missing)
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10
`\|/`
`

 

It would have to be subjective to the point of absurdity. You can have
a best bike *for a particular purpose*, but not an unqualified 'best
bike'. E.g. I'd like to see you take the best bike for transcontinental
touring & win an indoor trials competition on it.

--
Krusty
www.MuddyStuff.co.uk
Off-Road Classifieds

'02 MV Senna '03 Tiger 955i '96 Tiger '79 Fantic Hiro 250

 

You'll need to tell me which bike is the best ever and why it's better
than any of the competition because I can't think of one bike that I'd
give that title to.

 

What is it with this idea that something can be 'too sporty' anyway?
I've never understood it, except in the sense that some folks are just
plain scared of going fast.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3 (slightly broken, currently missing)
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10
`\|/`
`

 

Think riding position rather than performance.

--
Krusty
www.MuddyStuff.co.uk
Off-Road Classifieds

'02 MV Senna '03 Tiger 955i '96 Tiger '79 Fantic Hiro 250

 

I know. But let's not allow common sense to spoil a good argument.

Nice thought.

 

It's always a compromise isn't it. But I'd say that of all the bikes
I've ever ridden [1], there's always something you'd want to change -
perhaps a little more sharpness, a softer ride, better wind protection,
brighter lights, better economy, quicker acceleration, higher top speed.

There's a qworld of difference between "best bike ever" and "best bike
ever for my particular needs & desires".

I may actually withdraw my original comment.


[1] Which may even have reached double figures by now

 

Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, Krusty

Nonsense.

<Points to WUNderland garage>

See?

--
Wicked Uncle Nigel - Podium Placed Ducati Race Engineer as featured in
Performance Bikes and Fast Bikes

WS* GHPOTHUF#24 APOSTLE#14 DLC#1 COFF#20 BOTAFOT#150 HYPO#0(KoTL) IbW#41
SBS#39 OMF#6 Enfield 500 Curry House Racer "The Basmati Rice Burner",
Honda GL1000K2 (On its hols) Kawasaki ZN1300 Voyager "Oh, Oh, It's so big"
Suzuki TS250 "The Africa Single" Yamaha Vmax Honda ST1100 wiv trailer

 

Ah yes, my mistake.

<points & pees self laughing>

--
Krusty
www.MuddyStuff.co.uk
Off-Road Classifieds

'02 MV Senna '03 Tiger 955i '96 Tiger '79 Fantic Hiro 250

 

How many big bike owners do you think bought RD350s, then? I certainly
did. And what about small dirt bikes, in capacities from 100-350cc....

 

<Faux Scottish voice>

"Thas no bike, thas a foul mean an horrible mechanical abortion with
lots of nasty sharp pointed engineering"

</FSV>

Phil

 

The only manufacturer that ever implied a claim to such an accolade was
'Brough *Superior*'. Then you would still have to specify which model.


--

+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Pete Fisher at Home: |
| Voxan Roadster Gilera Nordwest Yamaha WR250Z |
| Gilera GFR Moto Morini 2C/375 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+

 

On 12 Oct 2006 02:42:26 -0700, TOG@toil,

This is just one of many ways in which you're atypical.

s'a whole different thing.

Anyway, I think what you're missing is that yes, there was a very good
reason why people went for smaller bikes back when we were kids,
namely that big bikes, even when they'd started to become reliable,
were a reall handfull, both in terms of sheer weight and their
handling. A decent rider on a 350LC, or even a 250, could run rings
around 90% of riders on the 'superbibes' of the day. Even in racing
circles it was quite normal to see 350s entered, and doing well, in
500cc races.

Nowadays this is no longer the case. A 165kg gixxer thou is every bit
as easy to manouevre and ride as an old LC, or indeed any of the more
recent small sports bikes - how much did the last generation of 250s
weigh? So there's no reason to make smaller bikes. If you want lower
power then there's still plenty to choose from - why would you choose
to go for a smaller engine too?


--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3 (slightly broken, currently missing)
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10
`\|/`
`

 

All bikes are fun in the right situation, & all bikes are horrible in
the wrong situation. I don't know how people survive with only one bike.

--
Krusty
www.MuddyStuff.co.uk
Off-Road Classifieds

'02 MV Senna '03 Tiger 955i '96 Tiger '79 Fantic Hiro 250

 

<Considers garage contents>

I want to buy a dirt bike. Something has to give......

 

Pillion seat is too high otherwise I'd consider p/x-ing the 1999 one for
the new one. Anne says she doesn't like being perched up so high where
her head gets turbulence and she finds she gets leg strain with the
higher seat.

 

..... the CB250RS ?

 

Probably

I too must be getting on a bit. My HO thinks that bikes are becomeing
more purposeful to their idealised audience. Thisimpacts on *me*
because I am tallish and long of leg in particauar.

Coupled with the fact that the age demogarpicc of people who can afford
to insure the more extreme machines may have some bearing on matters
too. (I insured a litre bike when I was 22 and live in London back in
the day).

If I were a motorcycle maniufacturer, I'd have at least *one* cool sexy
low capacity machine that is cheapish to insure to lure a future
market. *This* is what our manufacturing friends are failing to do and
I fear that thier markets may shrivel shortly unless the fucking wake
up.

 

I think you're right. I mean, the CBR125 is a classic example of what
you're talking about, at least. Looks brilliant, cheap to buy, cheap to
run, cheap to insure. OK, so it won't stir the blood like a Gixxer Thou,
but it's Europe's top-selling bike, I think. Certainly the UK's.

What also worries me is the rapid pace of model replacement. Time was it
was four years or so between major revisions. Then three. Now two.
Instant obsolescence and depressed residual values.

And this happened when they introduced a rush of new models into a
falling market back in the early 1980s, so they can't say they haven't
been forewarned.

 

*ding*

I think that something smaller that the SV 650 would the closest to
ideal.

<BTW> I have buried Para Pete today and am a little tired and
emotitional. Expect greater that usual spelling thingumies in the
future.