OK, so who in BH19 has the Vincent -V-twin?

Followed an elderly bike, presumably Black Shadow or Lightning, through
Stoborough this p.m. Overtook before Corfe, he bimbling at 50-ish.
Swanage, he went down the High Street, whilst I continued via Victoria
Avenue towards the front.

At junction by the Mowlem he was grinning and in front. Went up
Stafford Road.

Some 20 years ago their was an old lad -say 60-70+-ish up Stafford Road
on a corner who had a proper bike or two. Nowadays who?

 

Peter said...

Oh we're going to get into the "proper bike" debate again are we?

A proper bike is one that can be ridden daily and not break down all the
time. It will go well, stop well and handle with precision.

That rules out just about everything made before 1990.

 

The message <>

Except my rigid Matchless (1941), Jampot Matchless and AJS singles,
(1950s) my Douggies (with one outstanding exception (50s), and my MSS
Velo (1939).

I took the first Matchless twice round the clock with only minor
prombles - some oil in the Burman grease gearbox cured one of them, and
a replacement pot and piston was cheaper than a rebore.

AFAICR the later AMC singles never let me down, and only one of the
Douggies did, while on my way (well, that was the intention, anyway) to
the IOM TT.

Otherwise they were the very epitome of reliability, first-poke starting
and good handling. The Velo' likewise.

 

<plangent creak of R80RT slipping in under the wire>

 

There's a tendency to forget that all the unreliable SOBrits we have around
now were, in the 50s, new, and thus not worn out and shagged. OK, they
didn't have the same sort of brakes we do now, and the tyres weren't much
cop compared to modern ones, but compared to others of their time at least
some were reliable, handled well, etc etc.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
Blue: The sky is blue for a reason. Blue light is a source of strength
and harmony in the cosmos. Create a blue light in your life by
telephoning the police
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.

 

I don't think that'll wash with Lozzo's binary worldview.

Lozzo, you stick to what you like and others will stick to what they
like. All sorts of bikes are good for all sorts of things and interest
people in different ways. I find your taste in bikes as dull as
ditchwater but don't feel the need to ram that down your throat every
time I perceive some slight against my tastes.

 

hehe.

besides, there are still crap bikes even now... 's hardly fair to compare
post 1990 sports bikes, for example, with something from the 50s. What one
can do is compare modern ideas and be amused at how long ago someone was
already doing it - recent case in point: advert for BMW's new "adaptive
headlight" which shines around corners, funnily enough, Citroen did
something very similar in the 60s...

 

platypus said...

Valve gear suspect, handling shit, braking poor. It fails on all points,
as well as being ugly and shaft driven.

 

Ant - 441cc said...

You have no idea what I like. Keep those sort of assumptions to yourself
in future. I stated fact, you stated bollocks.

 

I'm just going out to balance the carbs. I may be some time.

 

Yer arse you did - you said that there were no proper bikes pre-90 (or
at least precious few that could be reliably used daily, handled well &
stop well)...

as counter-examples I would suggest the GPz900, FJ1200 & VFR750 - all of
which meet the criteria given.

Doesn't stop the default attitude of the brit bike lovers being that
anything foreign is shit, right enough.

Can you tell that, even though the Scottish bike show isn't for a
fortnight, I've already been subjected to one diatribe by some BSA
owning mouthbreather about how Laverdas "and other Jap Crap" will never
be classics? I wonder if he's the same mong who tried to get the classic
show organisers to kick out all the non-brit stuff last year?

 

Bob Scott said...

NO. I said *just about* every bike made before 1990.

Of course, 3 or 4 examples will pass the Lozzo test of brilliance.

Everything British before 1990 was shit though.

I don't deny that there were some iconic British bikes built before
1990, but I have never been particularly fond of them. I've spent far
too long waiting at the roadside watching mates repair their broken down
Brits to have any desire to own one.

 

That's a fair enough comment - each to his own and wotever. However, the
comment that they're all shite is what I for one was taking issue with. If
you talk to people who used to run 'em when new the better class ones were
reliable, handled well by the criteria of the time, and were reliable
everyday transport for a fair number of people.

 

And? You expect me to reply to what you actually wrote rather than what
suits me?

Indeed[1], and this whole thing set me thinking last night - the 80s saw
a paradigm shift in motorcycles whereas the 90s only saw incremental
improvements?

Compare & contrast:

1980 1990 2000
Yamaha XS1100 Exup R1
Suzuki GS1000 GSXR11 GSXR1000(?)
Honda CB650 CBR600 CBR600
Kawa Z1000 ZZR11 ZX9 (or was it 10?)
Ducati MHR 888 916
Guzzi Le mans Le mans Le mans (oh well, exception proves the rule...)
Laverda Jota bust bust

 

I don't see how this differs from the default attitude of the Jap
lovers (General Secretary - Emperor Lozzo) that anything British is
shit. Either extreme is a blind and stupid viewpoint, IMO. It all
depends what you want to do with it and how prepared you are to do your
own spannering/engineering

 

[]

Knew I'd forgot something:

[1] and I think I'd include the f2 YPVS in there as well - I was well
surprised at how my mates one did for commuting, leisure rides & general
hacking about - needed a rebuild every 20k miles but that let him ride
it for a year in between...

 

Ever seen a Jap bike owner trying to get a Brit bike flung out of a
classic bike show?

Ever seen a Jap bike owner walk up to a Brit bike owners club stand at a
show & rant about how they're not classics?

Want to look back through google groups and see how quickly this group
attracted some eedjit who announced that if it wasn't Brit it couldn't
be classic?

Were you around here when that numpt from Oz was spamming for his
classic bike discussion board thingy & deleting any posts relating to
non-Brit bikes?

If you look back through the letters pages of the various classic
magazines there's been a steady stream of letters over the decades
insisting that non-Brit isn't worth covering.

Given all the grief people into non-Brit old bikes have had over the
years are you surprised some of them react? IME Jap (& Italian) bike
owners who take the "if it's brit it's shit" attitude are doing so as a
reaction to a succession of tubes who've insisted that non-Brit = non-
classic (or, indeed, non-proper).

<small voice> I agree with this totally.

 

Well, I had a hard time off a chip-on-the-shoulder Geordie once, but I
don't think all Geordies are twats. I suggest that the things you
mention are taken up with the idiots who said or did such things
instead of looking all touchy and fragile when someone dares to use the
work 'proper'. Anyway, we don't know how the OP defined 'proper' apart
from including Vincent V twins, so it's hardly an occasion to start
chucking toys about, is it?.

 

Whatever *THEY* are...

 

Well aye, but it should give you an idea why some folk are a bit less
than sympathetic every time a brit-bike owner whinges about folk being
rude about his mobile oil leak.

It's not like I'm prejudiced against Brit bikes, I quite fancy a Scott
or a Silk[1].
[]

Etiquette prevents me agreeing with you. Wonder what the OP's definition
of 'proper' bike is?

Bob

[1] And I keep looking at Heskeths & thinking worrying thoughts :-/