Pity...

I seem to have a glimmer that I once saw a car with ATE brakes.
Possibly the Aussie built Mercedes models. They set up a facility to
assemble Mercs here in the late '50s, turning out the early 111
series. (For you non-numeric people, that's the model with the little
fins on the rear corners). I have an ID plate in my shed from one of
these, chassis number 00002.

Theo

 

Whilst living off the fat of the land.

(Apologies - espresso level nearing critical minimum )

N/

 

On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:47:54 +1100, CrazyCam wrote:


[...]

That's what I love about Usenet - you learn stuff that didn't think
you wanted to know.

 

+1. Us Yugos call it a "nilski konj", lit "Nile horse". Ze Germans
split the difference; "Nilpferd" and "Flusspferd" are both
permissible...

 

I'd pay money for a copy of a magazine containing an Alan Cathcart
writeup in which the word "pwn" appears.

Actually, **** that; I'm way (wai?) too tight for that... I'd be more
inclined to try to talk the staff of a bikemag syndicating Cathcart
into livening up his dessicated prose by inserting "pwn" into it.

....and if he makes some reference to the bike's performance when the
engine's revving past nine grand, well, that'd just be gravy, wouldn't
it?

 

When we had the Striple on test a month ago (review up at
[shamelessplug]http://www.dailybike.com/reviews/triumph/2008/2008-
triumph-speed-triple.asp[/shamelessplug]), I consciously thought to
myself "you know who'd like this... Clem. This is a Clem kind of bike.
If I got one of these, I'd call it 'The Big Clembowski".

The whole bike is actually quite compact, but the cockpit area is
*vast* - no wonder they come in pearlescent white, the colour of
stretch limousines. I was lost aboard the thing for the first day or
two - literally didn't know what to do with all the room... consider
that statement in the context of my size, if you will. For someone
whose formative motorcycling years would've been spent on litre-plus
UJM's, the Striple is like a swirl down the time tunnel.

This, I reckon, would've been a big factor in why a smaller bloke such
as yourself would've found it, as you say, "cumbersome"; there's just
too much cockpit to rattle around in. If you're built more in
proportion with the bike, you can really boss it around, and once
you've found the delta-function-narrow damping sweet spot, there's
serious corner speed to be had, but it's held back by the lazy motor.
The crank's too heavy; great for traction, but it just doesn't spool
up fast enough to really fire the bike out of corners. That's the
exact opposite of the Triplet, which strikes a much better balance
there. With something more upmarket in place of the bouncy-castle
suspension of the base model, which costs it a bit on entry and at the
apex, the Triplet would be *the* performance naked... until a KTM
Superduke showed up.

"That's just sportsbike riders for you," said the bloke who just
received an R1 Ohlins rear in this morning's mail...

 

I met up with Daron once at a race meeting and I was chatting away for
a while before he pointed down to alert me to Bren who had been
standing between us trying to get my attention!

 

I met up with Daron once at a race meeting and I was chatting away for
a while before he pointed down to alert me to Bren who had been
standing between us trying to get my attention!
--
Clem

Sounds like the perfect size for a woman.

Boxer

 

That's probably a minority view (seriously), I've heard a number of
people saying they'd love to buy a Norge but they are too small for
them, and you're the first one I've read saying that the Norge would be
better if it was a bit smaller.

It's about the right size for me and I'm only 5' 8" (shortish for a guy)
so it probably is on a the smaller size edge for a modern bike.

But it's about time someone built a bike that wasn't designed for tall
lanky buggers (which more and more they seem to be doing).


G-S

 

Nah... there are plenty of Japanese cruisers with low seats around (many
of which ride quite well).

Personally I don't mind the Yamaha XVS1100 (the motor in which is based
on the old 1100 Virago) so it's air cooled and feels like a
traditional(ish) v-twin motor.

The smaller XVS650 is very popular and the VT750 Honda is always high on
the cruiser top 10 sales list as well.


G-S

 

It's sorta a combo of typo and slang. Depending you can view it as an
abbreviation of 'pawn' but in reality it's more a case of a mistyped
'own' in terms of 'far superior to'.

eg when you headshot some poor sap every time you see him for most of a
round of whatever, you can safely say you pwned him.

 

They specialise in "mathematical and computational finance and
numerical methods for stochastic differential equations", apparently.

(I've no idea WTF that means mind you!)


GB

 

No, that's not what it means at all.

No, that's not what it means at all.


GB

 

I've never met Bren but I like her already. Vertically-challenged peeps like
us need to stand strong. I wonder just how many of us it would take for bike
manufacturers to actually take notice???

See, I reckon the problem is that too many SHORT riders (mostly male) don't
arc up about tall bikes - I suspect the Small Man Syndrome prohibits it.
Ever since I started riding (gee, a whole 3 years now...) I've maintained if
enough of us complained/grovelled/begged nicely, the bike manufacturers
might take notice, and start looking at making grunty sportsbikes for the
vertically-challenged. My main obstacle has always been the Small Man
market, which seems too proud to admit that tall bikes can be a problem for
short people. Sure, riding a too-tall bike is possible - with a bit
(actually, quite a LOT) of effort and confidence, but it's just MEAN. I love
riding so much, but I can only DREAM of the comfortable, thoughtless,
effortless aspects of parking etc that go with being a decent height...

I guess one of the issues is that shortness is generally associated with
being female - and female riders are such a minority within the total riding
population that they are seen as "negligible" as a market group. If more of
the MALE sector of the vertically-challenged sportsbike rider population
decided to demand shorter bikes for shorter riders, instead of being so
bloody stoic, we might have a hope in hell of actually achieving something.
The manufacturers might actually stat listening..... (or am I just dreaming
again....?)

betty

 

Just in case you haven't seen it, the Short Bike List had some useful
stuff. I suspect it is no longer updated.

http://tinyurl.com/shortbikelist

Moike

 

Yah... that's pretty much what it means GB.

See here...

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pwn



G-S

 

Yeah but she doesn't have a flat head.

 

I'm trying to think where they would they use stochastic differential
equations in financial analysis but...

maybe be the stock market? *confused look*. [1]


G-S

[1] I can't see it having much place in company accounting!

 

Errmm OK, that's not exactlyy what he said, I'm translating OK ?

Errrmmm yeah he does do that

JL
(sinking fast he suspects)

 

Thanks Moike - yeah, have devoured the Short Bike List on more than one
occasion. I think it's brilliant for a biking culture that accepts Things
Won't Ever Change for us shorties - but I would like to think that there are
enough of us shorties around to be a sizeable chunk of the market, with a
voice (if only we could get short blokes on board who were willing to admit
that big bikes are hard work and they'd actually prefer something physically
smaller!!!That would be a huge culture-shift though...)

I don't want short people to cave and say "ok, we can only handle cruisers
or 125 sportsbikes". I'm short and I want a sporty bike, dammit - and I do
big kms, so I don't want anything under 600cc for those distances. I bet
there are vast numbers of riders like me who would just LOVE to be riding
the bikes they're riding even MORE if they were built for peeps a couple of
inches shorter!

betty