motorcycle people

Discussion in 'General Chat' started by Big Rob, Feb 2, 2016.

  1. You can't also brake or trust the suspension to do anything.

    1970ffs, why not some WW1 era sewing mahcine? Those are even slower.


    Vintage bikes are great for learning basic maintenance and repair work, not to learn how to ride a bike.
     
  2. I'm glad I'm not the only person who has this image saved.

    I'm sad, however, that I do not currently have access to it
     
  3. i just wanna ride my motorcy
     
  4. cle
     
  5.  

    Attached Files:

  6. Yearly Motorcycle Show.

     

    Attached Files:

  7. Nice. I've always loved the gixxer
     
  8. You suck, and this is the stupidest thing I've ever read.
     
  9. Such great argument, much wow
     
  10. theres no point in arguing with someone who thinks the sky is orange, is there?
     
  11. No it's black you nigger whore
     
  12. Harely Davidson Softail Custom or Harley Davidson Dyna Wide Glide. Comfy and very ergonomic for long trips.
     
  13. On the topic of long trips, two new bikes from the same manufacturer that would more than likely be better than a Harley for long distance travel would be BMW's R1200RT and K1600GT/L.


    Whilst I've only owned one bike myself I've spent a couple of thousand miles on the back of a variety of bikes over the years. From my perspective as a passenger, at least, a Honda ST1100 is far superior to a HD (XL1200L in this example). I'm sure a bigger model would be a bit better and more comfortable but the building blocks are similar in that they are pretty archaic designs that don't hold up well when compared to more modern designs. The owner of both of the bikes I experienced rode a motorcycle almost every day for a decade before even getting a car licence and has owned everything from an RVF400 to a K1300S with a variety in between so I trust his opinion. He also thought the ST1100 was a much better bike in every aspect than the XL1200L he just replaced (with the K1300S, incidentally). Ride, handling, performance, braking, practicality, reliability, rideability, running costs, the lot. You could argue this is all anecdotal but even to an almost rank amateur like me, going from the ST1100 to the XL1200L then back to the K1300S felt like a step back in time before a giant leap forwards. Bringing up long trips again - the main issue with riding a motorcycle at high speed for any length of time is wind blast. It's tiring and is the one thing, bar the prevailing weather conditions, that discourages riding for long distances. Most Harleys have basicallyy no wind protection when stock. The parts catalogues are full to the brim with screens and baffles that go on your front guard to block the wind, and all sorts but once you've got all the necessary extras you've spent a grand or two to end up with something that still only blocks half what a modern touring bike manages completely standard. I'm sure a Road Glide would be a good bet with its big fairings and such like, but they're practically the most expensive mass produced bike you can buy. You could do 100mph on an ST1100 all day and not feel much. By comparison a Harley Davidson will beat the shit out of you at anything over 60mph.

    The only reason to buy a Harley Davidson is to show off, IMO. That's what they're for and I completely get it. They're just not good at much else.
     
  14. The default riding school bikes here when I got my licence were things like Honda CB500/600, Kawasaaki ER5/6. Sortof medium capacity parallel twins with 50-60hp. Forgiving, and as a result easy to ride with enough power to feel fun but not so much that you're overwhelmed at any point. As far as under 500cc goes, unless you're talking about the newer crop of 300-400cc bikes that have started to appear over the last few years then the options you've got left wouldn't feel quick enough in traffic, to me.

    I'd say to also look at the various riding positions there are across the bikes you're looking at, with regards to the handlebars particularly. The way you steer a commuter bike is really very different to something with clip-on bars. They can put pressure on your wrists, too, which some people don't like.

    I learnt and took my test on an ER5 which had a really comfortable upright seating position. I then went out and like an idiot bought a VFR750, convincing myself that "it's a sports-tourer, it'll be fine". I loved it but the thing with it was that the riding position was more "sports" than "tourer", and the clip on bars completely changed the way it had to be ridden compared to what I had learnt whilst getting my licence. I felt like I had to learn to ride a bike again but this time with twice the power. Needless to say I did about 2000 adrenaline and fear fuelled miles then crashed it.
     

    Attached Files:

  15. I have read several complaints about the decrease of quality regarding BMW since some years.The best touring Harley Davdison models and which blow any bimmer or honda are the Electra Glide Classic and the Road King which both have wind protection. The Softail Custom and the Dyna Wide Glide are two steps ahead the basic sportster. The BMW transmission is using an universal joint which is complicated to maintain and delicate to repair, Honda uses à chain transmission in the majority of tehir models and an universal joint transmission on some of their models, the Harley uses a driving belt transmission which is simpler to replace and maintain. Harley has enough reliable engines with the shovelhead family of V Twin engine (tested and tried since 1992) and a good chassis on their top of the touring motorcycle, the Electra Glide.The Electra Glide is the most comfortable touring bike ever produced far ahead Honda and BMW.
     
  16. I'm not getting a goddamn Harley #$%#
     
  17. I really like the Yamaha FZ-07
     

    Attached Files:

  18. That yami is nice. I like the kawasaki Z series too.
     
  19. #44 426 Hemistage 8, Feb 21, 2016
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
  20. Entry-level naked bikes are really good first bikes.

    -Lots of bike/$

    -Easy driving position and not too heavy, much nicer to handle in city traffic than some crotch rocket

    -Not too much power but still enough to be entertaining

    -The relatively low tune 2 cylinder engines in these bikes generally sound pretty good and have good torque across the rev range. Yet they still rev beyond 10k. A really highly strung 600cc 4-cyl may have 2-2,5x the power but they initially feel like an 80's turbo engine: Nothing...nothing...nothing...EVERYTHING. Which can be #$%#ing intimidating.

    The lack of windshield and piss-poor aerodynamics can be a nuisance when going fast but it's also a limiting factor to not go too fast.
     
  21. Wheelman's view of motorcycling:
     

    Attached Files:

  22. Hemistage's view of motorcycling:
     

    Attached Files:

  23. Get a Honda 600 Hornet, from 2008 or so just before they stopped making them
     
  24. I like that a lot
     
  25. I'll agree the belt drive is a nice thing on a Harley, but for some insight into what shaft-driven bikes are actually like I'll talk about my friend's experience again as that's what I have to draw from as opposed to you just reading things and believing them.

    Among others He's had a BMW R1150R Rockster, a Honda ST1100 and now a BMW K1300S which all have shaft-drive. I know he did about 25000 miles on the Rockster and a similar amount on the ST1100, and during those 50000 or so miles he never once had to do anything to maintain it, nor did any of the shaft-drive mechanisms ever fail, or require expensive maintenance. Literally zero. None. Come to think of it, neither of them ever needed anything other than the expected servicing. They never broke down, and always started on the button, first try. The K1300 hasn't been in his possession for very long so time will tell but I wouldn't be at all surprised if the ownership experience was as trouble free as previously.

    You can hear all you want about this supposed poor quality from BMW and such, but from what I've seen myself in real life, with bikes ridden all year in all weathers, they're solid. Again, anecdotal, but an anecdote is better than just hearsay.

    As far as I can see, a shaft-driven bike removes all of the issues associated with chains, (regular adjustments, constant lubrication, road dirt and grit getting stuck in the lubricant and causing excess wear, regularly paying for new chains and sprockets even without excess wear from poor adjustment and dirt, filthy undertray and back wheel... etc etc) so you just get on and ride. They seem to me like the superior method, if somewhat limited in application. I'd say they were better than belts too because although belts are clean and quiet, they still need the owner to regularly check the alignment, and there is always the risk of the belt snapping. Of course the risk is minimal but there is still a chance. You're never going to break a prop-shaft.

    Which harley davidson do you ride? I don't have a bike myself currently, but I'm curious.
     

Share This Page