916 vs Black lightning

I preferred the 2 because of the better fairing and the extra clocks.
The 3 was nowhere near as good, and with the 4 it all fell apart. But
yes, the 1 is the best looking.

 

Yersh. His 6 week trip on it last year probably didn't help, the roads
in Albania were particular bad apparently.

 

I always liked the 750S:
http://www.motorcyclespecs.co.za/Gallery C/Moto Guzzi 750S3.jpg

Hence my T3 evolved into looking like one (but also has a LM+ under the
skin):
http://www.sweller.dynalias.org/images/guzzi_20070929_800.jpg

 

"Great" at taking the term "ugly" to a whole new plane, yes.

 

Yes, they were very pretty. Never rode one, as the first time I sat on
one my knees were practically touching the clip-ons, so I decided that
it wasn't for me.

 

See I liked the way the MKII fairing comes back around the heads, but they
are both lovely. Silly to own though, being so utterly miniscule

 

I had a mate many years ago who was a 6'8" pipe cleaner and had a long
history of road going Manx Nortons. He took a fancy to a MKI. It looked like
a giant cellar spider jumped on a flea. His neck gave out soon afterwards.

 

Amazed you even had to do that

More like unholy shit...

 

My mate's mum had one and she used to do her shopping on it, and my mate his
paper round. We too were still at school at the time, but I do credit this
thing with sparking our interest in bikes

 

Define art? Most things designed to be beautiful end up as merely
fashionable. Yesterdays "must have" fashion is tomorrow's "Wouldn't be
seen dead". However some things which were designed as purely functional
objects end up with a timeless beauty. The Spitfire, the Forth Bridge,
the Flying Scotsman, Concorde. Motorbikes are essentially functional
objects so many of them have a timeless sculptural beauty.
My list would be exceedingly long. From the water cooled Scott via the
Manx Norton to the HRD. I wouldn't hang any bike on my wall unless I
could unhang it and ride it.

BTW what is a 916?

 

Whilst you make reasonable points I think there is a danger you may be
confusing "old" with "timeless"

It was going well until this point.
http://www.wheelsofitaly.com/wiki/images/0/03/Ducati_916_monoposto_1994.jpg

 

There's a fairly crap show on tv at the moment where people sell
works of art to dealers, Four Rooms.

Last week, one of the works being sold was an original Concorde nose
section. It went for 55 grand, iirc.

 

Unless something has stood the test of time it is hard to judge whether
it is merely today's fashion. Something can be old and crap. but nothing
can be new and timeless. In many areas of life technology has
advanced to the point where it is taken for granted. It is not the
engineer who is now king but the "designer". The person who decides what
it looks like. I tend to live in past when the engineer was king and
things end up looking the way they do because of their function.

What you see in the Ducati 916 is a shape which may be the result of a
designer's effort which makes it suspect as far as the "test of time" is
concerned. His degree of freedom has however been severely limited by
practical features such as wind resistance and the "fashion" of the day
which is to make sports bikes look like those on the race track - a
completely functional design - so there is a chance it will stand the
test of time. The Italians do tend to be better than most at getting it
right. The heart of the bike is the engine and that is not visible which
is why for me the Vincent would be my choice. More to look at, Not
merely a pleasing shape.

If you want an example of a designer's attempt at "beautifying" Google
Vincent black knight.

 

I agree with you here.

Eh? It's nearly 20 years since it was designed - if that doesn't pass
you 'test of time' criteria, how old would it have to be?

Indeed. Alfonso, if you don't know that, I would suggest you refrain
from further comment.

 

Jeebus!
http://tinyurl.com/vincent-black-knight

 

Goldwing predecessor

 

I think it was the original GW test in Bike way back in 1976 or so were
they had the comment that Honda had originally intended to call it the
Lead Wing, until they noticed that gold was heavier...

My personal preferences would include a Ducati's TT2, the '73 750 Sport
(with the black bits on the engine and forks I think it's actually
better looking than the Super Sport, and the colour is better), Triumph
T160 (from the side it really looks good), Norton 750 Fastback, Guzzi's
Le Mans I, the early Jotas, the list goes on and on.

The Guggenheim museum in New York had an exhibition several years ago
entitled "The Art of the Motorcycle". It went on tour to the various
Guggenheim sites in the US & Europe, but unfortunately I never made it
to any of them. The catalogue is a bloody big thick book, full of some
of the best photos of bikes you will see. Well worth digging up on one
of the old book sites on the net.

/Steve in Denmark, who may own one or more of the bikes mentioned..

 

Bloody electric bicyclist!

 

As a designer with a diploma in Art who worked an engineering
department, I think that's simplistic. And wrong. There were
effectively 7 designer/engineers on our teams who decided how a
product functioned/looked, from Project to Aero to Stress, etc. It is
a collaborative effort. No one person has the ultimate decision on
what a machine looks like, but all of them are striving for the most
elegant solution - that which produces the most results with the least
effort, materials, cost, and time to manufacture. Aesthetics are a
consideration, but hardly a driving force. About the only place a
designer has free reign is in the paint scheme.

 

<nods>