Fun and motorcycle efficiency

Back in 1976 I chopped in my Puch Maxi for a Yamaha YB100, and was
bowled over by the power and speed (I mean, 50mph cruising!).

Of course, after a year or so it felt as dog-slow as it really was. Up
the capacity ladder I went, reaching the heights of litre-bikes in the
early 1980s, each each step was accompanied by that initial thriill.

Some bikes still delivered the feeling of fun, years after I'd first
bought them - a Guzzi or two, a Yamaha RD350 YPVS, Yamaha XT600E, any
Kawasaki triples and most recently, my Ducati.

A lot of other bikes I rode didn't. Sure, there was the initial
appreciation of the extra poke, the better handling and the superior
brakes, but - and this is especially true these days - modern bikes
have got so damned good that they only start being fun at speeds which
are likely to see you locked up, or visiting Casualty.

Where's the fun in riding a sports 600 at 70mph? Non-existent. IMHO
they only start becoming fun at 90 and above. For bigger sports bikes,
you're probably talking about speeds way in excess of a ton before the
experience actually starts to be enjoyable.

I'm not confusing excitement with fun - 900-1100cc sports bikes can
hardly fail to be exciting, but IMHO that's more involved with the
effort involved in staying between the scenery, as it were, and
knowing that if you make a mistake, you're history. That kind of buzz
I can understand, but I can also separate it from "fun". 100%
adrenaline junkies will disagree - that's fine.

More and more these days the sensation of speed is being isolated from
the rider. Quieter exhausts, more compliant suspension and more
aerodynamic fairings make 120mph feel a snore. I remember the first
time I rode a ZZR1100 or, more recently, Zymurgy's Blackbird: 120mph
on either of those is about as involving as doing 90 on a CBR600.

Not so long ago if you'd said that a 130mph motorcycle that handled
and braked well could be as dull as ditchwater, people would have
thought you unnecessarily blase, but that's my old 900 Diversion for
you. I remember my mate Niall flogging his VFR750 after a few months
because while it was amazingly adept, it just bored the pants off him.

If you're in the right frame of mind, even a 125 can be an utter hoot.
The "ShiteOldBikes to the Bol" thrash a couple of years back was an
utter scream. So what modern bikes bikes are genuinely fun? What bikes
do you own that are entertaining to ride at virtually any speed, from
cutting through urban traffic through slinging down a
single-carriageway country road, to WFO on a deserted main road? And
what bikes are just, um, a bit boring?

Over to you.....

 

Honda Hornet (original unfaired version). Good riding position around town,
good handling on back roads, fun to rev the nuts off the engine and the long
monotony of motorway journeys is alleiviated by stopping for petrol every
five minutes. ZXR400 is also great fun but has a crippling riding position
after a while.

 

I think that this bit:

hits the nail on the head.

Bikes are fun when they provide a huge load of external stimuli.
Most of them do that at their limits; ie when the suspension is
bouncing you around, the exhaust is screaming, you are man-handling
it around corners rather than just "thinking it" round the corner,
the roar from the air intake hoses on Kwaks...

That's why over-development of bikes is a Bad Thing, which most
manufacturers are guilty of, but Honda most of all.[1] Look at
the first 'blades. 16" front wheel made for a twitchy bike. A couple
of years later, they got a 17" version, which made it that little
bit less twitchy, but took away some of the Fun.

It's also a reason I like the "modern classics"; they aren't
over-developed and focus-group tuned to a particular bunch of
pipe smokers.

I was about to give a list of bikes that I've ridden that were
fun, but, because the majority were only for 10-15 minutes, all
of those felt fun. And of the ones I've owned (CG, CX, GPz750turbo),
all provided the bucket loads of external stimuli (although
the CG probably only because it was my first).

[1] Could you tell this was coming, children?

 

How would a GSXR1000 doing a maximum of 60 get anywhere any quicker
than any other bike above say 250cc?

A Gixxer thou *is* excessive on public roads but that's no bad thing.
I can have a right laugh revving the tits off the Fazer and chucking
it around but I'll never choose to ride it for fun as long as I've got
the Gixxer.

--
Daz
GSXR1000K2 - Fun
CB250 - Purpose
Fazer600 - Bit of both
CBR600 - Racer
MRO#26 | FOT#115 | FOF#48 | two#41
http://www.highsideuk.com
ukrm at btopenworld dot com

 

Duh. It can accelerate to 60, and brake back again, much quicker than
a 250.

Hmmm, well I sometimes ride the 400 just for the fun of it, but it's a
different sort of fun. With the gixxer I know that I'm pushing my
limits but nowhere near those of the bike, whereas on the honda the
opposite is true - To enjoy riding it you have to thrash it
everywhere, and to be reasonably quick you have to just _not_ brake on
the approach to bends...

Had a larrf following a 996[1] in some twisties last week, although
I'm not sure he noticed me before fucking off into the distance when
it opened out a bit. Actually, now I think about it he did, as I
nearly overtook him at one point as he wimped out just because of a
white line...


[1] I think. TBH it could have been any modern ducati with under-seat
pipes...

 

[snip]


Although on a lighter, more nimble, 250 you can brake later and carry
more speed in the bends.

 

TBH I haven't.


165kg??? Is that wet or dry weight?

There is also the point that a gsxr1000 will more than likely be quite a
spirited beast and may induce sphincter tightening moments more readily
which in turn would slow the rider whereas a 250 2-stroke, RS250 say,
would be more amenable. Sort of a "less is more" principle, which I
believe the GP teams adopted, Honda detuned the RCV and the lap times
got better.

 

yeah, whatever...

--
cane [at] ukrm.org ¦ fireblade, r30
botafo t#50 f#03 YTC #15 bbb #6 apostle [kotl]
New? http://www.ukrm.net/faq/ukrmscbt.html
Rideout? http://www.horrible.demon.co.uk/botafof/
"Brace yourselves ladies, I'm coming in dry"

 

You've not ridden a gixxer thou, have you? 165kg and as nimble as they
come.

 

It was intended to be a rhetorical question.

Have you ever seen 'wet weight' quoted?

I suggest you try riding the various machines before repeating
something you read in a magazine. It's obvious that you have no
first-hand experience of what you're talking about.

A different thing altogether, based on it's propensity to lose
traction in the higher state of tune.

 

This I don't agree with.

The fun comes from exploring the power and handling [1] through twisty
lanes and back roads. Out and out speed does nothing for me.

This I totally agree with.

[1] At least for me it is.

 

Yes. Ducati do. Here's a quick example.
http://www.ducatilondonsouth.com/superbike/999/chassis.php

* = The weight includes battery, lubricants and, where applicable,
cooling liquid [1]

[1] OK, so no fuel in the tank but it's a start.

 

I've always assumed 'dry weight' was simply no fuel in the tank. I
can't imagine them quoting it sith a dry sump, battery, forks, brake
fluid...

 

Well yes. But *dry*, which most manufacturers use, is sans anything.

1.x litres of oil here, x litres of coolant and fork oil adds up a
bit. Not much compared to the rider, mind.

 

Was probably just what the bike weighed before they put all the bits
together.

"This 'ere sack of metal..."

--
DT125R - Smokey bacon, please.

http://www.rexx.co.uk
For email, visit the above.

www.noddingdogs.org - Biker community website
(Not mine, honest!)

 

My understanding is that most manufacturers do. SWK might help here,
as I'm not *certain*.

 

On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 15:25:48 +0100, Bear

In other words they're meaningless numbers really. Much like
manufacturers claims on BHP. Unless of course you do all your riding
sitting stationary in an engine test room.

--
Daz
GSXR1000K2 - Fun
CB250 - Purpose
Fazer600 - Bit of both
CBR600 - Racer
MRO#26 | FOT#115 | FOF#48 | two#41
http://www.highsideuk.com
ukrm at btopenworld dot com

 

..... or almost ANY supermoto.

Bring your Gixxer thou to a twisty circuit like Lydden Hill and watch as the
Supermoto's breeze past

 

One word - Supermoto. Most top out at 100mph (well, mine will get to 110,
but its not much fun), but it's the getting there that counts. Nothing like
a big thumpers torque and the nimbleness of a supermoto to bring a smile to
your face on anything expect long straight roads.

 

AAMOI, do you know how much either of these bikes weighs? The
'prillly's prolly less, but I wouldn't be at all surprised to find the
cbr weighs more than the gixxer. In fact, I'd be astonished if it were
not the case...

<fx: googling noise>

Right, the aprillia apparently weighs in at 141kg dry, the cbr is 163,
and just for comparison the zxr400's 168 and the gsxr400 is 167.

So who should be 'getting real' then?

Dream on, sonny.