performance figures

Sorry. Posting after midnight. I was in a hurry to get to bed, so I
didn't proof-read, and now Paulh's stepped in and made the point I would
have.

What I was going to say is that a worryingly large number of sportsbikes
do, in fact, get used in the manner they were intended, and all the
snorting about their being expensive playthings used only for beachfront
promenade cafe runs and so on and so forth is just bile from people who
want to think of themselves as "real" riders through declaring other
people not to be.

 

Cruel. Cruel but fair. (and as the .sig says...)

big

 

But that is only evidence of the fact that some manufacturers do
overtyre their products at the expense of handling.

I see nothing to support your assumption about the motive behind it, and
feel much more comfortable believing that the manufacturers are aiming
for incresed sales. I have seen very little evidence that degrading the
performance of sportsbikes to promote safer riding habits has ever been
a big sales plus.

Moike

 

You see correctly, Sir.

I base that view on the handling traits of the seven Japanese
sportsbikes I've owned over the past six years.

 

Well, there _is_ that trick Suzuki pull that retarts the ignition timing
in lower gears to make it a little harder to flip your
'busa/gixxerthou/tlr.

I'd count that as "degrading the performance", at least in the lower
gears...

big

 

The GSX-R1000 is styled to appeal to people whose money-no-object dream
car is an SS Commodore.

 

The first YZF R-1 is probably adequate proof of your comments, Mioke, and
disproof of your "make the riders want to go slower by putting big tyres
on", IK.

 

It's not just the rear tyre size. Stock shocks are undersprung and
underdamped[1] and stock rear ride heights are too low. Both these
traits are detrimental to out-and-out handling prowess in the way I
describe; they slow down the steering and cause the bike to give
excessive bad feedback when pushed, particularly under power past the
apex. Fitting a too-fat rear tyre not only exacerbates this further, it
can be passed off by marketing as "...and look! It's got a fat rear tyre!"

Well, it's not like Microsoft come out and admit that their user
documentation is intentionally woven through with obfuscation in order
to keep the support segment of the IT industry healthy, either.

The bike manufacturers do this on the sly, Mike. The people who'd be
impressed by a fat rear tyre are also the likeliest to be the ones who
need their bike to telegraph its warning signs loud and early.



[1]To say that it's just the Japanese speccing valving and spring rates
appropriate for a typically Japanese 60-65kg rider to their suspension
supplier is a bit weak when you consider the numbers of bikes they
export. If you can place an order for 5,000 rear shocks tuned to support
an 85-100kg Caucasian lardarse, the suspension factory won't baulk, and
to arrive at the specs required, you have to do little but consult a
chart even if you had been too much of a tightarse to employ a foreign
()or even a fat Japanese) test-rider.

 

I've fallen for this before... of course Coney remembers I put in excess
of 25,000km, and a couple of significant chassis mods, on a
first-generation R1... why, I even mentioned it in this very thread.

He put the hyphen in "YZF-R1" in the wrong place and added the space on
purpose, too.

Crafty sucker.

 

Umm, Geoff, of the two, which comes with swirly, slashy graphics and
interrupted colours all over, and which has single-dominant-colour
schemes? Of those two, which would be considered the more "adult",
quote-unquote styling feature?

Forgotten how Suzuki lay out the LED's in their taillights, or what font
they use for the digits and gradations on their tachos?

Sure, but did the Monoposto versions really need four meshed-over air
vents in the ducktail? If they did, how come the Bipostos got away with
having only two?

*grin*, as you say.

 

You'd be surprised how little I remember of anything, IK, and you shouldn't
confuse craftiness with gormlessness.

 

Suzuki do that too?
I thought it was only the Triumph Rocket 3.
Clem

 

I really must have gotten under your skin by not giving a shit about a
topic you wanted to debate, well, as it happens I think it's great that
most sportsbikes are fashion accessories, it means I have a chance to
buy one year old bikes cheap that are barely run in and have never been
flogged (except for being revved really hard in neutral out front of the
pub).

Whatsamatta paulie, what is it you've got your knickers in a twist about
hey ?

JL
(maybe it's also because I mentioned the U word and hayabusa in the same
sentence again as well ? Feeling a bit fragile about your taste again ?)

 

<fake shocked look> NO ! REALLY ! You're serious ? OHMYGOD!!!!

Nice snippage of the bit where I commented that some people buy for
looks, some for performance and some for a blurry bit in between, ah
well, you never did like anyone disagreeing with you, did ya ?

Well there ya go, Paul knows a few people who ride their bikes
occasionally but hard. The relevance to a discussion about people buying
for aesthetics over performance would be ... ?

Well, lets assume the very tenous implication that these guys only
bought for performance (which isn't shown by the statements), the part
where anyone said 100% of people fit in either camp was stated where ?

Ohhh poor baby, better go buy some tampons

JL

 

Nice rhetorical device, but really mate, come on. Of the R1's / GSXR's
etc sold how many make it past the Road Warrior cafe ? Some, sure, but
percentage ? Some even make it to a ride day or 5, but again, percentage ?

I see lots on the old road, I see far fewer making it to wollombi or
broke...

BTW, what's a real rider and how do you become one ?

JL
(I'm willing to concede it's possible Sydney has a higher proportion of
people with the money to spend on a sportsbike that they do <1000km a
year on than other capital cities, that it may even be a Sydney only thing)

 

But IK you can't extrapolate your behaviour as being typical of other R1
owners without additional information

JL
(and I would venture to suggest you are an exception to the general
population of R1 owners rather than typical)

 

If "and look it's got a fat tyre" is a considered a positive thing while
granting it has a negative performance impact than either a) it's
aesthetic or b) it's about PERCEIVED performance as opposed to real.


Either way, you're supporting the original proposition that overtyring a
sports bike isn't being done for positive performance reasons.

So now you're suggesting it could be a combination of positive
aesthetics and lowered performance ?

Either way, you've shot down your argument against the original poster
in the generality if not the specifics

JL

 

So, in plain english, you're saying that IK isn't a
bunch of wankers?

G

 

~
Maybe they do.
I never see them but maybe I just don't travel in those circles.
I generally just see 40-50yo blokes riding 10-20yo bikes indecently
quickly. (And I pass 25yo blokes in full leathers and with 1yo bikes
sitting at cafes)
At least they aren't getting in the way I s'pose........
~

~
I read somewhere that BVR isn't a "real" motorcyclist........
Clem

 

When I go out for a fang in the hills I'm not surprised to see as many sports
tourer/tourer bikes as full on sports bikes on the way, but then I do most of
my riding midweek, so I'm not surprised at all.

Nev..
'03 ZX12R