Re: Harley Davidson Dyna ride height

Aha very good call. I wanted one in 2000 after a 24hr test drive but it
was way over the top on the BT car list and ended up with the
7-Series.... Yeah I know.
It's the midrange from the computer controlled turbo that did it for me.

 

That may well be true but it's nice to have a bike that can make a
mediocre rider look pretty fucking quick. I wish we'd been using a
ZX10 instead of the old 7 when we were doing the KRC championship, I'm
pretty sure we'd have had that elusive point we were trying for.

 

You'd understand better if you'd ever worked in engineering. If you
want to improve the quality of the product you need to invest in new
tooling. It's not the production engineers or the engineering managers
who decide if that money is allocated or not.

Would you want to drill a hole with an old fashioned hand powered
drill or the latest high powered cordless drill? Spend some money and
you get to choose. It's the same with machine tools used to
manufacture any car or bike you care to name.

 

The trouble is that when I made a statement about the Harley I owned I
was called a liar. My biggest gripe about the Harley was that I
*really* wanted to enjoy riding it but the fun was taken out by poor
build quality.

 

At least I tried.....

Steve H isn't a troll, he's a fucking idiot who's never owned a decent
bike in his life and his opinion should be treated with as much
contempt as his choice of cars.

 

That's a shame really.
I have had a lot of enjoyment out of mine.
18,000 km in two lousy summers.

 

I was thinking about this, and it ocurred to me that, if darsy ever found
himself selected for this particular weight-loss opportunity, it would be
practically obligatory for some one of us to scoop up the separated swede,
pop it on the scales and yell "4.573 kilogrammes, you headless ****!", while
some flicker of conciousness remained to him.

 

Of course they 'hang off', but that is not synonymous with grinding kneepads.

You are obviously unfamiliar with racing chains (hint: no O rings).

At 260 pounds the only championship I hold is in bitch-slapping wise asses.
Makes it impossible to go fast when you weigh more than the bike.

However, you're right about one thing - none of 'you' are familiar with riding
good handling bikes to even get one around the track one lap. My wife raced
Hondas and TZs for several years. Her street ride was a GSXR. Looked great with
a seat cowl with luggage rack and a tank bag. She said there was less
difference between the GSXR or even her GPZ600 and my Gold Wing than between the
GSXR/GPZ and a race bike.

I'm sure you'll disagree noting that superbike racing is very popular ... but so
is NASCAR.

 

Whatever man. Show me a racer who is making good times and hasn't
touched down a kneepad.

Hint: O-rings are not the only reason for friction. Multiply 100s of
moving parts from from to rear and you find they add up to a 5% loss
easy.

You really think a polymer puck dragging on asphalt is consuming 5 HP?

And here I was thinking your comments come from actual experience
winning championships on the track. Since your ideas run so contrary
to so many other riders who race.

I've never raced a TZ either but I've ridden one. It didn't seem all
that different from a 600. Certainly not the tragedy you're making it
out to be.

I've picked up a 600 motor. They are astonishly light.

 

Certainly. Thus only very good riders rode them. OTOH a 180 BHP superbike can
be easily ridden by a near novice .... to a point. Then physics (and Darwin)
will assert themselves and hammer him into the pavement or an oncoming cage.
That's treachery.

I did ... almost all of todays superbikes are UJMs - inline DOHC 4s.

That (per se) wouldn't help. The UJM problem is too much weight to far from the
tire/pavement contact patches. The only solution is to get that weight down -
both make it less and make it lower.

Sure. Thats why 4-strokes are great for cruisers, touring bikes and scooters,
all intended for mediocre riders. The problem I've been addressing comes when
these mediocre riders get fooled into buying bikes styled like race bikes that
have their inherent problems so carefully masked that they become treacherous.

One might buy a "Boss Hog" with a V8 Chevy engine, but he'd be a fool if he
expected it to handle like a race bike. OTOH many (most?) here own bikes with
half a 1960's vintage F1 car engine stuffed into them sideways that they think
are superlative handlers. Bwahahaha! My neighbor thinks his car is just like a
NASCAR racer too.

But that's exactly when he does fall. You know about the "step" in a 2-stroke's
power delivery. There is a similar sudden step in a UJM's handling.

Fine ... but please understand that control is beyond 1/2 the riders out there.
In the situation you cite they'll snap the throttle closed, the tire'll slide
even more and down they go.

Yes, my 1500 Suzi cruiser and my H-D are both like that. But power isn't what
makes stuperbikes dangerous or rather treacherous. It is the excess weight too
high in the frame.

 

Nope, the origin was that UJMs have treacherous handling that necessitates
*excess* countersteer.

BTW countersteer itself does not turn a bike, it merely makes the bike lean by
steering the tire contact patch out from under the CG - it is the lean that
makes the bike turn by rolling onto a conical part of the tires.

 

I well understand. The best rider will win in a pack whether the pack is YPVSs
or GSXR-1000s but there's a big difference in how badly the so-so rider will be
beaten. I'd rather finish on the same lap as the good guys too.

 

It seems to me that you base your racing 'experience' on what your
wife has done rather than what you have done yourself. Do you think
that this puts you in a strong enough position to argue with
experienced racers about different riding skills and the skills
required to race at a reasonable level? I'm sure there are a few wives
and girlfriends out there who've gained just as much experience from
their partner racing as you have so until you've got real time
experience I'd suggest you **** off back to the kitchen.

When you've finished cooking for your wife it might be worth your time
to go and book a test ride on one of the latest litre class
superbikes. I've raced bikes at a reasonable level and none of them
were as fast or as good handling as the ZX10R I ride on the road. The
same can be said for the Suzuki GSXR1000 K5 and probably for the
latest Yamaha R1.

Just in case you're wondering if I think you're a wanker and a day
dreamer then stop wondering - I do think you're both of the above.

 

I think it's time you looked at where the Jap design engineers are
moving the weight to and what they're doing to seat heights, handlebar
heights etc.

 

This is utter crap. Some UJMs handle very well.

And shaft drive bikes can't countersteer anyway.

 

You reckon?

 

Hailwood?

 

Are there any boundaries to your ignorance?

 

I've had the same experience with a dozen H-Ds; for example the FLHTC I bought
new in late '89 and still have after nearly 200,000 miles. I'm sorry Andy had
problems with his but I'd never call him a liar, just point out that his may not
be typical. Look at all the problems people had with BMW FI awhile back
(zero=zero) and with front tire wear.

 

The one thing that bothered me, opkay two, were related to a long
distance trip this past summer.
After riding all day in 100 degree weather into a strong headwind the
bike became extremely noisy. It went away after it sat for a bit but
two 600+ mile days in those conditions did cause a lot of top end
noise.
It also caused a combination of poor top cruising speed and poor gas
mileage. Trying to keep 75 mph on the interstate into a 30 mph wind
was difficult enough with just a smallish windscreen. The motor was
having to work furiously though and it could have used some extra
power and/or another gear. That also added to the noise factor. On the
return trip I had a good tailwind for the first day and easily cruised
at 85 to 90 mph all day.