Salvage

wasn't that the R1100S, not the ST?

Then again, racing BMWs - who the **** cares?

<fx: ouch>[1]

[1] broke a fingernail half off yesterday - hurts like **** when I
forget and type with that finger.

 

Macho Biker Levels auto adjusted.

 

darsy emerged from their own little world to say

yes, here's a replika [sic]
http://cannon-bmw.co.uk/cannon/New_Bikes/R1100S/R1100SS BOXER CUP/bmw_boxer_cup.htm

ST replaces the RS according to
http://cannon-bmw.co.uk/cannon/New_Bikes/R1200ST/bmw_r1200st.htm

 

I'll grant that looks quite nice - but it's underpowered and far too
heavy for a sportsbike.

that's what I'd assumed in any case.

 

darsy emerged from their own little world to say

Maybe, but it is a true sportsbike in that it is a replica of something
raced in a competition rather than a pastiche.

The CB500 and Speed Triple probably wouldn't qualify as sports bikes by
your criteria either. However, single make race series provide excellent
entertainment where the skill of the rider counts more than the depth of
the sponsors' pockets.

 

no. To see what I mean, do you think that the fact people race MX bikes
makes MX "sportsbikes", or the fact that people race trucks makes said
trucks sportscars?

 

darsy emerged from their own little world to say

I fully understand *your* meaning of sportsbike in the context of a
consumer good. Any regular reader of UKRM will know the bikes that float
your boat. I'm disputing your reservation of its use for such a
restrictive definition. I am quite happy to call any bike a
sportsbike[1] and trucks sports vehicles when they are used in sport.
Calling trucks cars is a bit silly.

[1] so are the marketing boys who have invented an "adventure
sportsbike" category to target a particular niche

 

That I like,

....whereas my dear mate Leo seems to have landed himself with a
hideous pile of shit.

 

Bear emerged from their own little world to say

and prepared to defend it if you read the other reply to darsy

It's a semantic argument about the use of the word sport, that is all.

No need to get yourself into a lather on my behalf.

 

<flounce>
You're entitled to your opinion.
</flounce>

It grows on you. Honest?

And anyway, I've been reliably informed that I fell out of the ugly
tree before I was even ripe, so there you go.

At least we turn heads as we pass by, me and my bike. They may be
saying, "My God look at the ugly bloke on the really ugly bike," but I
don't care 'cos I can't hear them.

La, La, La.

 

Just about every vehicle ever created has been raced. By your definition
that makes them *all* worthy of the sports appelation. Which makes it a
worthless waste of breath/ink/bits. Regardless of any logic behind your
preferred definition, it would be of no use to anyone so I think we're
better off sticking with the more common useage, or something vaguely
similar to it.

 

Really? My bikes have been (in order of first ownership):

CG125, SZR660, Bandit 1200, TRX850, CD200, R1150GS, R30, CBR929-RR1,
R65LS, ZX-7R, RGV250 (these last two are track bikes[1] co-owned with
the Blane). I'm currently in the process of selling the 'blade and
replacing it with a Ducati Monster.

So, what type of bikes "float my boat"? Out of the 11 above, only 3 are
race-reps and only another 2 could be loosely described as "sports
bikes"[2].

Dispute away. You're wrong.

You're wrong. Such vehicles are *race* bikes, not "sports bikes". They
race C90s and mopeds - does this fact make a C90 a "sports bike"? No.

[1] surely even you wouldn't claim there's a better type of bike for
track use than a bike designed as a sports/race bike...?
[2] most people who like "sports bikes" probably would not include the
SZR660 in that category despite the fact that, not only was there a
race series for it, it was in fact designed expressly for said race
series (supermono racing, by Yamaha Italia).

 

darsy emerged from their own little world to say

It was a veiled reference to your past indecision about what to have
next, which may or may not be ameliorated by discussion on UKRM.

I said "bikes" not "type of bike".

As I said to Bear, it's a semantic argument. I suppose it is best summed
up by distinguishing between a "sports bike" and a "sportsbike". The
latter being a typology used to market a number of styles of bike. The
manufacturers seem to use at least one additional adjective e.g. sports
touring bike, supersports, adventure sports and now sports torque [1].

Language has evolved through patterns of consumption. You know what you
mean by a sportsbike but it is no longer a specific enough term to
signify that meaning. Supersports is the new sportsbike.

As far as "sports bike" is concerned: it's an adjective and a noun, with
generic definitions. If I want to use it to describe my mates
competition enduro bike or Ben's MTB I will

[1] source Honda, Suzuki & Yamaha websites

 

and you'll still be wrong.

But I think we're done.

 

darsy emerged from their own little world to say

I concur.

 

THAT WAS **NOT** FUCKING AGGRESSIVE YOU FUCKING CUNTING BASTARD ****!!!!

 

Bastard Motherfucking Wanker.