Why not?

Shite finish on metal work, no crash bungs as standard, no maintenance
access panels in the fairing, no grease nipples whatsoever, no alarm/
immobiliser as standard, non (or very little) adjustable
seat/bars/footrests, no heated grips, primitive chain adjustment facilities,
mirrors instead of some techy camera thing, no stereo etc,etc

 

That's the thing that pisses me off most. Why do car brakes last for
decades without ever needing to toothbrush the pistons, whereas bike
brakes can't even cope with a couple of years? Daft it is.

 

On the plus side, > £100,000 car performance for < 1/10th the cost. Our
cup is at least half-full.

 

Agree completely: but when you consider the life of most models (e.g.
Honda - typically 4 years between completely new versions of the same bike,
with a couple of tweaks at year 2), and the number of units they shift,
compared to cars, corner-cutting is going to have to feature somewhere ...

 

The penalty for this (the same with cars) is all the added weight.
Compare the latest golf wit the original. VW have to put a V6 engine in it
now to get the same performance. I light bike is a joy to ride. Adding any
luxury items normally means the weight goes up. Changing the
bars, pegs, seat position can have a very big affect on stability and
handling. Even changing the size of the bar end weights can make a bike
weave. It's all down to damping out unwanted resonance frequencies. Now
since the bikes in question can do well over 150mph this is quite a
serious safety requirement in the design. Change the shape to a tourer /
trail type bike and things are different again.

 

Nope.
A TVR doesn't cost anything like

'Hog

 

Well basically the finish on the outside of the car is the same as the
finish on the outside of the fairing tank. The nuts and bolts underneath
get just as corroded as a bike. You can't use cadmium plating any more.

All the manufacturers are cutting costs and using zinc plate.

Interesting chat at http://www.finishing.com/136/93.shtml

 

Getting another, or something different?

 

Yes but a TVR fills up with water quicker than my bath

 

Fair point well made, although the MV hasn't got a hint of corrosion
anywhere - which is nice. Can't say the same about the Tiger - it's a
shed.

 

True, I was forgetting about those. The zero-to-breakdown times are
particularly impressive ;-)

 

New models and new management have improved matters somewhat

'Hog

 

Tuscan S m'boy

'Hog

 

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41143000/jpg/_41143069_allotment.jpg

 

It's fine apart from the Tip box. Rocking Horse droppings though.
I had a mad idea about a black 996 Turbo Cab but I think the new drugs
have calmed me down.

'Hog

 

I was >< close to buying a Griffith a few years back - it was a toss-up
between that and the MV. Improved reliability could maybe tempt me in
the future, but I just can't make myself like the latter fat-arse
shapes. Tuscan 2 Convertible's not too bad though.

 

LOL fat arse! have you seen the new 911's I had to get an African
girlfriend to match

'Hog

 

Yebbut they're fat in the right direction i.e. width (911s, not
Africans). The TVR's are tall fat, which just looks /wrong./

 

Yeah and the African's ride quality is far superior

'Hog

 

flash wrote

Centre stands, traditionally, don't go on two types of bike:- sports
bikes and cruisers. Perhaps they were trying to extend it to a new
category?