www.borile.it/gb_multiuso.html
I want one - soon to be imported around £4k.
|
Sea change? Innovative? Its a Trail or trials Bike, nothing more than that - Ugly than most to boot. .
|
|
Not quite a trail bike it's more a motorised mountain bike. Ideal for towns and city riding in a way no trail bike could be - they do an off road version as well.
|
>> Not quite a trail bike it's more a motorised mountain bike. Ideal for towns and
>> city riding in a way no trail bike could be -
I dont see the difference other than buzz words. Its a tricked up trail bike.
"Sea Change" "Innovative" means something radically different, say three wheels at the front and a roof that was Crap but certainly a sea change.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 18 Aug 13 at 11:35
|
|
The link doesn't seem to work for me.
|
|
There is innovation here - the fuel is stored in the frame rather than in a tank, the weight has been pared down by the use of tech. The Street Triple is a very modern bike - state of the art in many ways, but the layout would be recognisable to a 1920s motorcyclist - sea-change is when stuff like that changes. Its like moving the gear change from a hand change to a foot change. I reckon these will sell by the boat load. They also make a bike called the "B astard" I like a company that thinks like that.
|
|
Reminds me of a Suzuki Van Van which has been around since what seems like when Enzo Ferrari was a boy.
|
|
Being a big fan of trail bikes that would appeal to me, particularly with the 230cc engine. It's a great shame that our learner laws have virtually killed off the 175 - 250 class of bike, they were cheap, practical and easily able to keep up with other traffic.
|
Nothing new. Buell introduced fuel storage in the frame years ago, along with the oil tank in the swing-arm.
This thing's an air-cooled carb-fuelled four-stroke with 2 valves. That was old hat in the 1960's.
Alloy frame? Been done before but not a good idea IMO on a bike which looks designed for the African utility market.
And worst of all it's bleedin' ugly.
|
>> And worst of all it's bleedin' ugly.
>>
Ugly?
THIS is ugly -
www.harley-davidson.com/en_GB/Motorcycles/iron-883.html
|
Looks better from the front, but then again you wouldn't see that very often on yours would you? ;-)
|
>> Looks better from the front, but then again you wouldn't see that very often on
>> yours would you? ;-)
>>
>>
Actually, the cruiser style of bikes does appeal as I get older and the standard 883 does look pretty good, but that thing is hideous.
Mind you, if I were to get a cruiser it would be Japanese. I can't see what HD's offer for the price they cost apart from the tank badge.
|
>>
>> Mind you, if I were to get a cruiser it would be Japanese. I can't
>> see what HD's offer for the price they cost apart from the tank badge.
>>
I'd suggest that the cost difference isn't half as big as you might think. Harleys do hold their price well, are easy to work on and get parts for, and are infinitely rebuildable.
Don't be fooled by the "bad-ass bro" lifestyle thing either. There are many H-D riders, myself included, who just enjoy them for what they are. I am however the first to concede that they're the ultimate Marmite bike; I've yet to meet anyone who's actually indifferent to them.
|
>>THIS is ugly - www.harley-davidson.com/en_GB/Motorcycles/iron-883.html
S'nice, I could go one of those as it appens.
|
I like the 500CR. Nice traditional looks. Fitted with custom hard panniers and top box it would be a nice tourer for camping, etc.
Ted
|
|
That 883 reminds me very much of my much-luved: www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbD47Udaf0U
|
Ah, the much-maligned CX500 or"Maggot". Friend of mine had two of 'em, second one went round the clock although it had more rebuilds than Elton John's hairline.
Despatch riders loved them and like the Super Dream they seemed to be able to rattle on forever. Nice ones seem to be rare these days.
|
|
Talking about the CX this afternoon over a coffee after a ride out.
|
These modern touring Harleys must be thirsty and are driven via rubber toothed belts. You'd need to carry a spare. Or perhaps they don't have enough torque to strip one these days? I bet Hells Angels hate them in their heart of hearts.
Vincent anyone? I've been on a couple of those, with a barmy friend in London and as a hitchhiker, memorably although not enormously fast.
Now that was a classy big Vtwin.
|
>> These modern touring Harleys must be thirsty and are driven via rubber toothed belts. You'd
>> need to carry a spare. Or perhaps they don't have enough torque to strip one
>> these days? I bet Hells Angels hate them in their heart of hearts.
>>
>>
Belts have a much longer life than chains, I've heard around 50k quoted. One of my neighbours has use of his firms BMW (He's a driving examiner) and I was surprised to see that is also has belt as opposed to BM's traditional shaft drive.
|
>> Belts have a much longer life than chains
Shows how much I know.
Chains are greasier though.
|
>> Shows how much I know.
>>
>> Chains are greasier though.
>>
Some years back one of the magazines did a comparison between chains, belts and shafts. Chain drive came out far ahead of the other two in terms of efficiency absorbing only 3% of the power between gearbox and rear wheel sprockets, I forget the order of the other two but they were a fair way back. The reason race bikes only ever use chains.
That of course assumes a chain in tip top condition, they deteriorate very rapidly and a dry, worn or dirty chain loses all it's advantages and then some.
Last edited by: Robin Regal on Sun 18 Aug 13 at 20:23
|
Took the GS out to wag its tail today (mainly because Mrs RP was on the ST) - It's easy to forget what a sorted bike the GS is - it's just an incredible bike, I was riding it along the A5 down (and up) the Ogwen Valley, it's as if Thomas Telford had owned an earlier version of the big Bavarian - every twist and turn flatters it. On days like this you can steer this beast with your hips, exactly as if it's a sports bike....I just love bikes so much.
Me and the bikes - completely different in character, but both as near perfect as bikes can be.
www.flickr.com/photos/67389469@N02/9541446436/
Last edited by: R.P. on Sun 18 Aug 13 at 20:50
|
Lovely bikes, Rob.
Pity about that ugly old codger who gatecrashed your picture and spoilt it.
|
>> Belts have a much longer life than chains, I've heard around 50k quoted.
The problem with belts is they're vulnerable to stones; it's an unwise H-D rider who removes the guards for aesthetic reasons. On the Sportster they're a doddle to change, can be done at the roadside with basic tools. The twin-shock biggies are a bit more complex, and the Softail (looks like a rigid frame but has hidden suspension) it's a day in the workshop job as the transmission has to be partially dismantled. They're made of Kevlar BTW and are pretty robust.
As you say they can last for considerable mileages, I've known them go for 75K; however mine failed on my Sportster last year with only 18K on it. Then again I'm not known for riding it sedately. Biggest problem is people taking off smartly after the bike's been stood for a few months, especially in colder weather.
I confess that I hated them when they first came out, thought they'd never catch on. Now I'm quite used to them; the latest Suzuki cruisers are likewise fitted. Forthcoming Electra-Glide (due to land next week) is chain drive though and will remain thus.
AC, the big Harleys return about 40-45 mpg, Sportsters up to 60. I'll be interested to see what the forthcoming new engine does.
Last edited by: Harleyman on Sun 18 Aug 13 at 21:29
|
What bugs me about biking ( but only a wee bit ) is what is the reasoning behind my pal's wife getting free VED on her Sirion, which is under 1000cc, I think, and me having to pay £57 to tax my 582cc Honda bike !
It can't be down to emissions....bikes aren't tested for them.
Ted
|
>> It can't be down to emissions....bikes aren't tested for them.
>>
>> Ted
>>
It's down to government stupidity Ted. I'm paying £78 for the Sportster now, and they even put the VED up on me little 110cc scooter by a quid last time; so much for encouraging people to move to more economical and greener transport. Bikes are more recyclable, take up less space and do less damage to the roads. Yet the haters want them banned.
|
>> Belts have a much longer life than chains, I've heard around 50k quoted.
I think I've put 60k miles on a DID chain on an R1 since changing the original at 30k miles.
|
>> Nothing new. Buell introduced fuel storage in the frame years ago, along with the oil
>> tank in the swing-arm.
And the rim mounted single brake disc that offered the same performance as everyone else's twin setup with half the unsprung weight, mass centralisation as a core design principle many years before Honda's marketeers jumped on the idea, and packaging the heavy, bulky and hot exhaust silencer out of the way under the bike keeping its mass low, while the Japanese were still hanging them out in the wind, half a metre off the ground where they either decked in extreme cornering, or melted luggage or pillion's legs.
Buell were innovative in a way that made the Japanese and European manufacturers look backwards, and the handling was a delight. A 100 bhp Buell was more than capable of keeping a Japanese or European bike with half as much power again honest in any environment that was remotely twisty. Such a shame they were royally shafted by Harley Davidson. Erik Buell's farewell video on the site just before they shut down was genuinely moving.
But the good news is they are coming back, and without the unreliable Harley Davidson engines which were always the thing that put me off buying one :-)
Last edited by: DP on Mon 19 Aug 13 at 01:30
|
I'd agree with most of that DP, especially the bit about H-D shafting Erik Buell, that was disgraceful; though I'd question your allegation that the Sportster-based engines were unreliable. For one thing the Rotax designs proved to be little, if any, better; for another it's a proven lump which suffers more for its dated pushrod valve train than anything else.
Despite it being the total opposite of what you might expect me to fancy, I loved the looks of the old RR1000 Battletwin though I doubt it would have lasted long with the Ironhead-based XR1000 engine. A pity too that the 500cc Blast never took off.
|
A sea change in motorcycling design ? - Zero
